This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
6 Must Read Essays By Jeremy Grantham
Summer Essays by Jeremy Grantham
- 22612 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Summer Essays by Jeremy Grantham
- advertisements -
6, bitchez
OT: PHYS -5%
Premium being destroyed? Liquidations? JPM trying to teach its investors a lesson to stay clear of Sprott silver trust?
Bankrupt Chinese Manufactures Lend to Real Estate Developers at Shark Loan Rates
#4 is the best, concise, and accurate write-up on global warming/climate change that I've seen.
I expect to get junked by the flat-earth crowd, but the truth is all right there, or in James Hansen's book, or a million other places.
His point number 4 is drivel, and it discredits his entire piece. Nothing to see here folks, move along. Just more rank warmist-elitism. (For those who are going to junk me, I am just dismissing him the same way he disses the "deniers".
Wow, a confederate and a flat-earther... what other fine attributes do you bring to us?
Flat earther, thats almost as clever as calling tea-partiers tea-baggers. You seem to be really current on all the latest progressive jingo. I'm sure your buddies at Kos would be proud.
We are so bold as to think we little humans can have such a dramatic effect on the planet's climate. This is being fed to us so that we welcome the transfer of wealth in the form of carbon taxes. What bullshit! The planet chills out, then heats up, then chills out, etc. All this without our help. Give me break.
100% agreement with your assessment. The myth of AGW is nothing more than a new angle for TPTB to separate you from your liberty... in this case in the form of unnecessary & unjust taxation. Yeah and suddenly CO2 is a hazardous gas too, right. Because the EPA says so... I don't believe anybody not working an angle to bank some coin could really get behind this bullshit.
Getthefuckoutahere.
I'm saddened to see that Jeremy Grantham has revealed himself as one of the power elite by agreeing to assist the grand AGW misinformation scheme. The purpose of which is to destroy/enslave the lower economic strata of society (read: everyone who actually works for a living) through ever increasing taxation. I had kept naive hopes that Grantham was one of the good guys... willing to stand up to TPTB, & had a lot of respect for Mr. Grantham... until now.
Fuck you Jeremy Grantham
Don't you know that the science is settled? And, according to this guy, it's the "hard" science. And there's no disputing that.
It's like that stupid-ass NY Times ad where the guy says, "The best writers in the world work at the Times...and there's no disputing that." (or something lke that) Well, I think Zero Hedge, for one example, is evidence to the contrary.
I hope climate change deniers are the ONLY people who survive the destruction of our home planet. Then they can argue amongst themselves about what just happened while they simultaneously plan ways to kill each other for food.
Blah, Blah, Blah, more chicken little AGW BS. If you are going to make extraordinary claims, and expect billions to reduce their standard of living to support the new greenie aristocracy, you better have extraordinary proof, not just computer generated fantasies created from climate models that prove nothing. Besides, please forgive me if I don´t share your religious faith. The idea of bowing to Lord Gore nauseates me almost as much as the thought that he would try to force a 54 year massage therapist to release his second cchakra! Imagine Gore naked.... (puke)
I hope you're open minded enough to consider evidence that runs counter to your predispositions.
This is a wonderful site at which a gentleman who I believe is an economist has shown that the supposedly rock solid temperature records have been clearly fudged to create higher temps.
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/
The primary way it's done is by dropping colder rural temperature stations from the records over time and constantly re-calibrating the mass of the other thermometers according to records at places like airports.
I'm sure you'll read lots of his posts. Because you don't have to be afraid of facts, right? Environmentalism's not a religion, right?
And here's a wonderful book by a gentleman named A.W. Montford. It follows Stephen McIntyre's debunking of the risible, in hindsight, purported science of the likes of Michael Mann, Keith Briffa and others that had been the backbone of IPCC 3 and 4.
http://www.amazon.com/Hockey-Stick-Illusion-Climategate-Independent/dp/1906768358/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1279588373&sr=8-1
It's quite well written. So it's no chore to read. The only thing that would be holding you back would be reluctance to encounter facts that force you to re-think your predispositions. But that's not a problem because environmentalism's not a religion, right?
+1, let alone anyone thinking through separation of effects, where di-hydride monoxide contributes 40-70% of the "greenhouse effect" while good ol' CO2 is in the 4-6% range. - Ned
GW == more food!
