BREAKING NEWS: Manipulated Datasets at NASA and NCDC
Once again, the audacity and brazen manipulation of scientific evidence is shocking. These are very serious allegations.
Thermometers moved from cold mountains to warm beaches; from Siberian Arctic to more southerly locations, and from pristine rural locations to jet airport tarmacs.
There were around 6000 thermometers 20 or 30 years ago in the global data set, but in 1989-1990, the number of thermometers were reduced to around 1,500. A new study shows a dramatic pattern of artificial adjustments in the way these thermometers were included or deleted. Jonathon Coleman announced the study results tonight on his blog and also in his broadcast (see below).
Apparently officials systematically left out colder thermometer recordings and kept in hotter data, and where there were empty points on the map, they “filled them in” with calculations instead of measurements. The data was homogenized, and the adjustments always increased the warming. This is the telltale sign of chicanery. This is how we know there were artificial adjustments. Normal scientific corrections are random, not all tending in one direction.
E.Michael Smith notes “When doing a benchmark test of the program, I found patterns in the input data from NCDC that looked like dramatic and selective deletions of thermometers from cold locations.” Smith says after awhile, it became clear this was not a random strange pattern he was finding, but a well designed and orchestrated manipulation process. “The more I looked, the more I found patterns of deletion that could not be accidental. Thermometers moved from cold mountains to warm beaches; from Siberian Arctic to more southerly locations, and from pristine rural locations to jet airport tarmacs. The last remaining Arctic thermometer in Canada is in a place called ‘The Garden Spot of the Arctic,’ always moving away from the cold and toward the heat. I could not believe it was so blatant and it clearly looked like it was in support of an agenda,” Smith says. [Source: IceCap ]
“It has been revealed that a “sleight of hand” was used in the computer program that rated 2005 as “THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD.” Skeptical climate researchers have discovered extensive manipulation of the data within the U.S. Government’s two primary climate centers: the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) in Asheville, North Carolina and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) at Columbia University in New York City. These centers are being accused of creating a strong bias toward warmer temperatures through a system that dramatically trimmed the number and cherry-picked the locations of weather observation stations they use to produce the data set on which temperature record reports are based. The two investigators say the system has been distorted in other ways as well. They have documented their findings in great detail in a scientific report that has been posted online. These findings are presented as a part of my television special report ”Global Warming: The Other Side” telecast Thursday night, January 14th at 9 PM here on KUSI TV.”
See here for the John Coleman interview with both men on last night’s broadcast. Watch the video.
The data is so homogenized, there are no actual temperature readings left, only interpretations of temperatures ….
Programmer E. Michael Smith and CCM Joseph D’Aleo, the two men who did the research, also revealed there are no actual temperatures left in the computer database when it proclaimed “2005 WAS THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD.” In the transition to a computer averaging system, the National Data Climate Center deleted actual temperatures at thousands of locations throughout the world as it evolved to a system of global grid boxes. The number that goes into each grid box is determined by averaging the temperatures of two or more weather observation stations nearest that grid box..
Those who control the datasets, control the “temperature”
E. Michael Smith blog is here.
Joe D’Aleo edits IceCap.
Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) will be putting up a detailed report very soon.
Thanks to Colin, David W, and also to Marc Morano at Climate Depot for the fast notification.
I know I need to check it out when three emails arrive in 5 minutes linking the same story.
I saw where they claimed December was one of the warmest, yet the world froze. Now I see how they do it. You are right, those who control the data control the world (to paraphrase).
10
They did a lot of work sorting thru data friendly thermometrs.
It looks like James Hansen is in deep trouble. What will he tell his grand children?
Storms of My Grandchildren. His book may need revision, eh?
10
Yep, this massive corruption of science and truth is wide and ugly. Why? Money, power and control via carbon trading. “Save the planet” is just a nice mantra used to sway compassionate folks who don’t question. They’ll sign up for anything if it sounds nice.
This issue is separating the weak-minded followers – those who still want to believe Gore, the UN, and all the other hysterical “Cities will sink” types – from critical thinkers. But we’ll all be in the same boat if cap-and-trade takes hold. I’d feel more sorry for the true-believers if they weren’t taking me down with them.
Fortunately, more people are aware now since this climate scandal broke. To all – Jo Nova, Watts Up With That?, John Coleman, Lord Monckton, Chris Booker, James Delinpole, the climate scandal whistle blowers, etc. who keep us informed – Thank you!!
10
[…] Climategate arrives in the USA, […]
10
The evidence of manipulated data not only by the Hadley Centre in the UK but now by NASA and the NCDC in the US is now overwhelming. Why do the politicians still turn a blind eye ? Is it money ? Surely it can’t be for politicians except the occasional jaunt to a conference, When will this fraud sink home in the corridors of power, so that cap and trade and these ludicrous fringe organisations trying cut CO2 can be put to bed?
10
At last! I’ve never believed that NASA’s hands were clean. I just didn’t know how dirty they really are. Hansen must be in a sweat for sure. Serves him right.
Now get ready for the spin doctors.
10
Where will Gore hide now?
10
Oh my Gawd!
This from “New Scientist”.
