Climate Change Assertiveness through Detail Ambiguity
El Niño and La Niña are the warm and cool phases, respectively, of a natural recurring climate-changing pattern across the Pacific Ocean. North American indigenous tribes from centuries ago would actually ascertain and access these conditions to see where the best fishing would be – both in quantity and size. Acknowledging and assessing both El Niño and La Niña, the tribes would relocate at intervals to preferred and better fishing grounds. The occurrence of El Niño was preferred since La Niña waters can be 2 to 3 degrees cooler.
Relating to the warming in the Atlantic Ocean, “A study of climate records has shown that El Niño events in the equatorial Pacific are generally associated with a warm tropical North Atlantic in the following spring and summer. About half of El Niño events persist sufficiently into the spring months for the Western Hemisphere Warm Pool to become unusually large in summer.”
All of this is more information than you will likely glean from the linked story “Scientists horrified as sea surface temperatures spike off the charts” although no charts accompany the story. Actually, it does not even tell us what part of what ocean is warming. I am assuming it is the northern portions of the Atlantic since the University of Maine's Climate Change Institute is preparing and recording the data.
The veracity of the story becomes quite dubious immediately when the third sentence reads, “That means we are in uncharted territory as global warming continues to take its toll with extreme weather events becoming more common by the year — and scientists are clearly shaken by the spiking temperatures.” There has been no increase in any extreme weather events as evidenced by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and even the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Considering that temperatures have been stable, or declined slightly in the past 9 years is further evidence against “spiking temperatures”. The alarmist community of scientists and researchers simply say deceitful and dishonest things and the legacy media reproduces it like a Xerox copier and does so without question.
In the article, physicist Rober Rohde tweeted, "For the last month [the daily index] has been continuously reading higher than in any previous year and still shows no sign of settling." Whether true or not is questionable, but what is true is that the records only began in 1982, discounting the greater portion of history even in the age of the industrial revolution and more reliable instrumentation.
Do these authors advocating for climate change and their scientific sources believe what is true, or are their beliefs and cherry-picked ideals dictated by what they wish is true? Obviously, we know the answer. To constantly restate the erroneous is not the result of inanity or ignorance, but one simply of progressive bias and prejudicial politicking.
The politicians and their scientific allies have become more shrewd in the recent past by continuing to pursue the push of alarm on the citizenry but becoming quite vague in their timelines or anticipated event chronology.