Fact Check: The warmest decade in recorded history was not 1934

[Crick]

A factcheck conducted by the Australian Associated Press has debunked a claim that has been appearing on Facebook (and here) that the warmest decade in history was in the 1930s. This is not true for New Zealand, for Australia, for the US or globally. Those of you supporting the AGW denier position need to consider why your side needs to lie as often as you do.

No, the warmest decade was not nearly 100 years ago

A viral post seen by more than 10 million people states our warmest decade was nearly a hundred years ago.

www.aap.com.au

 

[johngaltshrugged]

A factcheck conducted by the Australian Associated Press has debunked a claim that has been appearing on Facebook (and here) that the warmest decade in history was in the 1930s. This is not true for New Zealand, for Australia, for the US or globally. Those of you supporting the AGW denier position need to consider why your side needs to lie as often as you do.

No, the warmest decade was not nearly 100 years ago

A viral post seen by more than 10 million people states our warmest decade was nearly a hundred years ago.

www.aap.com.au

Pretty rich considering the Climategate emails proved the "scientists" behind the AGW scam were encouraging each other to lie & fudge data.
Ask Al Gore how well his lies have paid off for his bank account

Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.

Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate

We need more objective research and ethical conduct by the scientists at the heart of the IPCC and the global warming discussion.

www.forbes.com

 

[shockedcanadian]

I have no problem with society wanting to preserve the planet and atmosphere. As in most pursuits based on genuine concern and well meaning objectives by some, there are even more leeches who turn the crisis into an industry, for their personal accumulation of wealth.

It's peculiar to me, that after America signed the Paris Accord with apparently trillions of U.S dollars moving elsewhere, there is, yet again, the most recent NEW climate budget.

When we speak about curiousity on an issue, very few in media even ask "why did we sign the Paris Accord if we were going to put another $750B+ into the issue just a couple of years later"?

Furthermore, "when will the expenses end and what are they achieving"?

 

[Donald H]

It was so obviously a lie, that it's surprising anybody would feel the need to rebut the denialists' claims!

 

[Crick]

It was so obviously a lie, that it's surprising anybody would feel the need to rebut the denialists' claims!

Keep in mind this was from Australia.

 

[Crick]

I have no problem with society wanting to preserve the planet and atmosphere. As in most pursuits based on genuine concern and well meaning objectives by some, there are even more leeches who turn the crisis into an industry, for their personal accumulation of wealth.

It's peculiar to me, that after America signed the Paris Accord with apparently trillions of U.S dollars moving elsewhere, there is, yet again, the most recent NEW climate budget.

When we speak about curiousity on an issue, very few in media even ask "why did we sign the Paris Accord if we were going to put another $750B+ into the issue just a couple of years later"?

Furthermore, "when will the expenses end and what are they achieving"?

I assume you're aware that Trump pulled the US OUT of the Paris Climate accords. The Trump administration didn't spend a single dime on climate issues.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The warmest decade in recorded history was not 1934​

Well duh!

1934 is a year, not a decade.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Keep in mind this was from Australia.

They adjusting temperatures 90 years later down under too?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I assume you're aware that Trump pulled the US OUT of the Paris Climate accords.

Thank goodness. What a useless waste of time and money that was.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

1954 was an extreme heat year as well

Brad Belk: Recalling the superheated summer of 1954

The summer of 1954 will be remembered for the scalding heat reaching an astounding high of 122 degrees on July 14 in Pittsburg, Kansas. The searing heat lasted for 52

www.joplinglobe.com

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I assume you're aware that Trump pulled the US OUT of the Paris Climate accords. The Trump administration didn't spend a single dime on climate issues.

Wow. He actually did something right.

Without doubt, the Paris agreement alone will barely get human society started on the road to dealing with climate change. The targets are too weak and the governance too uncertain. In that way, the critics are correct in their worries that the mere appearance of the agreement can lead to the perception that the problem has been solved.

Paris Climate Agreement: Success Or Failure?

While the new climate accord does not go far enough, is a first step in developing a new set of behaviors for human civilization — toward our evolution as a true planetary species, says Adam Frank.

www.npr.org

 

[two_iron]

My wife gets REALLY hot when I wipe my dick off on the curtains.

Maybe some tax credits for that?

I need to talk algore.

 

[Flash]

A factcheck conducted by the Australian Associated Press has debunked a claim that has been appearing on Facebook (and here) that the warmest decade in history was in the 1930s. This is not true for New Zealand, for Australia, for the US or globally. Those of you supporting the AGW denier position need to consider why your side needs to lie as often as you do.

No, the warmest decade was not nearly 100 years ago

A viral post seen by more than 10 million people states our warmest decade was nearly a hundred years ago.

www.aap.com.au

There is no "fact" when the goddam NOAA doesn't even know how to take temperature readings. We have no idea what the temperature is when the people that suppose to collect the data don't even know what they are doing.

MEDIA ADVISORY: 96% of U.S. Climate Data Is Corrupted

MEDIA ADVISORY: 96% of U.S. Climate Data Is Corrupted​

Nationwide study follows up widespread corruption and heat biases found at NOAA stations in 2009, and the heat-bias distortion problem is even worse now​

ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL (July 27, 2022) – A new study, Corrupted Climate Stations: The Official U.S. Surface Temperature Record Remains Fatally Flawed, finds approximately 96 percent of U.S. temperature stations used to measure climate change fail to meet what the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) considers to be “acceptable” and uncorrupted placement by its own published standards.

 

[Concerned American]

A factcheck conducted by the Australian Associated Press has debunked a claim that has been appearing on Facebook (and here) that the warmest decade in history was in the 1930s. This is not true for New Zealand, for Australia, for the US or globally. Those of you supporting the AGW denier position need to consider why your side needs to lie as often as you do.