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/1/15/new-scientist-on-glaciers.html
Could honesty, not to mention real science, be breaking out?
Not holding my breath yet.
10
Here is the site of the whole special by Coleman.
http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/81583352.html
Apparently KUSI is an independent TV station, very popular in CA and now will be world wide. NASA still denies this. Don’t know what more it’s gonna take, hope were past the famous tipping point now though.
10
This hardly comes as a surprise when you consider the stakes. The left is on the verge of taking control of every aspect of American life by the use of administrative fiat by the EPA instead of through legislation. They need some semblence of scientific theory to back up this power grab, even the junk science of the AGW Alarmist KoolAid Club. Fortunately time is running out. The democratic/socialist majority in the Senate will be greatly reduced next year and the House will likely revert to Republican control. That will be the death knell for the no growth nuts for a while.
10
The kusi News interviews have either been taken down or removed.
Suspicious
10
Also interesting to me is the latest on CA to do with NASA emails. In one of these emails, a NASA worker suggests that the margin of error is 0.5C. So the current “anomoly” temperature of about 1.3C is actually 1.3C +- 1.0C because the baseline period could be out in one direction and the current measurement in the other. And since these emails also reveal the previous “Y2K correction” found by Steve McIntyre was for 0.15C for the USA, and the USA is regarded as the “best and most accurate” record, plus the fact that the 0.15C “Y2K error” was only found by an outsider and only because it was “obvious”, I have much more doubt that the warming is “real” in any case. And let us not forget that the global “adjustments” add around 0.6C to the trend as well, mostly by “cooling the past”.
So yeah – a “tempest in a tea-cup” it may well be.
But having said that, I will also add that IMO these people are in fact genuine in their beliefs. They really do think they have evidence that we are destroying the planet and need to do something. They just haven’t properly taken into account the error margins and propogated them through the whole system. If they did that, they’d have a hard time convincing anyone that they’d found a problem because I suspect that we’d be looking at a sub 1 sigma change – well within what’s expected and well within the noise (and error margins). Of course, I could be wrong but without the error ranges being well noted and propogated throughout the system, we’ll never know.
10
Fittler #11
Not sure what you mean, please clarify
BTW The Smith-D’Aleo paper was commissioned by SPPI That’s Lord Moncktons group.
What a great job the Lord is doing.
10
Something smells in Denmark, to coin a phrase. We all know the northern hemisphere has been the coldest in many years during early January. The stories abound everywhere (I in S. MN. on the Iowa border have yet to see the temperature above freezing this year and spent most of the first two weeks below zero F). Now as us skeptics (realist) are gloating. It just so happens the people behind the curtain, come out and say we just had the warmest January day in recorded history during the frigid plunge? ( Some Global Temperature recording site UAH) Well excuse me, I wasn’t born yesterday. I would like to add, I found this site http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/ I typed in my local rural city and asked for raw data graphed since 1886 (real temp data I assume). Anyhow here is the result http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=425744400040&data_set=0&num_neighbors=1 Amazingly their is not any Hockey Stick My city is near as cold in 2009 as it has ever been in recorded History! No wonder I do not buy into the GW frenzy. I am a Farmer and would wish it would warm up so I could consistently raise better crops, extend my growing season and have less fear of severe crop loss from sudden freezes in the spring and fall…and it I really do have Global Cooling here in Rural MN………..John
PS Why don’t some of you guys put in some pertinent cities and see if You also have Global cooling or at least zero warming over the last last 120 years Like I have…….John………
10
Baa Humbug:
January 16th, 2010 at 10:15 am
Fittler #11
Not sure what you mean, please clarify
BTW The Smith-D’Aleo paper was commissioned by SPPI That’s Lord Moncktons group.
What a great job the Lord is doing.
When I go to the Kusi TV links looking for the John Coleman interview the videos do not show up
10
UAH global satellite data has record warmest day for January
Go figure,
At WUWT here
I think too many log fires in the northern hemisphere lol
10
Fittler I just checked that and the videos, all 5 of them are there for me. Check your browser settings maybe???
Try here
10
Jo,
Tim Ball has written a 2 page article on the Canadian history of this – have you received it at all? Albert Jacobs sent it out in his email list. I can forward it if you want,
10
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Blue Moon, Ayn Orwell, Ayn Orwell, ClimateGate_RT, ClimateGate_RT and others. ClimateGate_RT said: #JoNova : ClimateGate arrives in the US http://bit.ly/4pioyX #HideTheDecline […]
10
Wow! What a really “scientific” way to determine temperature! I wonder why I flew recon for 8-9 years and “measured” temperatures (among other things). Just look at all the money that could have been saved! Why drop sondes near the North Pole, or in the North Atlantic, or the vast Pacific when a little “pencil whipping” would have sufficed?
Oh wait! I was measuring ‘weather,’ not ‘climate.’ Silly me.
10
The reason all those thermometers were dropped is obvious to anyone who has bothered to examine their readings.
THEY WERE DENIERS refusing to show rising temps.
10
NASA = Never A Straight Answer
NCDC = National Cooked Data Centre
10
I would be careful about where you lay the blame.
Yes E.M. Smith saw what he said he saw. Please don’t misinterpret what he said and assume just COLD stations were lost.
