New analysis of global temperatures over several centuries finds the Earth would have warmed the SAME amount even without industrialization

The Alt-Left has convinced itself and as many people as possible that because human beings dared to modernize, we are responsible for a “warming” trend that is destroying our planet.

As country after country began to industrialize, the theory goes, the resulting burning of fossil fuels has created a “greenhouse gas” effect that has led to a warming of temperatures; the more fossil fuels burned, the more greenhouse gases are produced, and the warmer the planet gets, thereby changing the climate in ways that will ultimately destroy us.

The Left is always quick in pointing to the latest “scientific” computer model “proving” the theory valid, even while failing to prove the theory. But any day now, any year, the theory will be proven, the Leftists assure us. Just wait and see.

But in the meantime they want us to give them all of our money — because it takes giving money away to poor countries to halt climate change — stop driving cars, stop heating with wood, coal and natural gas, and start living a much simpler, less technologically advanced life — regress, in other words — and things will start to improve.

It’s madness, and yet far too many people believe it.

What’s equally maddening is that far too few people believe actual data disproving the global warming/climate change theory, and that likely will include a new study by researchers Jennifer Marohasy and Dr. John Abbot, which found that global temperatures, which have warmed an average of one degree Celsius since the beginning of the Industrial Age in the 1830s, would have risen exactly the same amount even without human industrialization.

Marohasy writes that the two researchers have developed a system using artificial neural networks (ANN) to accurately forecast monthly rainfall, and that over the past year they’ve used the same system to estimate what global temperatures would have been during the 20th century without human-emission carbon dioxide.

She notes:

We began by deconstructing the six-proxy series from different geographic regions – series already published in the mainstream climate science literature.  One of these, the Northern Hemisphere composite series begins in 50 AD, ends in the year 2000, and is derived from studies of pollen, lake sediments, stalagmites and boreholes.

Marohasy said that the temperature series showed typical zig-zagging up and down, but that there were two warming trends: The first, which peaked around 1200 AD and which corresponds with a period known as the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), while the second period peaked around 1980, then declined. There is a Little Ice Age (LIA) in between that period, which bottomed out around 1650 AD.

During the warming period, England was rich in bountiful agricultural harvests; men dressed in fine tunics and built incredible buildings and monument. But during the LIA, there was much famine and London suffered the Great Plague.

In any event, Marohasy notes that while temperatures declined beginning in 1980, that is generally referred to by Left-wing climate change hoaxers as “the divergence problem,” and summarily ignored.

“In denial of this problem,” she writes, “leading climate scientists have been known to even graft temperature measurements from thermometers onto the proxy record after 1980 to literally ‘hide the decline.’ Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia, aptly described the technique as a ‘trick.’” (Related: EPA chief Pruitt truth bomb: No, ‘carbon dioxide’ does not contribute to ‘global warming’)

In other words, climate change hoaxers have manipulated data to make it seem as though warming may still be occurring. And when that hasn’t worked, they pivot from “global warming” to “climate change,” because we all know the climate changes (it just isn’t changing due to human-caused activity).

The bottom line, Marohasy writes:

Our results show up to 1°C of warming. The average divergence between the proxy temperature record and our ANN projection is just 0.09 degree Celsius. This suggests that even if there had been no industrial revolution and burning of fossil fuels, there would have still been warming through the twentieth century – to at least 1980, and of almost 1°C.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, relying on General Circulation Models, and giving us the Paris Accord, also estimates warming of approximately 1°C, but claims this is all our fault (human caused).

That this study found temperatures would have changed by precisely the same amount if the world had not industrialized is not something the hoaxers want you to know. But it’s something you need to know so that you don’t get the wool pulled over your eyes by political leaders who want to steal your future and control your life using “climate change” as their reason to do so.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for and, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources include:

We will respect your inbox and privacy

comments powered by Disqus