That's inconvenient.

So much for the Antarctic narrative.

This is from Newsweek:

//Researchers at NASA have discovered a huge upwelling of hot rock under Marie Byrd Land, which lies between the Ross Ice Shelf and the Ross Sea, is creating vast lakes and rivers under the ice sheet. The presence of a huge mantle plume could explain why the region is so unstable today, and why it collapsed so quickly at the end of the last Ice Age, 11,000 years ago.

Mantle plumes are thought to be part of the plumbing systems that brings hot material up from Earth’s interior. Once it gets through the mantle, it spreads out under the crust, providing magma for volcanic eruptions. The area above a plume is known as a hotspot.//

Apart from this area, Antarctic ice has been growing during this period of "global warming."

Volcanic activity under the ice has been reported previously as the explanation for melting in this area.

Translation - People who were skeptical of Global Warming hysteria have been right all along.

According to the Independent:

//Computer modelling used a decade ago to predict how quickly global average temperatures would rise may have forecast too much warming, a study has found.

The Earth warmed more slowly than the models forecast, meaning the planet has a slightly better chance of meeting the goals set out in the Paris climate agreement, including limiting global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

Scientists said previous models may have been “on the hot side”.

But the findings indicate the danger may not be as acute as was previously thought.//

Well, it wasn't like grant money would come flooding in with headlines like "climate change within normal parameters."

Thirty years of record temperature increases and we are back where we started.

A con can only go on so long.

//In 1991, the Times reported yet another record high, and published yet another reminder of how cool the planet used to be:

The Goddard group found that the record average surface temperature for the globe was eight-tenths of a degree Fahrenheit above the 1951-1980 average of 59 degrees. The British group found it seventh-tenths of a degree higher than the 1951-80 average.
By that point a reasonable consumer might have been ardently hoping to return to that magical era in which global temperatures averaged just 59 degrees. But in the ensuing years it must have been difficult for Times readers to stay hopeful. As the years and then the decades rolled by, The Times routinely reported record or near-record highs as global temperatures appeared to march ever higher.


In January of this year, the newspaper published a feature entitled, “How 2016 Became Earth’s Hottest Year on Record.” The Times noted the disturbing news that “2016 was the first time that the hottest year on record occurred three times in a row.” And things could be about to get much worse. “We expect records to continue to be broken as global warming proceeds,” climate enthusiast Michael Mann told the Times.

Is there any way to return to the salad days of 59 degrees? Well, it turns out to be easier than you might think. In January, as the government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was reporting the third consecutive year of record highs, it noted that the average global temperature in 2016 had surged to a sizzling... 58.69 degrees.

Over the years researchers seem to have concluded that the planet was not as hot as they thought. Oops.//

This is pure hysteria.

Stephen Hawking warns of yet another tipping point, but this one will turn Earth into Venus!!!!

//Speaking to the BBC to mark his 75th birthday the author of A Brief History of Time said: "We are close to the tipping point where global warming becomes irreversible.

"Trump's action could push the Earth over the brink, to become like Venus, with a temperature of two hundred and fifty degrees, and raining sulphuric acid."//

Maybe we should cut the 75 year old scientist some slack, but the fact is that Earth is at a historically low level of CO2, close, in fact, to the point where plant life will shut down due to the lack of CO2.

The Earth's atmosphere has had levels of CO2 factors of 1,000 times greater than what it is now.

And it never became Venus.

Global Warming Undermines EPA's Clean Air Mission.

Is there anything that Global Warming can't do?

//While critics and supporters alike pore over President Trump's proposed federal budget to pinpoint programs that will suffer and savings that will benefit taxpayers, President Trump's vision of the federal budget includes welcome reform at the Environmental Protection Agency. It would slash appropriations for the EPA's climate programs; instead of global warming, the budget "reorients EPA's air program to protect the air we breathe." From this statement, it is safe to infer that President Trump intends to refocus the agency on doing its job as intended by the Congress.

Over the last decade, climate change has become the EPA's number one priority. Consider the ascendancy of global warming in the agency's multi-year strategic plans for air quality, which are required by law. In the EPA's 2001 — 2005 Strategic Plan, "Goal 1" is "Clean Air," while climate change mitigation was subsumed in "Goal 6: Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks." However, in the 2006-2010 plan, climate change mitigation is incorporated into a new "Goal 1," which is titled "Clean Air and Global Climate Change." And in the 2011-2015 plan, "Goal 1" is changed again to "Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality" — that is, global warming is listed before improving air quality.

A look back shows that the EPA's shift in focus to climate change accelerated during the Obama administration. In 2014, for example, then-EPA administrator Gina McCarthy told reporters that "all hands on deck" at the agency were working on President Barack Obama's climate action plan.//

This kind of creeping away from mission is a reason that the government is so expensive and ineffective.

Global Warming Fraud.

File this under "Ideology distorts Science."

The reliance of NOAA on unverified, inferior data has been known for years; this shows that they know what they are doing and why.

Panic, panic, panic....

2016 was the hottest year in forever!!!!

Panic, panic, panic...

Aside from the fact that this is based on earth data which is notoriously subject to heat island effects, and not satellite data that shows no warming, the "hottest year" is a statistical mirage:

//They should have been in the first paragraph, but at least they’re in the third paragraph: “This puts 2016 only nominally ahead of 2015 by just 0.01C—within the 0.1C margin of error—but….” There’s stuff after the “but,” but it’s just somebody’s evaluation. Even this report can’t give us a straight fact and leave it alone.

For the benefit of science reporters and other people who are unfamiliar with the scientific method, let me point out that the margin of error for these measurements is plus or minus one tenth of a degree Celsius. The temperature difference that is supposedly being measured is one one-hundredth of a degree—one tenth the size of the margin of error. To go back to sports reporting, that’s like saying that the football is on the 10-yard line—give or take a hundred yards.//