The issue isn’t just cold stations as using the anomaly system the absolute temperature isn’t involved so it is only the CHANGE in temp that matters.
The issues are several.
1) removing all stations in a grid cell that then invokes infilling data from the closest station which will typically then be an URBAN station with a higher UHI that WILL AFFECT THE ANOMALY!!! Areas like northern Canada, Bolivia, Siberia, central Africa do not tend to have cities with large UHI!!
2) removing rural stations which will remove their flatter anomaly from the average of their grid cell and reduce the possibility that the GISS adjustment will average an Urban center with a true RURAL area.
3) removing stations with long continuous histories. The methods used to homogenise stations with moves or instrument changes appear to increase the anomaly. The HADCrud especially seemed to prefer this method.
I would note that generally, lower altitude and lower latitude will generally have larger cities/airports with greater UHI.
Looking at the temp record compared to the station availability record we can also see that the temps do not rise quickly while the number of stations are increasing!! This is reasonable as large population centers will already have records. New stations would typically be at research stations or smaller towns/rural areas with little UHI.
10
Fittler #15
Try WUWT. They have the full series on the page.
10
Oh, did I forget to mention that E.M. Smith also found that areas of the globe have a rather high percentage of thermometers at airports?? He confirmed what others have speculated about!!
10
It looks like James Hansen is compeeting for the cooking contest.
10
[…] Nova has the whole shebang. Categories: AGW Comments (0) Trackbacks (0) Leave a comment […]
10
CLIMATEGATE
THE TRACK RECORD OVER FOUR DECADES
a.n.ditchfield
My environmental awareness was aroused in mid 1971, when I was invited to a meeting of the Club of Rome in Rio de Janeiro. It first struck me as a constructive publicity move of FIAT, the sponsor. At intervals of a few months the Club of Rome invited noted scientists and intellectuals to meetings at tourist attractions like Rio de Janeiro, with all expenses paid. They were asked to meditate about the predicament of mankind and to listen to progress reports of a team of young MIT engineers who were using a computer model to project the impact on the planet of expanding economic activity. The results of the study were stated in the 1972 book, Limits to Growth, of which some 12 million copies were printed. The launching of the book was a masterpiece by editorial standards and its contents still remain central to such thought, including that of John Holdren, science adviser of Obama.
One of the new tools used in the study was the feed-back algorithm developed by Prof. Jay Forrester, of MIT, to portray the unfolding of complex systems over long timelines. All relevant factors are displayed in elaborate flowcharts and their interplay shown in a succession of stages like snapshots, in which the end of one stage is the beginning of the next. The idea is much like that of cinema, in which the rapid display of successive photos creates the optical illusion of movement. Forrester used his feedback innovation to the study of location problems of industry (Industrial Dynamics) and to explain the decay of metropolitan cities in America (Urban Dynamics). The new effort applied Forrester’s technique to demonstrate the Club of Rome proposition that a finite planet cannot support growth of population and economic activity at the pace seen for two decades after World War II. The conclusion was ready; it needed rationalization with a computer model to give a scientific look to what was the belief of the sponsors, FIAT chairman Aurelio Peccei and the renowned scientist Alexander King.
Limits to Growth had a large number of gloomy forecasts, speculative thought as such, but not science, and time rejected their validity. The earliest of the kind, the Malthus Essay on the Principle of Population published in 1798, foretold a grim 19th century. The population of Britain, stable at 5 million until the middle of the 18th century, had grown to 8 million and was expanding at a geometrical rate, while the supply of food expanded at a lower arithmetical rate. As Malthus saw it, population was bound to collapse to a sustainable level through famine, disease and war. But during the 19th century the population of Britain became four times larger and the economy sixteen times greater, an expansion supported by the Industrial Revolution. Most Britons entered the 20th century well fed, clothed and healthy, housed in cities with good sanitation. Gone were the days of the “dark satanic mills” of the early 19th century. The technology that had expanded industrial output also provided the means to end squalor.
Malthusian thought was discredited but remained dormant until the 1968, when resurrected by Paul Erlich with his equally grim Population Bomb. This time world population was bound to collapse on a planet that was running out of arable land to feed it; he reckoned that over the next two decades hundreds of millions would die of famine. The reasoning was crude and was superseded by the more sophisticated approach of the Club of Rome that put in motion the PAT idea, a formula that summarizes the impact of human activity on the environment I = P×A×T. In words: Human Impact (I) on the environment equals the product of population (P), affluence (A): consumption per capita; and technology (T): environmental impact per unit of consumption. Population was still at the root of coming doomsday, and its impact on the planet is multiplied by growing demand for non-renewable resources (fuel and minerals) to sustain better living standards. Food scarcity was only one factor among many driving mankind to destruction.
I made three objections to the assumptions underpinning the Club of Rome study.
• Population forecasts are uncertain. What had come about in mid 20th century was the dramatic fall of mortality while fertility remained the same. I held this to be exceptional. Nothing warranted the assumption that this imbalance would persist indefinitely as projected in the study. Indeed, UN world population forecasts now show stability to be reached in the 21st century.