+1 CH, he should lay-off the organic free-range Kool-Aid.
yep just another addled-minded generic old white guy more interested in pleasing his social circle than making money. people like him control 99.9999% of the money and power in this world though so try to exploit him!
Yes, Mad Max you will be junked since Manmade Global Warming is a fraud pushed by the same banksters that have already destroyed our economy. Imagine, trillions of dollars made from creating and selling carbon credits, whilst REAL environmental problems get ignored. The science is already discredited beyond redemption and if you actually were genuinely interested in truth, you would know that the code behind Michael Manns hockey stick was designed to create an upwardly sloping curve even if you inputted random data.Keep also in mind that Grantham makes a great deal of money from their forestry investments, and carbon credits would have made them much more profitable since all they are selling is air! I read Granthams work and viewsw but I am also understand their biases. In this case they are simply talking their book.
Thanks Russ, you took the words right out of my mouth. Central bankers have corrupted some scientists just as they have economists. The earth has been going through these cycles for billions of years and transferring wealth to these jackasses in the name of saving the planet is just wrong.
Regards
Stick to the markets, Grantham, because you know precisely jack about global warming. Here's the real ticket. All you need to know about the global warming scam in 2Mb: http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/sh1/the_skeptics_handbook_2-3_lq.pdf
#4 is moronic and my guess would be that this guy has either an ideological bias or an investment bias. He lost at claiming that the solar influence has been steady, which is verifiably false. I've spent hundreds of hours over the last few years measuring this debate and the evidence of a concocted , overblown, campaign to force action through fear is simply overwhelming. Too many false and or unproven statements in #4.
Not saying that we should'nt move toward renewables/clean energy. I believe that we should.
GMO really have a star team with Grantham and Montier (former SG Research). If they got Freddie and nice Grice from SG over too they could be the new super hero squad!!
Anyway top notch stuff from GMO as always!
btw for what it counts I really recommend Montier's "Value Investor" book (CAPM is CRAP etc...) brilliant!
LOL IBM earnings - nesto - "OMG" down 4
jeremy sounds like joe biden to me. all "stimulus" is good? no difference how its spent? SEIU, acorn $ for hiway signs? just spend baby spend
Everything you need to know about Global Warming in 5 seconds:
It is a scam invented for the purpose of taxing, and trading carbon derivatives.
It was pushed by Ken Lay, Enron, and Al Gore in 1997.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A37287-2002Jan12
Would that be the same Al Gore that invented the internet?
He sure gets around.
yup. and he sure does.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2010/0624101gore1.html
No, he is the guy that tries to force himself upon 54 year old massage therapists, demanding that his second chakra be released. Guess he is bored with the rent boys.
Thank You. AGW scam summed up better than I could ever articulate..
We (my colleagues and I) have determined that the expansion of the Universe has a very large anthropomorphic component. Haven't been able to figure out a tax scheme however...yet...
Every thing you need to know about CO2 in one SEC - and that's all physics!
It's a Fraud!
Therec was some warmning up of earth before 1995 but so it was on MARS! Since there are no SUV's on Mars nor the other planets in our solar system who were also warming up the conclusion is easy The IPCC is a FRAUD!
CO2 Contributed by Human Activity: 12 to 15ppmv / version 1 Vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYLmLW4k4aI The Great Global Warming Swindle http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5576670191369613647#
CBC - Global Warming Doomsday Called Off http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3309910462407994295&hl=en-GB
Sorry Youri, you are wrong, wrong, wrong! Didn´t you know that the martians and venusians destroyed their planets because they refused to accept as Al Gore as their saviour? As any greenie... they will tell you that we are on the road to hell if we do not submit to the one true faith... Denier Denier, pants on fire!!
the one true faith
Sorry Youri, you are wrong, wrong, wrong! Didn´t you know that the martians and venusians destroyed their planets because they refused to accept as Al Gore as their saviour? As any greenie... they will tell you that we are on the road to hell if we do not submit to the one true faith... Denier Denier, pants on fire!!
the one true faith
That's just what I want from a guy who invests my money, for him to dive into global warming halfway through his essay. Gimme a break.
