By Jane Jamison
Climate-gate part I occurred in early December when a still-unknown person posted thousands of e-mails and documents on a scientific website. The e-mails showed that scientists at the leading “global warming” research institute in the world, East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) had “changed” weather data to prove their climate-warming theories, and squelched dissenting opinions from skeptical scientists to maintain credibility for their fraud.
Climate-gate part II begins now: The scientists with Icecap.us website announced findings late last week that not only was the CRU involved in producing fraudulent weather data, but two United States agencies, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), have also been falsifying climate reports for years. NOAA, the report concludes, is actually “ground-zero” for the fraud of global warming, not the East Anglia Institute.
Climate researchers have discovered that government researchers improperly manipulated data in order to claim 2009 as “THE SECOND WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD.”
http://www.icecap.us/
Climategate: Leaked Emails Inspired Data Analyses Show Claimed Warming Greatly Exaggerated and NOAA not CRU is Ground Zero
(This is a preliminary introduction – final much more complete report will be posted here and on SPPI, which has supported the study shortly)
By Joseph D’Aleo
The global data bases have serious problems that render them useless for determining accurate long term temperature trends. Especially since most of the issues produce a warm bias in the data.
The Climategate whistleblower proved what those of us dealing with data for decades already knew. The data was degrading and was being manipulated. The IPCC and their supported scientists have worked to remove the pesky Medieval Warm Period, the Little Ice Age, and the period emailer Tom Wigley referred to as the “warm 1940s blip.” They have also worked to pump up the recent warm cycle that ended in 2001.
Programmer Ian “Harry” Harris, in the Harry_Read_Me.txt file, commented about:
“[The] hopeless state of their (CRU) data base. No uniform data integrity, it’s just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they’re found...I am very sorry to report that the rest of the databases seem to be in nearly as poor a state as Australia was. There are hundreds if not thousands of pairs of dummy stations, one with no WMO and one with, usually overlapping and with the same station name and very similar coordinates. I know it could be old and new stations, but why such large overlaps if that’s the case? Aarrggghhh! There truly is no end in sight.
This whole project is SUCH A MESS. No wonder I needed therapy!!
There has clearly been some cyclical warming in recent decades most notably 1979 to 1998. However the global surface station based data is seriously compromised by major station dropout. There has been a clear bias towards removing higher elevation, higher latitude and rural stations. The data suffers contamination by urbanization and other local factors such as land-use/land-cover changes, and improper siting. There is missing data and uncertainties in ocean temperatures. These factors all lead to overestimation of temperatures. Numerous peer-reviewed papers in the last several years have shown this overestimation is the order of 30 to 50% just from the contamination issues alone. The cherry picking of observing sites and the increase of interpolation to vacant data grids makes these estimates very conservative. The data bases on which so many important decisions are to be made are “Non Gradus Anus Rodentum!”
“Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of the truth.” Mahatma Gandhi
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAArole…
Just about everyone involved with the “global warming” movement was faking and lying about faking their reports.
http://www.icecap.us/|||Clearly the evidence indicates that there should be a public investigation. NOAA's climate prediction has always had a warm bias, predicting warmer than average temperatures for most of the country even though most independent, for profit climate studies correctly saw the deep freeze and increased snow amounts for the last 4 years.
Recall October 2008 when NOAA announced that this was the warmest month on record while snow and low temperatures were being recorded around the globe? NOAA had to retract this statement after independent scientists caught glaring errors in the data.
It makes you wonder how successful they are when the manipulate other data.|||"Character/source-assassinatio… when they disagree with your religion indicates a desperate last gasp."
Were you looking in the mirror when you said that?
Report Abuse
|||I read Joseph D’Aleo's report. It reads more like a political smear than a scientific paper.
When he uses a graph of state record highs to prove his point (irrelevant), I know he is not interested in global warming but in politics.|||The UK Meteorological Office has become so "warmist" obsessed that The BBC (another warmist organisation) is considering getting its weather forecasts from private weather forecasters.|||no|||So you have ICECRAP reporting on a story supported by SPPI and aired by KUSI-TV e.g. the same old John Colman)
"Just about everyone involved with the “global warming” movement was faking and lying about faking their reports."
Do you honestly think this rubbish fools anyone !
“Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of the truth.” Mahatma Gandhi
True, and the simplest of searches show the interlinking of these denier groups and who is paying their bills.|||it would be nice if we could get the politics out of Research organizations but apparently we cant.
its already too late anyway because they are rapidly losing credibility %26amp; becoming irrelevant to anyone except the politicians who fund them.
this global warming fiasco has dealt government science a crippling blow just at a time when we may need big science more than ever to solve "real" world problems.
when the stores are empty %26amp; the lights go out be sure to thank a dingbat hippy for it.|||Unlike the warmers here, who are lately becoming quite the conspiracy theorists themselves to add to the ad hominem element, I will await verification, confirmation, analysis or some other type of support for those statements by D'Aleo.
The report by Coleman and D'Aleo seems highly accusatory in nature, more so than previous skepticism. I hope it can be backed up.|||Interesting article, but I would like to see some more evidence that this is indeed the case.
The scientists have all made modifications to the data in an unblinded manner, so there can be little doubt that they are indeed adding bias, though unintentionally. I am not sure how much of an effect, if any their unintentional biasing of the data causes, but if they are intentionally doing so, they should be in jail after the billions of taxpayer's dollars they have used. Once again I would need to see more evidence.|||You people who BELEIVE in AGW.. do you ACTUALLY believe all these governments and politicians are WORRIED about the Planet? You cannot POSSBILY be that stupid. If Governments REALLY wanted to HELP the Environment they would ENACT tougher emission standards!
No.. The ONLY thing these people see is $$$$$$$ in their eyes.. Tax %26amp; Cap .. Carbon Credits.. its worth TRILLIONS %26amp; TRILLIONS %26amp; TRILLIONS of $$ in taxes.. THIS is the UGLY TRUTH TO AGW.. a Hoax to fleece everyone.
When in doubt.. FOLLOW THE MONEY! ALWAYS FOLLOW THE MONEY!
No comments:
Post a Comment