• Given the vast land area of the planet the idea of an excessive population is farfetched. Overcrowding is a local problem. It is evil in Calcutta and has been successfully coped with in many metropolitan cites.
• The concept of non-renewable resources was untenable. Most of the crust of the earth remains unknown. The Club of Rome assumption was that mineral reserves stated in sources like the Minerals Yearbook of the U.S, Bureau of Mines were all that remained and, given the naïve arithmetic, most would be depleted by the end of the 20th century.
Dennis Meadows, the project team leader, conceded that simplifications were made to make the World Model fit into the humble IBM 1130 computer, but these did not invalidate the axiomatic idea that a finite planet cannot support infinite growth. I challenged the axiom too. If Meadows reasoned at limits, I had equal right. I claim that all human consumption does not subtract one ounce from the mass of a planet subject to the Law of Conservation of Mass. Theoretically, everything can be recycled. The limitation is one of energy, and fusion energy reactors will make it available in practically unlimited quantities. It may be argued that we cannot count on technology not yet developed, but we must not discount it either. That is the flaw of Malthusian thought: the assumption that technological development will cease and stagnate forever at current levels.
What amazed me was the sight of the elderly sages of the Club of Rome accepting the computer printouts and graphs as sayings of a pagan oracle. To my mind they just illustrated the truth of the adage: [garbage in] = [garage out]. I know the content of the Forrester programs in the intimacy of FORTRAN statements, so I was not awed by the mathematics or by the computer of the MIT team. As an engineer, I had a professional interest in the Forrester programs because I was then engaged in location studies for large industries.
Eight weeks after the Rio de Janeiro Club of Rome meeting I traveled to New York on a business mission, after an absence of five years, and felt that I had landed on a different planet. On the ride from airport to Manhattan I was surprised by the sight of leafless trees in full summer. The cab driver explained that a pest was killing the trees and a court order had banned the use of pesticides; New Yorkers were exchanging their trees for a collection of insects. I found fleas in the subway, cockroaches in my hotel room and flies galore everywhere. I learned that the new Environmental Protection Agency, in one of its first acts, had banned the use of DDT with no scientific evidence to back the claim that it was harmful to human health. Over the previous decade the Silent Spring book of Rachel Carson had demonized it to the American public until it became politically correct to curse all chemical products used by modern farming. The anti-scientific ban was to have consequences beyond the discomfort I was experiencing. It stopped a world wide drive to eradicate malaria, as was done with polio and smallpox. Over four decades 40 to 50 million preventable deaths can be laid at the door of the promoters of this environmental cause. One of them was Alexander King, leader of the scientific team at the time of World War II that gave the world large scale availability of DDT, and the hope of eradicating insect-transmitted diseases. In his memoirs King let slip a senile remark: “my chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it greatly added to the population problem.”
I realized the strength of the grip of this new misanthropic attitude when I strolled down Lexington Avenue and stopped at a grocery that displayed boxes of worm-infested peaches on the sidewalk – sold at premium price! I entered for a word with the grocer. He claimed that he sold what the customers wanted: the presence of worms was taken as proof of legitimate “natural” fruit. To me it proved that fruit flies had sat on the peaches. I laughed. Someone with the wits to sell rotten peaches at high prices has the talent to sell anything at any price. I advised him to sell the grocery and move a few blocks west, to Madison Avenue, the hub of the advertising business, where he would earn a fortune as a gifted liar.
The mindset of America, and indeed of the Western world, was being shaken by a tectonic shift. For two centuries the Industrial Revolution had bestowed bounty on much of the world and was fast banishing the specter of dire want everywhere. Industrialization was fostered everywhere, and a national steel mill and national airline were emblematic of newly independent countries. Progress, once a universal aspiration, was now being challenged by contrarians of a new breed, not by the reactionaries of some failed Ancien Regime, of which the world still has plenty. The picturesque hippies of San Francisco who rejected progress and aspired to a life of idleness and poverty were only an echo of a wider movement that was engulfing the academic sphere and especially social studies. It was postmodern doctrine with its rejection of science, progress and of rational thought itself.
Prof. Alan Sokal, a physicist of New York University saw through it and concluded that there ain’t no thing called a social science. Anything goes, provided it is well written, scholarly-looking, in tune with the prejudices of the editor, and proved his point with publication of his paper, titled “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity”. The paper would have been perceived as a hoax by an engineering student, but was published as serious in Social Text. In one statement the number PI had a value of 3.141592… because it was arbitrated by the current social context; future generations in a different context would give it another value, because all is relative. Sokal didn’t invent such postmodernist nonsense; it is supported by more than 100 references to what had been published about hard science by social “scientists”. Engineers and scientists stopped being pinup boys and were vilified as robots mindlessly herding mankind to the cliff edge. It was claimed that the higher knowledge of postmodernist government was needed to avert disaster.
During the decades dominated by Thatcher and Reagan a limit was put to the politics of envy that exploited the cynical saying that “A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul”. This was laid to rest by market economy reforms that returned power to Victorian values that rewarded hard work, enterprise and ingenuity instead of political craftiness. Neither Blair nor Clinton dared tamper with reforms that worked well. The market economy was accepted all over the world because it was more efficient in meeting the needs of mankind than any alternative.