I know. More stimulus, and then global warming? No thanks. Just check the ECRI to know how well the last stimulus did, and check out the quacks who have been pushing global warming for the last five years. The largest redistribution of wealth ever seen by man will occur if cap and trade goes through. To MadMax, you've got a lot of faith in "science". 20 years ago, the "scientists" told us that an ice age was imminent. And they'll be saying the same crap 20 years from now. Scientists need a "crisis" to get funding. Apparently the government has now followed that logic.
+1
He comes very close to asserting that it (Global Warming) is settled science. He also uses the word inconvenient more than once.
It is a sad day when someone as erudite as Mr. Grantham sounds suspiciously like looney Al Gore.
Actually, Johnny B. Jeremy Grantham is just talking his book. His fund invests very heavily in reforestation and makes good money from it. They would make much more money buying, selling and trading carbon credits, since they are producing nothing and getting paid for it. Carbon credits are simply another flavour of the various derivative scams that made Wall Street Trillions whilst destroying Main Street.
Talking his book is no excuse to endorse debt enslavement of the entire fucking developed world. You gotta have a line you won't cross...
Fuck Jeremy Grantham
no shit
doublepost. oops
The theory that govt stimulus can help lift an economy out of recession is, IMO, reason enough to completely discredit Keynesian theory as pure drivel. Govts will always apply stimulus for political and personal reasons, and rarely or accidentally for purely economic reasons. Is the current stimulus helping the economy? Not really, because it was used to bail out banks and not on projects that would create jobs like infrastructure, small business lending, etc. And, if the stimulus actually worked, do you think there would be a single politician who would advocate raising taxes to pay for said stimulus. No way. They would just preach the same old crap about growing our way out of the debt. If govts cannot reasonably be expected to use stimulus wisely, they should not have the power at all.
Economists should be required to get a double major in college: the first in economics, and the second in common sense.
From a geological perspective the use of a data sample of "at least the last several thousand years" is statistically insignificant when looking at systems that have been operating for several hundred million years. CO2 levels have been much higher in the past. The Cretaceous coal swamps formed in one such period, but what the heck, that was 60 million years ago. Probably doesn't mean anything at all.
This guy made his fortune and now he's concerned with all these problems? What a load of shit. These problems have been known for decades.
The financial guys are lobbying more and more desperately for more money-printing. Golly, do you think they have any influence at central banks, the poor powerless dears? The deflation bogey monster and all that.
In the early stages of hyperinflation, it appears (wrongly) that there is a shortage of "money", and so even a well-intended central banker prints more. But it's all an illusion.
Prices are rising in what you buy every day, in the taxes you pay (direct and indirect). The only prices that are falling are what you own, namely your home and IBM/TXN etc. And to boot you earn less and less on your savings. The only way the deflation argument can fool anyone is for the economy to worsen. But then the govt has even less and less income and more and more countercyclical spending and soon enough it's Brazil/Argentina of not too many years ago.
And re global warming, I'm agnostic but suspicious because if the PTB were serious about the subject, they'd simply directly tax fossil fuels and forget about the cap and trade scam. Do you think that Grantham wants more and more cap and trade to grab a piece of? (As if there's any doubt about the answer!)
In brief, Jeremy's talking his book. IMHO the only valuable info he provides is his relative value analyses by asset class. Historically it has paid off to pay attention to them.
For this essay to say: "Global warming is settled..." and "...based on hard science..." makes this essay and the tools writing it fools.
The soft scientific literature and the PORN known as the IPCC don't even know how big the Himalayan Glacier pack is, let along how to unzip their flies.
The hard science, meanwhile, that appears in peer reviewed literature, models the suns energy, a function of its solar flare cycle, (and increased intensity flux) as being the vast majority cause (and completely natural) of the current warming cycle.
We are in the solar flux bath of the Sun. When it heats up so do we. It is heating up.
End of Science.
Enter Hegelian Agenda. Stage Left. "Oh, Its So Inconvenient to tell the Truth, When You Can Lie."
Jeremy Grantham is a tool of liars. As a result he is a fool.
I'll vote that the big orange ball in the sky is the cause of the great weather and the cold winter was caused by a lack of sunshine. No matter what, it's not a problem mankind would fix anyway - but a great reason to add new taxes and fees.
The problem is that you cannot feed the current World population except for unlimited use of fossil fuels, primarily oil and natural gas. If you want to drastically reduce the use of oil and natural gas, you'd better also come up with a way of euthanizing 2/3 of the world's human population.
