Satellite Temperature Comparisons

May 14, 2023 rjdavison

CSS-40 A very important development just manifested in “climate change” science. Many thanks to Prof. Ross McKitrick for bringing that information to our attention (The important climate study you won’t hear about – Financial Post – April 12^th, 2023) and a follow-up by Jo Nova in Iowa Climate Science (Daily News) – April 20^th, 2023). The University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) has traditionally been the outlier when it came to satellite temperature measurements. The other two major satellite options (Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and NOAA’s Satellite Applications & Research (STAR) initiative) were more aggressive in both absolute and trend magnitude. Not so anymore!

#climatechange #delaythegreen #globalwarming #showusthedata

NOAA’s STAR initiative has just recently conducted an extensive review of their process, assumptions, etc. and ultimately come into line with the UAH dataset. I must give the scientists at NOAA (led by Cheng-Zhi Zou) some credit for producing a temperature dataset that does not agree with the CAGW alarmist narrative. The detailed technical discussion is provided in their March 3^rd, 2023 paper, Mid-Tropospheric Layer Temperature Record Derived From Satellite Microwave Sounder Observations With Backward Merging Approach. Are their motives altruistic or are they just taking some initial steps towards changing the narrative (CYA (?))? Time will tell. A similar move was made by the IPCC in late 2021, when they acknowledged that their models were running too hot and the high-end emission scenarios (ssp3-7.0 and ssp5-8.5) were implausible (ridiculous may be more accurate). Note, the models were running too hot in their ssp2-4.5 lower-case scenario. Those self acknowledgement links can be found in my OPS-55 – The State of Climate Science post. A detailed look at the model projections is laid out in my CSS-30 – CMIP6 Climate Model post. The final product looks the same as Dr. John Christy’s (UAH), I just added in the HadCRUT5 surface data.

Bottom line, the Climate Models are not realistic, but they are still being used to promote our current unscientific, unnecessary, and dangerous “green” policies. And the IPCC leadership, our political “leaders”, the mainstream media, etc. continue to dutifully put out the UN/WEF’s idiotological Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) alarmist narrative. Seriously people, WAKE UP. The models are pure fiction, there is no empirical CO₂ Temperature dataset that shows CO₂ driving the climate on any statistically significant historical time scale (a basic scientific method requirement) and the data does not support the constant lies being put forward on extreme weather or their most recent attempt at science, “attribution studies”. Those studies which are based on their models that run too hot?