In the shadow of that time Environmentalism became a big business with a myriad of non-governmental organizations that evolved into a huge extortion racket, protected by law and supported by ample funds and publicity. With the turn of the political tide the racket is out for its own grab for power.
• Its objective is to place energy production under control of governments, and ultimately of an international body. Energy consumption would be rationed. Taxing the air you breathe will no longer be a figure of speech; it will be world wide policy to submit the acts of every human being to central control.
• Its technique is the one of the Club of Rome: rationalization with computer models to give a scientific look to what is an unproved and non provable belief: that anthropogenic global warming would end civilization (no longer attributed to overcrowding and exhausted resources). One finds the UN Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change In the old role of the Club of Rome, with vastly expanded propaganda resources.
• Its instrument is the postmodern Precautionary Principle: where there is a deadlock in understanding, bureaucratic whim trumps science.
The instrument carries the threat of being lethal to democratic institutions. Its first notable use was ushered in by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under the tenure of Carol Browner, during the Clinton years, to implement her anti-tobacco project with the justification that second hand smoke caused cancer in non-smokers. Numerous medical studies commissioned by the Agency failed to deliver the justification. The studies had been done under the stern rules of Food and Drug Administration with double-blind reviews. Big Tobacco hired lawyers to state their case and these resorted to expert testimony of scientists – exactly what the other side did. This is litigation, not science, with the pot calling the kettle black. Carol Browner circumvented the deadlock with a legal dodge of the Precautionary Principle: “if an action or policy has suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of a scientific consensus that harm would not ensue, the burden of proof falls on those who would advocate taking the action.” This opened the gates to endless mischief. On December 7th 2009, the day that lives in infamy, Obama decreed that carbon dioxide a pollutant dangerous to health, when it is the nutrient that sustains the food chain of all that lives on the planet. EPA rulings, not acts of Congress, are now the law of the land. America was turned into a Bobama Republic ruled by decree. Carol Browner is now energy adviser to Obama, not for her knowledge of the field but for her expertise in chicanery. Her achievement in the field was banning the drilling for oil on the continental shelf of Florida.
At the Copenhagen Climate Conference Hugo Chavez blamed global warming on capitalism and got a standing ovation from delegates of 191 sovereign states. Evo Morales blames Americans for the summer floods of Bolivia. They have the support of the Castro brothers, Amhadinejad, Kim Jong-il and of Osama Bin Laden. With friends like these, does Obama really need enemies?
Delegates argued whether a 2% or 1.5% reduction in world temperature was in order, with all the assurance that governments hold power to change climate. This reminds me of an amusing incident told by a chemical engineer who attended an international petrochemical symposium at Baku, on the Caspian sea, during the Soviet era. The guests were taken for a tour of manufacturing facilities and told by the Russian guide that the effluent emerged from the distillation tower with a purity of 99.9%. This was translated into English as “emerged from the distillation tower with a virginity of 99.9%. That is also splitting hairs. Delegates to the cop15 climatefest must have emerged with it, after the free sex offer of Copenhagen prostitutes.
In November 2009, three thousand documents with FORTRAN source codes and one thousand private e-mails were placed in the public domain, revealing peer-reviewed climate science as a joke on which rests the proposed expenditure of trillions of dollars. Climategate may come to rank with the climacteric events of World War II, as an event that changed the course of world history.
10
The politicians have funded scientists to construct a scientific validation for their environmental and Social policies….
In any other group of people, this would be a conspiricy to defraud… However with these people, it seems that they think it’s good science and government.
10
This could be a helpful summary:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=122109
10
A.N.Ditchield @ 28
There could be a book in that. 🙂
Like this one ClimateGate Book
10
Oh come now, economists have been on that game for decades. Why does it suddenly become a problem when others join in?
10
The truly frightening thing is how easily they could believe they would never be discovered. And they continue to insist that all is right and correct with their work even after being exposed. So it went with Enron and many others until the walls fell down around them.
Now unfortunately we have an Attorney General who will never even look for any misdeeds, much less ever prosecute them. So getting this before the public is more important than ever.
What a terrible tangled web we weave;
When first we practice to deceive.
10
[…] by JoAnne Nova […]
10
[…] Climategate Breaking News By mrgreengenes ClimateGate arrives in the US […]
10
Don’t worry folks. As the climate continues to cool over the coming years, the AGW alarmist will have their mouths frozen shut for good. My only wish is the likes of Al Gore and all the so called leading climate scientists in the organizations involved in this scam go to jail. One clear message here is there’s sufficient evidence already available to take them to court now and have an excellent chance of getting a guilty verdict. There’s no question about that now.
10
Hansen’s get out of jail card (WUWT) is simply state that NASA uses 3 independent data sources, and isn’t responsible for any alleged manipulation. Conspicuously he is in no rush to deny much. Sounds like see no evil – hear no evil. Doesn’t mean there isn’t any evil.
10
For whatever its worth I’ve sent the links for Coleman and Smith to U.S. Senator James Inhofe, the only skeptic in Congress.
The worst two things I can find out are that he already knows about it or that he doesn’t care. And at the best he’ll look into it.