Starve them/ us.
Q.E.D.
The important piece of this article isnt anything to do with the temperature of the planet, It's in the use of the phrase "Bernanke put".
If you think such a thing exists then you have to believe the market will fall then rise as the put becomes visible to everyone in the market. If not, IMO you have to believe just collapses.
I can tell you why this guy only manages < $1 Billion.
First of all, he is equaled only by that Middleton dude in terms of words per pound and the use of "I" and "me." Never before has man written so much and said so little !!
Secondly, he starts by trying to write on formative subjects (even if not intelligent) then out of nowhere he starts preaches on the subject global warming? WTF, Jeremy?!?
Reading this was like watching Ross Perot talk to us with his homemade pie charts about what was probably important stuff – we gave him the benefit of the doubt. Then, from nowhere he tells us, 'I'm headed home to look under my bed for aliens.' Wow!! WTF, Ross??
Try again, Jeremy. Put this on three pages (without the warming noise).
Just for the hell of it, lets make an assumption that in fact the warming of the planet is real and, yes it is PRIMARILY being caused by the 7 Billion people who inhabit said planet. Further we come to the conclusion that said 7 Billion and the by product of trying to feed, cloth etc that many people when there were only 2 Billion 100 years ago has in fact caused the planet to heat up faster than 100 years ago. And that further we can asertain that yes the industrial revolution is the most striking reason for the added heat as well as a large part of the additional people in the past 100 years due to advances in crop growing and production of goods and services. Is there any reason not to believe that our use of carbon based energy sources are the reason for the excessive rise in CO2 in the world from 100 years ago?
So lets go to stage two of this apparantly heritical view and propose we correct this real or imagined danger. What happens if the USA takes 1 TRILLION dollars and puts it into the economy thru solar (listening Leo?) wind and tidal (and other promising) energy programs and we begin the process of weening ourselves from the carbon handcuffs we now find ourself in. is there a better time to do such a program as now considering the shape of our gonna be Depression coming instead of continued unemployment @ 12-16%?We have the brainpower to do it--do we have the will to do it?
So going back to the first part, what are the upsides to doing something crudely outlined above?
1. Hopefully get rid of the affore mentioned handcuffs.
2. Get rid of our looming war with Islam-one that we have stupidly engaged ourself in while trying to con/intimadate the middle east in taking/buying their soon to run out of oil and going back to square one.
3. Making very wealthy, powerful Corporations even more wealthy and powerful.
4. Maybe actually make the world a little more livable. Anyone read the book "6 Degrees"?
5. The common denominator of the equasion is the source of limitless energy--the sun which indirectly causes wind and the moon for the tides.Gawd folks its sitting there in front of us and all the wealthy F***s don't want that because they can't figure how to make a buck on it!!
Certainly there are a hell of a lot of other upsides to this--now what are the downsides?? I know you doubters can have a field day junking me--why not take the time to lay out to me and other readers the downsides? Milestones
Milestones,
We have plenty of environmental problems without having to create a new scam called manmade global warming. Most discerning humanoids who spend a few hours researching AGW realise that it is the epitome of politics masquerading as science. Words and phrases like Denier, the science is settled, 97% scientists agree etc are from the realm of politics and religion, not science. One scientist, following the scientific method, with replicable results, can completely overturn an existing theory, such as Einsteins General of Relativity (who, BTW, is not the last authority on physics). If the people of the world had actually bought into this scam, we would be facing rigid controls over all aspects of our lives, subject to a green tyranny run by the criminals that populate the central banks, investment banks, NGOs etc. We barely dodged a global dictatorship, and must be constantly on our guard to prevent its emergence in another form. Make no mistake, carbon credits were meant to be the backing for SDR´s, issued by BIS or new world bank run by the same swine that destroyed our economies via derivatives.
I am in favor of developing alternate energy technologies, and if necessary a straight tax on energy paid to our national authorities. We do not, and will never need cap & trade, aka ripoff & enslave.
The U.S. doesn't actually get much of its oil from the middle east. If we didn't pointlessly handcuff ourselves with respect to getting oil from certain parts of Alaska, that would be even less the case.
The single greatest energy priority should be nuclear power and specifically developing and building liquid fluouride thorium reactors (LFTR's). But, for whatever reason, Obama and Chu simply will not pluck this absolutely obvious piece of low hanging fruit.
