Name:   MartiniMan - Subject:   On the 18 year hiatus Date:   3/8/2016 2:56:56 PM (updated 3/8/2016 2:58:41 PM)

Just so you know, the source of global climate data using satellite data comes from two sources.  The first is the University of Alabama in Huntsville and the second is the Remote Sensing Corporation in Califormia.  Both data sets agree within a very small range.  A trendline of that combined data set is flat as a pancake over the last 18 years.  I wish it were easier to post the plot of the data because it is so dead straight forward that anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty would agree that there is no warming trend for the last 18 years.  This is not some anti-ACC data set or presentation, it comes from reliable sources.

As this became apparent there was initially a wave of explanations about why there was no warming (ocean heat sinks, etc.).  When none of these passed muster NOAA and NASA decided to eliminate this data set in favor of land-based data long criticized for being impacted by the urban heat sources.  I have read a couple of peer reviewed papers that demonstrated the problem with land based data.  This too has been thoroughly discredited because prior to the hiatus both NASA and NOAA claimed satellite data was the best and most reliable source of actual global climates because they measure temperatures in the troposhpere and are not biased by urban heat sources.  

What is abundantly obvious is that the long-term variations in global climates tracks extremely well with the activity of the sun.  This makes perfect sense as the sun is the source of the energy that heats the earth.  This is not hard to understand.  Only someone who is scientifically illiterate could accuse a person using an entire data set as cherry picking for criticizing another group that selectively used a portion of the data set that supported their contention.  That is exceedingly humorous and equally ludicrous.