10
I found this video about how temperature data has been manipulated to support the AGW myth. This is a must view video, it will surprise many of you.
http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/?p=2843
10
This may be a bit obscure but it wouldn’t be the first time the weather has turned a certain victory into a rout.
1812 and Napoleon at the gates of Moscow; beaten by the cold.
1942 and Hitler at the gates of Moscow; beaten by the cold (twice).
AGW and beween the cold, emails and the Russian scientists it should be roadkill.
10
One factor which must always be borne in mind is these people are “intellectuals” in which a reasoned and convincing argument proves some issue, and this philosophical approach as been applied to the hard sciences, or at least some of them, (I can’t imagine the engineering faculties being invaded by these intelligentia). These people actually believe they are right and as a result believe the data must be wrong.
It’ s not much use criticising them for falsifying the data, which they are doing, but far more use to criticise their intellectual position, and that is not easy.
As Car Sagan put it, you can never convince a believer of anything, for their belief is not based on evidence but on a deep seated need to believe.
This battle is far from over, for they control government and its resources, and we must never lose sight of the fact that it is also very dangerous being right about matters on which government is wrong, judging from some of the veiled threats one got occasionally on the now defunct Marohasy blog.
10
Albert
Thanks for that link to Coleman’s video – Joe D’aleo might think money is the agenda, but not in the way he thinks – it’s about redistributing the money. Also I had not realised what was really done to the data – basically culling of colder stations from the final data set, In any case their whole calculation methdology, averaging temperatures for grid cells, is technically wrong, and which I will have to summarise and put on my blog.
10
a.n. ditchfield: Brilliant.
Here’s a taste of some items coming in the very soon to be available revised ClimateGate timeline chart:
“If you put tomfoolery into a computer, nothing comes out of it but tomfoolery. But this tomfoolery, having passed through a very expensive machine, is somehow ennobled and no one dares criticise it.” — PIERRE GALLOIS
“There is no opinion, however absurd, which men will not readily embrace as soon as they can be brought to the conviction that it is generally adopted.” — ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER
“Nothing is more obstinate than a fashionable consensus.” — MARGARET THATCHER
10
We all have a lot to be thankful for considering the leaked emails and these recent revelations about NASA and NCDC. Not to throw water on the party but remember we are dealing with the lowest form of mammal here, politicians. They don’t care that the science of AGW is a fraud that would make a carnival barker blush. The politicians understanding of any issue lags that of the public. There is a clear reason for this. They don’t give a dam about correct or incorrect or smart or stupid. They care about one thing and one thing only REELCTION! They will gladly vote the chains of cap and trade on us all as long as the polls say most of the electorate still believe the AGW prattle.
Our best hope in this regard in the US hinges on the senate race in Massachusetts, election this Tuesday. The republican Scott Brown is 5 point ahead of the Democratic candidate Martha Coakley. This is happening in a congressional seat held by Ted Kennedy, I think he won the seat a half hour after creation and held it till his death. Ted’s politics were somewhere left of Stalin. In any case if the anti AGW Scott Brown wins this special election the politicians will be running for cover from the entire crazy liberal (U.S. definition) nonsense being foisted on the public from the healthcare takeover to cap and trade.
The other thing we all need to be thankful for is this site. Joanne Nova deserves a round of applause and a hearty hand shake.
10
Ray H.
Like most Australians ( those that care) I only follow the presidential elections. This year the mid terms are going to be a guide for us all. A republical gain or win will have a profound effect on those of us who don’t support AGW. A Republican Senate would be more likely to seek the truth since they would be looking for reasons to stop cap and trade. Tuesdays by-election in a safe democrat seat should be a guide on how the average citizen is thinking. It would also give heart to Tony Abbott here.
News item in the Sunday Tele tells of “researchers” looking for sheep that don’t burp as a means to cut down dangerous methane emissions. See the end of AGW would mean an awful lot of “researchers” out of a job. Funny, while the item is in the Sydney press I didn’t see it in the Land, the main rural publication.
10
Some good posts here. Just think should a mini ice age occur
what countries it will greatly effect. Agriculture will be effected and food supplies diminish. Effecting 3rd world countries ability to survive. The New World order has tried to think that our world would be better off with 2 billion people less. I note on the web, UK is having problems re food security. Think of an ice age. Parts of the Northern Hemisphere will be uninhabitable. We’ll be better off down Under. That’s why we must preserve our farming land. And if an ice age comes, the seas levels will decrease. More land and we’ll eventually be attached to Tasmania and Papua New Guinea. (The latter not so good, eh)
I agree with Lord Monckton, this is the biggest crime against humanity ever. I believe 31,000 scientists have threatened to
sue Al Gore. Considering he has just bought a 4 mil condo near
the sea in SF. A place he predicted would be inundated by sea level rises!!!!!
There are worse crimes here that don’t cut the mustard. Your
beliefs will be coloured by your political agenda. Pro Green,
socialist, communist, what ever. Anti Royalty, trade competition,
so many factors that have supported this scam right for the start. The media has stirred it up in some instances. If the Greens have their way, we’ll all end up Vegan, and they will try to attempt a social equaliser. Take from the rich and give to the poor, globally.