They ran the prototype for LFTR's for several years back in the late 60's and early 70's. It ran flawlessly. But LFTR's don't create material for nuclear weapons like conventional reactors do. So, the powers that be chose to make reactors such as we typically see nowadays.
The primary fuel of a LFTR, thorium, is practically harmless. You can hold a lump in your hand safely. And the U.S. has, literally, tons and tons of it. LFTR's are more efficient than our present reactors, take up much less space, require much less protective shielding and could make a huge step forward in energy self-sufficiency for the U.S.
Solar, wind etc are nice complementary technologies but the real deal should be LFTR's. It's amazing to me that the pretentious cipher's administration cannot see the practical and public relations gold of this technology.
The downside is that solar and especially wind and tidal are inordinately more expensive ways of producing energy than burning fossil fuels, so this "stimulus" would be even worse than the bridges to nowhere/dig holes and fill them in school of Keynesian nonsense. It is conceivable, though very far from certain, that technological advances will some day make solar economically viable. The others, not so much. If and when that happens, the market will rapidly adopt the technology without any governmental stimulus. Regardless, even if we do start to run out of oil, we will have no shortage of coal or natural gas for the forseeable future - and these are not obscenely expensive ways to generate energy, though the replacement of oil with them would certainly necessitate an accelerated adoption of electric motors in cars and other means of transport. Finally, if we really want to throw a load of money at research into a truly clean long-term replacement for fossil fuels, I firmly believe that the best candidate is cold fusion (probably of the laser variety).
Grantham is a Class A Dild. An economic decline is what's needed right now to flush out malinvestment. Reacting to every downturn with stimulus and liquidity is one of the major factors that has contributed to the current situation. Economies are surprisingly resilient and come back fast enough when the digiristes just fuck off.
The Dild then opines on AGW at length. I'm a denier but don't think it's a deliberate hoax. It's just scientists thinking they know a lot more about climate than they do. I remember when the scientific consensus was that the next Ice Age was imminent. The Chicken Littles, Luddites, and control freaks like to jump on these bandwagons.
Grantham is just parroting the arguments of the ruling class. He is an enemy of liberty and the people. He's right on healthcare though, the U.S. system is insane. However, the simplest way to ration is to make people pay for their own care. All of a sudden, rationality will be reintroduced to an irrational system.
If AGW was really a problem, they would propose paying for it by slashing taxes such that the carbon tax was neutral. Is anyone proposing replacing the tax structure?
And what of the left-winger Lomborg who says the tax should amount to $0.05 per gallon of gas. Have you heard that's enough to pay for the adjustment?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4zyjLyBp64&feature=related
Who here has a degree in hard sciences?
If not shut the fuck up..
And yes, Cap 'n Trade is a scam. The only solution is a $50 per tonne Carbon tax.
All right hot shot what caused/ended the last three ice ages, why couldn't we be overdue for another one and doesn't that all make a little anthropogenic warming look like a drop in the bucket that may even help mitigate the whole glacier on Manhattan thing?
- - - -
I can't tell if Grantham is brown-nosing in hopes of running some government money or he feels guilty about being so rich or what. You think the financial services sector has put on a few percentage points since '65? Take a look at government Jeremy - still not big enough he seems to think. And profit-based fees are not a zero-sum game any more than profits period are a zero-sum game. I know this guy's a legend and all but the global-warming politics alone should be enough to scare away any sane investor.
All your questions are answered with a little serious research. As I keep mentioning, Dr. James Hansen's book (among various sources) deals with those and explains the issue in detail and without bs.
That would be the Dr. James Hansen who testified in front of the U.S. congress back in 1988 that if we did nothing to curb the emissions of greenhouse gases (as we have) that by the present day, temperatures would be 5-6 degrees warmer than they actually are?
That Dr. James Hansen?
Yeah, I have a B.S. with coursework in climatology (as well as meteorology, geology, statistics, etc.). But it appears that you and I are on the same side anyway.
Cap and Trade is basically a scam, and it would do little or no good. But that doesn't mean that climate change is fake. People need to be discerning enough to understand that simply because some politician claims an issue for their political purposes, does not mean that the underlying issue is created out of nothing. If you take that approach then presumably our cars would spew raw gasoline out the tailpipe, our rivers and lakes would be completely toxic, and "OSHA" would be a shorthand expression for what you say while suffering a career-ending accident that will render you destitute for life.