No, the warmest decade was not nearly 100 years ago

A viral post seen by more than 10 million people states our warmest decade was nearly a hundred years ago.

www.aap.com.au

The only thing true about this thread is the title. One year, 1934, is not a decade. Everything else is bullshit.

 

[Samofvt]

A factcheck conducted by the Australian Associated Press has debunked a claim that has been appearing on Facebook (and here) that the warmest decade in history was in the 1930s. This is not true for New Zealand, for Australia, for the US or globally. Those of you supporting the AGW denier position need to consider why your side needs to lie as often as you do.

No, the warmest decade was not nearly 100 years ago

A viral post seen by more than 10 million people states our warmest decade was nearly a hundred years ago.

www.aap.com.au

I don't deny climate change: it is a natural phenomenon that occurs ALL THE TIME. There are minor changes from decade to decade, there are also changes from century to century. This is well known, recorded in geological history.

What I DON'T BUY IS YOU IDIOTS THAT DENY THE SCIENCE AND CLAIM YOU NEED TO TAKE MORE CONTROLL, all for nothing. Really, nothing but expected climate changes. Why do you deny the fact that your version of recorded climate measurements only go back a few decades? Nobody lived in California or Arizona 100 years before you thin skinned westerners arrived. 1000 years ago, yes: there is evidence of massive culture, but still no surviving recorded measurements of what it was like.

No, ya'll with this narrative about "the sky is falling because of your actions" shit need to shut the F*** up. We've got work to do, if we're going to prepare for temperatures close to 10 degrees higher on average, as predicted by the geological records.

 

[Crick]

I don't deny climate change: it is a natural phenomenon that occurs ALL THE TIME. There are minor changes from decade to decade, there are also changes from century to century. This is well known, recorded in geological history.

What I DON'T BUY IS YOU IDIOTS THAT DENY THE SCIENCE AND CLAIM YOU NEED TO TAKE MORE CONTROLL, all for nothing. Really, nothing but expected climate changes. Why do you deny the fact that your version of recorded climate measurements only go back a few decades? Nobody lived in California or Arizona 100 years before you thin skinned westerners arrived. 1000 years ago, yes: there is evidence of massive culture, but still no surviving recorded measurements of what it was like.

No, ya'll with this narrative about "the sky is falling because of your actions" shit need to shut the F*** up. We've got work to do, if we're going to prepare for temperatures close to 10 degrees higher on average, as predicted by the geological records.

View attachment 683123

Give that the whole of human history is significantly less than a single pixel wide on the graphic you've provided, you have nothing here supporting your contention. There is also the point that you say we have no data past a few decades and yet provide a graphic that goes back 542 million years. Which is it?

Here are some data (from File:2000 Year Temperature Comparison.png - Wikimedia Commons) that are significantly more pertinent to the question of whether or not humans have caused global warming:

There is NO natural cause for the sudden and dramatic rise in temperatures. It, does, however, coincide precisely with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and the increased CO2 due to humans' use (combustion) of coal and oil. Humans are responsible. And I'm sorry but a claim otherwise is simply unsupportable. Particularly when you present zero evidence to support your claim.

 

[Samofvt]

Give that the whole of human history is significantly less than a single pixel wide on the graphic you've provided, you have nothing here supporting your contention. There is also the point that you say we have no data past a few decades and yet provide a graphic that goes back 542 million years. Which is it?

Here are some data (from File:2000 Year Temperature Comparison.png - Wikimedia Commons) that are significantly more pertinent to the question of whether or not humans have caused global warming:



There is NO natural cause for the sudden and dramatic rise in temperatures. It, does, however, coincide precisely with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and the increased CO2 due to humans' use (combustion) of coal and oil. Humans are responsible. And I'm sorry but a claim otherwise is simply unsupportable. Particularly when you present zero evidence to support your claim.

Your tiny little chart only goes back 1000 years, and shows major fluctuations durring that time period. The accepted geological history goes back MILLIONS of years.

Why do you deny science?

 

[Crick]

Your tiny little chart only goes back 1000 years, and shows major fluctuations durring that time period. The accepted geological history goes back MILLIONS of years.

Why do you deny science?

Don't be stupid. The point was to show AGW beginning with the Industrial Revolution. And since I accept the conclusions of greater than 99% of publishing climate scientists, I'd say I am NOT denying the science. What's your position?

 

[Crick]

Silence, apparently. I wonder if Trump realized what an ungodly mess his "Fake News" tactic would cause. Well, actually I don't (wonder) because the man doesn't have the brains god gives a rubber duck and, being a complete sociopath, wouldn't care even if he did. How convenient to simply claim that everything you disagree with is a lie. You never have to argue anything. And, of course, none of the people claiming an unpleasant piece of news is "fake" EVER provide any EVIDENCE that it's fake. They just yell louder and more angrily and threaten violence so people will stop arguing with them. We will be lucky if Donald Trump and the idiots he has hornswaggled don't spell the complete and utter destruction of this nation. Make sure you tell your grandchildren how you destroyed the greatest nation on Earth so that an ignorant, egotistical, self-centered, narcissistic bigot could have a presidency without actually winning an election. You OWN that. You'd BETTER be proud.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Don't be stupid. The point was to show AGW beginning with the Industrial Revolution. And since I accept the conclusions of greater than 99% of publishing climate scientists, I'd say I am NOT denying the science. What's your position?

The point was to show AGW beginning with the Industrial Revolution.

Where in all this noise, is the beginning of the Industrial Revolution?