Now you see how it will turn around. Mention of that World Government run by unelected people, will grab people’s attention.
Green industrialists might take a knock too, that in my mine
isn’t so good for the environment… however, I think this could bring governments down. I see Brian Brown out… bad timing when that cold snap is happening in Europe. It happened in 1963
and 1947 too. The Thames froze up in 1963 near Windsor.
Maybe Rudd will take a knock too. Abbot is a smart pollie and now they have got rid of Turnbull he could carry the numbers next election. NSW Government is a mess, if they get back in
it will be a miracle. And Obama, I like him, but I don’t think
the Congress or Senate might pass the Climate Change Bill and not too soon, I feel.
This scam has been driven obviously by money (and grants offered)
political government manipulation of the people, and maybe more
sinister motives like the formation of one World Government.
But taxing countries on the carbon footprint to help undeveloped
countries is a scandalous move, how do you calculate what every
country contributes if the data is corrupted?
I picked up John Coleman’s 5 part videos OK. From a link offered through Joanne.
Best of luck folks, don’t let a lie go unpunished.
10
Ah, the plot thickens! As I’ve stated elsewhere, if the CRU data is corrupt and slanted to give a predetermined outcome, any other data sets that agrees with it must also be corrupt. Mann taught Jones the “trick” to “hide the decline”; how do you spell conspiracy? This is the same small cabal that was responsible for Chapter 9 of the IPCC report blaming man for Global warming, for the computer models that say we are all going to fry, for corrupting the peer review process, for eliminating weather temp stations in rural and cold areas for the purpose of artificially altering the data sets to promote their “theory” and for scamming the taxpayers out of billions of dollars. The scientists get the prestige, glory, recognition and , above all, the grant money to maintain their status. They are egomaniacs who are nothing more than useful idiots for politicians who see the global warming hoax as a way to control all human activity from economic growth to the very air we exhale. Americans react strongly to anyone or anything that will lower their standard of living. Massachusetts is holding a special election to fill the vacancy created by the death of Senator Ted Kennedy. If the Republican candidate wins an election in a traditionally Democrat strong hold, and he is currently leading in the polls, the political landscape will be further altered in a way most discomforting to the warmanistas. The Republicans are smelling blood and will utilize the backlash against AGW to regain power. The “scientists’ will fall from grace faster than anything seen since Satan was cast from Heaven. The only question remaining in my mind is who will be the one to cut a deal to save his skin and reap the reward money for doing so. Once the dominos start tumbling they will not stop until the balance of power is altered in every western democracy. Call me an optimist but I think the day of living green is about to end. The ruling elite must realize that the family is the central unit of society, not the state. People are more important than animals, there is plenty of everything to go around and the only limits on the human race are the ones we place upon ourselves. As Shakespeare says, “The truth will out.”
10
Louis Hissink @ 41
How about this one from George Orwell.
“There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them”.
I also like this one attributed to Otto von Bismark (I think)
“Believe nothing… until it has been officially denied”.
10
Anyone remember Hansen being interviewed on lateline? (Oz current affairs on our ABC)
TONY JONES: Okay, can you tell us how the Goddard Institute takes and adjusts these global temperatures because sceptics claim that urban heat centres make a huge difference; that they distort global temperatures and they make it appear hotter that it really is.
So do you adjust, in your figures, for the urban heat zone effects?
JAMES HANSEN: We get data from three different sources and we now, in order to avoid criticisms from contrarians, we no longer make an adjustment. Even if we see there are eight stations in Alaska and seven of them have temperatures in the minus 30s and one of them says plus 35, which pretty obvious what happens, someone didn’t put the minus sign there, we just, we don’t correct that.
Instead we send an email or letter or a letter to the organisation that produces the data and say, you’d better check the Alaska temperatures, because we don’t want to be blamed for changing anything. But as far as adjusting for urban effects, we have a very simple procedure.
We exclude urban locations, use rural locations to establish a trend, and that does eliminate – though urban stations do have more warming than the rural stations, and so we eliminate that effect simply by eliminating those stations, but it’s very clear that the warming that we see is not urban, it’s largest in Siberia, and in the Arctic and the Antarctic, and there aren’t any cities there, and there’s warming over the oceans, there are no cities there. So it’s not urban warming that’s just nonsense.
Rather sensitive to “accusations by contrarians” isn’t he the poor darling.
So who’s got a list of the stations he uses? Any in urban areas? Was he lying? By the way, I guarantee an airport is classified as rural.
10
Based on what Coleman & Smith have reported. Well, Hansens got credibility problems?
10
Bush bunny,
You’ve nailed down the problem quite nicely. Food production will suffer from significant cooling. And we are still stupidly taking good crop land out of productive use in the name of complete…well I won’t say it here but you know what I mean.
Gore is so obviously just making as much money on AGW as he can that he beggars the Bernie Madoff’s of this world by comparison.
Only $4 mil Al? Come now, surely you can get something better than that! You’re the biggest con artist the world has ever seen. Don’t you deserve something much better than a $4 million condo? A castle on a hill dominating the whole city would seem more fitting. Surely they would be willing to tear down half the place to accommodate you, the savior of the world!