C'mon, people, read Dr. James Hansen's book, it's all explained there, all the supposed debunking is refuted, various strawman issues are dealt with, and it is all readily understandable by anyone who earned a four-year degree.
You lost me when you said climate change. Climate changes every hour of every phucking day. Prove to me CO2 increases temperature in the real world and not vice versa and I will start to pay attention.
HERE IS THE CURE FOR GLOBAL WARMING and it is simpler than you thought.
We already know that global warming is caused by CO2 because mankind has increased the CO2 content of the atmosphere from 285 parts per million to 385 parts per million in the last 150 years.
To put this in perspective, if you had $1,000,000 worth of air $780,000 would be nitrogen, $210,000 oxygen, $6000 argon, and $385 of it CO2, up from $285 in 1850.
That little $100 or 100PPM of CO2 has already raised the temp of the whole world 1 degree.
And that means CO2 IS THE MOST POWERFUL INSULATOR IN THE UNIVERSE.
If one part per 10000 can do all that can you imagine what 100% pure CO2 can do?
Now all we need to do is insulate our houses with CO2. We can do this by putting CO2 in bubble wrap and using that to insulate our houses.
The result will be that we will be able to heat and cool our houses with 1/10000th the energy we use today. Plus look at all the CO2 sequestered in the bubble wrap.
Instantly cutting our use of fossil fuels, and reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
I don't see why it won't work, if everything Al Gore says is true.
(Note, the above is a JOKE in case you don't get it. It would only work if Al Gore and friends are telling the truth, ha ha.)
Thank you all for intelligently responding to my post. I know very little and I learn a great deal from this site. Milestones
XAUUSD / XAUEUR / XAUAUD bearish warnings issued since July 1 continue . . .
http://stockmarket618.wordpress.com/about
I'd be curious to know how many climate change deniers on this board also believe that God created the Earth 4000 years ago... I thought the coming financial collapse was going to send us back to the stoneage but apparently for many of you it's arleady here...fucking retards.
And my apologies for the blatant flame..it's not my usual style..but man some of you people are so unbelievably stupid. Why not just go and take out a McDonalds or something and make a name for yourselves...
I read Grantham's article on global warming. His view is uninformed. It's science...or at least, it SHOULD be. Otherwise it's just another global swindle...
US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced
Written by John O'Sullivan, special to Climate Change Fraud | 09 August 2010
600°F in Egg Harbor, WI? Yikes!
UPDATE 8-10-2010: It would appear CoastWatch has removed the original image. Never fear, it's shown here on the right. Please see author's addendum at end of article.
Global warming data apparently cooked by U.S. government-funded body shows astounding temperature fraud with increases averaging 10 to 15 degrees Fahrenheit.
The tax-payer funded National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has become mired in fresh global warming data scandal involving numbers for the Great Lakes region that substantially ramp up averages.
A beleaguered federal agency appears to be implicated in the most blatant and extreme case of climate data fraud yet seen. Official records have been confirmed as evidence that a handful of temperature records for the Great Lakes region have been hiked up by literally hundreds of degrees to substantially inflate the average temperature range for the northeastern United States.
The web pages at the center of this latest climate storm were created by NOAA in partnership with Michigan State University.
Disgraced Administration Mired in Another Climategate-style Data Fix
Someone under the pseudonym ‘Sportsmen’ anonymously tipped off skeptic blog, Climatechangefraud.com. Independent analysts affirm the web pages as genuine.
In his email the faceless whistleblower explains that what precipitated the scoop was “a rather dubious report in the media that the Great Lakes temperatures have risen 10 to 15 degrees, I found it was downright laughable.” (Just a few examples of media hysteria here and here and here and here)
He continues, “ Prior to this report I would frequent the ‘Coastal Watch’ temperature maps for northern Lake Michigan. When this report came out it dawned on me that the numbers didn't match what I had been reading on the Coastal Watch temperature page.”
Under a scheme called ‘Sea Grant’ NOAA collaborates with national universities to compile an official federal temperature record. In this instance, the partnersip is with Michigan University’s ‘Coastal Watch.’
Together the two institutions show temperature maps for northern Lake Michigan registering an absurd 430 degrees Fahrenheit -yes, you read it right –that’s four hundred and thirty degrees-and this is by no means the highest temperature recorded on the charts.
