Was 2014 the warmest year in history?
If you believe the global warming/climate change believers, it was (NOTE: the correct term varies, depending on temperature – if it\’s warm, the huge scientific grants are to study global warming; if it\’s cold, the huge scientific grants are to study climate change).
But was it?
Excerpted from syndicated columnist Jeff Jacoby\’s (typically) excellent commentary at townhall.com:
Amongthose seizing on the news to make a political point was PresidentObama, who used his Stateof the Union address to voice disdain for those who don\’t sharehis view.
Well,I\’m also not a scientist. But I do know that what NASA\’s GoddardInstitute for Space Studies and NOAA\’s National Climatic Data Centeractually reported…the probability that 2014 set a record is not 99percent or 95 percent, but lessthan 50 percent.NOAA\’s number-crunchers put the probability at 48 percent; NASA\’sanalysis came in at 38 percent.
But…The report from the UKMet Office noted only that “2014 was one of the warmestyears in a record dating back to 1850.” Giventhe size of the margin of error, it acknowledged, “It\’s notpossible to definitively say which of several recent years was thewarmest.” Similarly, the Berkeley Earth summary of its 2014calculations explained that last year\’s bottom line was statisticallyidentical to other recent years.
Allof which reasonably leads to the conclusion notthat the planet has been relentlessly warming, but that the warmingtrend that peaked at the end of the 1990s has neither resumed norreversed. Global warming has more or less been on hold since the turnof the 21st century. That hiatus poses something of aninconvenient truth to those who believe that anthropogeniccarbon-dioxide is the key driver of climate change, since CO2emissions have continued without letup.
Translation: 2014, statistically, was a very warm year. But to call it the warmest year on record is a huge stretch (that\’s the nice way of calling it a hot, steamy load). And, even if it were the warmest year on record, the fact remains – as Jeff shows, using a table I have previously posted in this blog and is repeated below – that there has not been a trend of “global warming over the past 18 years…
makes that claim look less like a scientific finding and more like a rationale to keep those grants coming.
Moreover, even if there were such a trend, where is the proof that the warming/change/whatever qualifies today is primarily created by humankind?
The truth? Cow farts, burps and manure – all of which create methane – may well have more to do with “global warming” than anything humankind has inflicted on the planet.
Look, I concede there is a genuine issue here. But genuine issues have more than one side. And when the adherents to a given side sneer out insults and condemnations to everyone else, it is no longer an issue to be addressed with objective science, it is a crusade.
Uh…..did I mention grant money?