Antarctic Peninsula Cooling For 20 Years

Remember the Antarctic Peninsula … the small part of Antarctica that points towards Chile and is held up by the AGW cult as proof that Antarctica is warming.

Nope.

Its been cooling for 20 years.

And of course there was weaseling:

Scientists were quick to declare the results of the Turner et al paper, which covered 1 per cent of the Antarctic continent, did not negate a long-term warming because of man-made climate change.

Rather, they said, the ozone hole, changing wind patterns and natural variability had masked the long-term warming trend.

And not just any weaseling. Preplanned coordinated weaseling.

Prior to the paper’s publication, science media organisations around the world were ready with quotes from climate scientists to ensure the Turner paper was not misinterpreted.

Misinterpreted? You mean ordinary people might get confused by claims of warming that were refuted by cooling?

 

AP_graphic

 

USA NOAA May 2016 Tmax – 49th Coldest out of 122 (-0.42F Colder Than 1901-2000)

According to the NOAA, May 2016 was ranked 49th coldest out of 122.

That is essentially a tie with May 2015.  The warmest May Tmax’s were 1934, 1936, 2012 and and 1939.

Noaa_May_2016_max

The following map shows state rankings. 122 = warmest. 1 would be coldest.

Note the states ranked 7th and 8th coldest. Wow. Not much El Nino effects …

NOAA_May_2016_Map_Tmax

 

Institutions Are Biased

Interesting paper coming out that may demolish Psychology.  And other pseudo sciences like climate science.

“How could hundreds of peer-reviewed studies possibly be so wrong? There may be a way to explain it, and it’s shaking researchers to their cores.

Every time scientists conduct an experiment, there’s a chance they’ll find a false positive. But here’s the scary thing: Psychologists are now realizing their institutions are structured so it’s more likely that false positives will make it through to publication than inconclusive results.

We’re now learning that there’s so much bias in the published literature that the meta-analyses can’t be trusted,” Simine Vazire, a professor of psychology and the editor in chief of the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, tells me.”