" ... Unfortunately, despite the indisputable and consensus scientific recognition that a temperature plateau exists, and the lively debate within science circles as to why, there are elite green alarmists who claim the 'standstill' is a hoax or does not exist - essentially, that is sheer climate-change denialism by deniers performing in anti-science, denialist roles.

On top of such denial travesties, the mainstream press is trying to change the focus away from the significance of the global warming slowdown and climate model failure to the incredibly small increase in warming that allows them to ("shout") report that 2014 is the "warmest" year ever.

The term "warmest" (as in day, week, month, spring, summer, autumn, winter, year, decade and so on) has become the last propaganda refuge of those who either deny the global pause or just want everyone to forget its importance. Utilizing the terminology of "warmest" reveals the ultimate cherry-picking agenda.

However, since the Little Ice Age (LIA) end during the 1800's, the world has been constantly producing new "warmest-ever" records - it's entirely normal within the climate record, and will happen even when a temperature change hiatus exists.

To that point, both warm and cold years can coexist during longer periods of temperature stability, as multiple global and regional records demonstrate. In addition, it's unquestionable that severe/extreme weather events can take place, regardless if it is the "coldest" or "warmest" year. ... " - http://www.c3headlines.com/2014/12/alarm...

47% of the measuring stations are used to measure 4.8% of the World's surface and they get accurate results? ROTFLMAO!!!

The problem with that "official statement" is that they have been bringing in the ARGO data and blending it into the surface data. They use climate modelling to reconstruct past water temperature data. This is where the "Climate Clown Act" get's really funny. (I heard that they can now get 20 Climate Clowns into a '66 VW Beetle)

I think that theres always the argument that higher temperatures could be indicative of the earth entering a normal heating cycle, which also happens with cooling. I mean look at the ice ages. Do they indicate that the whole world is going to be frozen forever? I think not. The earth goes through normal temperature changes and at this point i dont think that can be ruled out. On the other hand, deforestations really bad in some places and with populations still increasing, there could definitely be some human influence.

Well it can be only the hottest year since they have been keeping track and naturally the measurement system today is different than previously. So it really means little or no. In addition there can be little to nothing to perform about it other when compared with adapt.

That is what happens when they continually cool the past. If we rated inflation like we did 20 years ago, it would be far far higher. In fact, it would probably push interest rates up so high that our payment on the debt would cause all sorts of problems with those slurping on the government trough. When the government finds numbers inconvenient, they simply adjust them if enough money is riding on it and nobody calls them on it.

http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/12/04/d...

Satellites apparently tell a different story yet I'm guessing alarmists aren't going to comment much about that except to say "nothing to see here, move along"

They think Californa is Earth while the rest of states had a mild Summer No 100s this year in Missouri only a 99 degree plus rain once a week

Well it is only the hottest year since they have been keeping track and of course the measurement system today is different than in the past. So it really means very little. In addition there is little to nothing to do about it other than adapt.

"All 13 of the warmest years on record have now occurred in the last 15 years according to Climate Central, a non-profit science communications organization based in Princeton, New Jersey. The likelihood of such a string of warm years occurring by chance is less than 1 in 27 million, it calculated."

I'm going to call bull fecal matter on this one. Maybe super adult Gary F with x-ray statistical skills can break this out and show where the figure 1 in 27 million came from and its significance.

Edit: I love some of Michael Mann's comments.

“Viewed in context, the record 2014 temperatures underscore the undeniable fact that we are witnessing, before our eyes, the effects of human-caused climate change."

“The record temperatures *should* put to rest the absurd notion of a “pause”.

I'll let the alarmists point out the nonsense of Mann's statements since they love pointing out to skeptics that you can't "see" climate change and a one year data point does not make a trend and that variations in trends which don't go your way are not "absurd".

I guess when you view something in "context" you can pretty much see whatever you want to see.

Looking at other high temp years, the trend since 1998 is .07C in 16 years, less than .5C per century.

The trend since 2002 is .08C in 12 years or less than .7C per century

The trend since 2005 is .03C in 9 years or less than .4C per century

The trend since 2010 is .02C in 4 years or .5C per century

The predicted trends from the IPCC are much much higher, and these levels are not worth worrying about.

Berkeley Earth found the same thing. They were careful though to point out that the differences from some past years were not statistically significant; i.e. there is more than a 1% chance that actually 2010 or 2005 was as warm and the difference is statistical randomness.

http://static.berkeleyearth.org/memos/Gl...

2014 was the warmest year over oceans. Over land it was nominally the 4th warmest.

Well, multiple independent agencies have all said this, so I don't think there is any trickery going on, if that's where you're asking.The year-to-year variation is much higher than differences, so I think it's a bit foolish to focus on the exact value.

And were you implying that people like Patrick Michaels, John Christy, Roger Pielke and Judith Curry are biased? They were all among the scientists interviewed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/01/16/scientists-react-to-warmest-year-2014-underscores-undeniable-fact-of-human-caused-climate-change/

And they even got 21 highly neutral scientists, like Michael Mann, to back them up.

I can already promise 2015 is the hottest year ever in history.

Of course it's true, that is why both Polar Ice Caps are growing at an alarming Climate Change rate.

Pigs have adapted by swimming to Islamic Countries where they will not be eaten.