In the heated debate about Earth’s ever-changing climate you certainly don’t need to be scientist to figure out that the Great Lakes would have boiled away at a mere 212 degrees so something has seriously gone awry inside this well-funded program.
In addition to its civilian employees, NOAA research and operations are supported by 300 uniformed service members who make up the NOAA Commissioned Officer Corps. But don’t bet on anyone being court-marshalled over this latest global warming fiasco.
Paid for entirely from federal taxes, the shamed public body’s key responsibilities include warning of dangerous weather and protection of ocean and coastal resources, and conducts research to improve understanding and stewardship of the environment.
Michigan State University Also Complicit in Fraud?
The worst evidence of hyper-inflated global warming data is on a web page entitled, ‘Michigan State University Remote Sensing & GIS Research and Outreach Services.’
While another web page identifies that Michigan State University’s ‘Coastal Watch’ site is officially connected to NOAA thus implicating both institutions in a climate data conspiracy. At the bottom of the web page mention is made of ‘Sea Grant’ that is described as a “unique partnership of public and private sectors that combines research, education and technology transfer for public service.“
The legend further boasts that such data is shared across “ a national network of universities meeting the changing environmental and economic needs of Americans in coastal ocean and Great Lakes regions.”
NOAA Makes it White Hot in Wisconsin
But our intrepid anonymous whistleblower wasn’t done yet. He pointed out that Egg Harbor, Wisconsin, really got cooking this July 4th around 9:59AM, according to NOAA and Coast Watch. It was there, at the bottom left row of the temperature data points, that the records reveal on that day a phenomenally furnace-like 600 degrees Fahrenheit. (Click here if CoastWatch link does not work or disappears)
Egg Harbor by Royalbroil
Further analysis of the web pages shows that the incredibly wide temperature swings were occurring in remarkably short 10-hour periods-and sometimes in less than 5 hours. Strangely, none of the 250 citizens of the 78 families living in the village appeared to notice this apocalyptic heatwave during their holiday festivities.
Hidden Data Spike Hikes Heating Averages
But our sharp-eyed stranger comments, “ As I understand it, the current available Gif data maps are several for the latest dates, but the archives have less dates to choose from. It's possible that in the past these numbers were incorrect but in the archive system you do not see the numbers that could have been in gross error.”
So it may reasonably be inferred climate fraudsters had a perfect opportunity here to fraudulently apply overcooked and overlooked data so that America’s Joe Public would be none the wiser that a few climate numbers vastly ramped up the national temperature averages.
Laughably, NOAA publishes a caveat at the bottom right corner of their web page warning about their data is “Not to be used for navigation purposes!”
The current head of NOAA is Dr. Jane Lubchenco, nominated by President Barack Obama and confirmed by the United States Senate on March 19, 2009 and is the first woman to serve as NOAA administrator. On her appointment Lubchenco declared that science would guide the agency and that she expects it to play a role in developing a green economy. You can say that again!
Readers now interested in doing their own detective work may wish to peruse the further data found here and here
to further ascertain whether climate doomsayers have rigged more ‘real world’ temperatures in a shabby scheme to win support for green energy tax hikes. If you find anything be sure to drop Lubchenco a line here.
Author's Addendum:
Of major concern here is whether the false data has been fed into climate models ascertaining the broader temperature averages for the entire United States. The alleged response from NOAA as shown in the comments below this article, indicates evasiveness by Chuck Pistis, NOAA Program Coordinator, in answering the question. Why so?
I also applied due diligence and asked internationally renowned climatologist, Dr. Timothy Ball to take a look at the numbers. Here is what Dr. Ball observed:
Moreover, I have written to NOAA but am still awaiting their reply. I specifically asked whether this extravagantly false data was fed into climate models to help ramp up the U.S. climate numbers by "400%" as commented on by analyst, Jo Nova (more here). The Australian researcher provides an excellent summary to an important paper that removes all doubt that climate models are utterly flawed. As Dr. Ball points out—perhaps we know why.
John O'Sullivan is a legal analyst, author and journalist. As an accredited academic, John taught and lectured for over twenty years at schools and colleges in the east of England before moving to the United States. As an analytical commentator, O'Sullivan has published over 100 major articles worldwide