Another bad month for climate change -

Another bad month for climate change

2015 is already shaping up to be the hottest year on record



We’re making climate change history, yet again.

Across the globe, this past March was the hottest yet, and the third warmest month since people began keeping records about 130 years ago.


March produced temperatures 0.85˚C above the global 20th century average, and rounded out the warmest first quarter on record. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration notes that the previous March record was in 2010 at 0.80˚C above average.

With numbers like these, it won’t be a surprise if 2015 takes the prize for warmest year yet. Incidentally, the worst ten years have all occurred within the last two decades.


Filed under:

Another bad month for climate change

    • How do you explain what? The difference between a nutty conspiracy piece by a journalist and science?
      If you need that explained to you it probably isn’t going to help.

    • Your comment is awaiting moderation.

      Judith Curry, a skeptic, has published three discussions of temperature adjustments on her blog.

      There has been much discussion of temperature adjustment of late in both climate blogs and in the media, but not much background on what specific adjustments are being made, why they are being made, and what effects they have. Adjustments have a big effect on temperature trends in the U.S., and a modest effect on global land trends. The large contribution of adjustments to century-scale U.S. temperature trends lends itself to an unfortunate narrative that “government bureaucrats are cooking the books”.

      Jully 14, 2014

      Feb 9, 2015

      Feb 22, 2015

  1. 34 YEARS of science’s 97% certainty is now 34 YEARS of climate action FAILURE and total global DISBELIEF and these decades of exaggeration of vague science can only be a crime against humanity in the coming history books.

  2. Give it a rest guys….the world has moved on without you.


  3. Does it need to be pointed out that in order to keep funding coming whatever your worry is it must be exaggerated to the point of disaster to get attention. We’ve been through “a new ice age”, “mass starvation”, and “wars over rice”. Beyond the environment we’ve had bomber and missile gaps, the Red Army getting to the Rhine in 48 hours and Sadaam’s nuclear arsenal.

    The doomsayers have been 100% wrong so far. Why would the pattern be different now? Have people become less ambitious and greedy? Have we done away with the motivation to skew data towards an alarmist position which gets the big grants?

    My predication. 30 years from now we’ll be asking how we were stampeded into harming our economy in the futile attempt to change the planets climate.

    • Does it need to be pointed out that you haven’t actually refuted one iota of climate science?

      • OK Mann’s hockey stick. The lack of the increase in hurricanes the models predict. The need to guess what temperatures were in remote places to make the models work. The encroachment of urban areas over places where there were thermometers. The 19 year warming hiatus. The 1960’s cold spells which made the first researcher who tied C02 to temperature question his own theory.


        Global Warming has taken on the same sort of ideological flavor of religion or a mass political movement. It’s “settled”. There are calls for anyone who question sit to be persecuted. Not following it’s doctrine will lead to catastrophe. Only the cognicinti can interpret the signs correctly. All very reminiscent of Christianity for most of it’s history and Communism. Of course the guys who get in early get the big bucks. Anyone who disagrees in league with the devil/ big oil or greedy world capitalists.

        • A laundry list of denier shibboleths doesn’t get you any further.

        • The hockey stick has been replicated scores of times using different data sets, methodologies and time frames.

          ” Even with this “hiatus” in GMST trend, the decade of the 2000s has been the warmest in the instrumental record of GMST”
          AR5 – page 769

          Berkeley Earth also has carefully studied issues raised by skeptics, such as possible biases from urban heating, data selection, poor station quality, and data adjustment. They have demonstrated that these do not unduly bias the results.

  4. Canada’s fringes of the Canadian Shield and central Prairie forest fringes are perfect for Cranberry bogs. A healthy local food source. You’d think a satellite (the space vehicle) campus in Thompson or Churchill would be a wise investment too…
    I’ve a mostly hashed out carbon sequester procedure. It mainly involves sphagnum fuscum and sphagnum riparium. The latter grows rapidly over ponds. The former sequesters millennia of carbon. Sphagnum riparium growing over a pond can be skimmed off using a boom or appropriate marine vehicle. It can be stacked on the shore and sphagnum fuscum applied over it. The next year, riparium will have regrown over the pond where it was harvested. Used the procedure until you have a peat bog grown over a former pond. Over a century and over most cheap land in the wetter northern hemisphere, this should sequester around a yr of global emissions. Maybe sequestering ditch oil and chemical spills is a better small biz application for now.