10
this link says it all IMO – it was posted on WUWT.
http://www.rockyhigh66.org/stuff/USHCN_revisions_wisconsin.htm
10
and this one
http://www.rockyhigh66.org/stuff/USHCN_revisions.htm
source: http://chiefio.wordpress.com/
10
If the facts continue developing as they have so far, a charge of treason against these conspirators might be justified in both the UK and USA.
10
Now, GlacierGate arrives in Australia:
Front page headline in the The Australian: “United Nations’ blunder on glaciers exposed”.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/united-nations-blunder-on-glaciers-exposed/story-e6frg6n6-1225820614171
…and the penny has dropped for the MSM. Thank you The Australian.
10
NEWS Insurance companies jump ship after Climategate.
In this article, the USA’s National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) explicitly refers to Climategate
…
10
Whadayaknow? Insurance companies aren’t some bunch of “deniers” blogging away on some way-out site in Australia. These are among the most conservative and risk averse business people in the world. One more wall comes tumbling down.
Amen!
Global warming has hit the fan now!
10
Mike Rankin,
At least in the U.S. treason has a rather extraordinarily high burden of proof. I’d be happy with charges of fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud. But our august Attorney General is unlikely to even care.
10
RE: teh article in teh australian:
Talk about a self fulfilling prophecy. New Scientist dreams something up, The WWF runs with it. The IPCC then says “well if the WWF say it’s right, it must be” and then publishes it as a consensus.
I’m laughing so much I gotta go to the john now…
10
There will be some serious implications, now that the insurance has got involved. these blokes have some serious legal muscle in tow.
Watch out warmies. your going to regret beleiving for belifes sake.
You gotta feel sorry for a lot of ’em, though, their whole world is crumbling around ’em. Hang on!! they wanted to crumble my world.
I changed my mind. I don’t feel sorry for ’em!!
As the learned Mr Kerigan Esquire itterated in The Castle….
Suffer in ya jocks.
OK enough frevolity, this is serious!!
10
Gtting serious now 🙂
The MSM better start getting this out through generak outlets.
There is going to be a massive backlash by their customers for not reporting these events, when WHAM!! out of nowhere comes…
“Great news… We don’t have to worry about AGW anymore. We just guessed wrong and didn’t want to tell you what was happening ’cause we didn’t think you could handle it or beleive us”.
“By the way…
“Did we tell you about Bob Carter’s commentary on past climate data”?
“Did we tell you that Co2 lags temperature by 800 years”?
“Did we tell you that the models don’t contain allowances for clouds and have the feedbacks wrong”?
“Did we tell you about Svensmarks breakthrough research on clouds”?
“Did you know the Climategate Story”
“Did we tell you about the Temperature records from NOAA”
“The insurance industry is about to jump off AGW”?
Maaannnn, a lot of catching up to do.
10
Baa Humbug:
“UAH global satellite data has record warmest day for January
Go figure, ”
Lubos Motl has an interesting take on why this might be – he suggests that these numbers are likely correct, and that the increase comes from the latent heat released when snow forms. It certainly seems like a compelling arguement to me.
10
[…] Bron: ClimateGate arrives in the US « JoNova. […]
10
AGW = ClimateGate
AGW, all of AGW — not CRU or any part of it, IS ClimateGate.
Here’s what the station dropout did to the temps — from Joseph D’Aleo’s site:
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Stationdropout.jpg
10
I’ve never been a big fan of the grand conspiracy theory. I’ve always thought more long the lines of, these guys have been a bit overcommitted to their theory and basically have been finding what they’re looking for. With perhaps a little bit of cherry picking. Or maybe they scared themselves with their own alarmism and have exaggerated slightly. Believing that the end justifies the means, and eventually they will be vindicated anyway.
However it is becoming increasingly difficult to come to any other conclusion than that they have gone for the BIG lie. Of the sort pioneered by the Nazi propaganda machine.
10
news Stranger and Stranger
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2010/01/stranger-and-stranger.html
The fallout from the IPCC Himalayan glacier situation gets stranger and stranger. Now an IPCC lead author has stepped forward claiming that the error has been known by the IPCC all along. From Agence France-Presse:
A top scientist said Monday he had warned in 2006 that a prediction of catastrophic loss of Himalayan glaciers, published months later by the UN’s Nobel-winning climate panel, was badly wrong.
“This number is not just a little bit wrong, but far out of any order of magnitude,” said Georg Kaser, an expert in tropical glaciology at the University of Innsbruck in Austria.
“It is so wrong that it is not even worth discussing,” he told AFP in an interview.
And the solution: Brush it off as to be fixed in 2013:
The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment, scheduled for release in 2013, will probably be adjusted to avoid such problems, said Kaser.
“All the responsible people are aware of this weakness in the Fourth Assessment. All are aware of the mistakes made,” he said.
“If it had not been the focus of so much public opinion, we would have said ‘we will do better next time.’ It is clear now that Working Group II has to be restructured,” he said.
10
Mohib, so in summary we can say:
* The document is seriously flawed, containing one or more errors so wrong they are not worth discussing.
* The document is known to be flawed, even by its authors.
* The people who know where the errors are will not come forward and speak about it, until they are called out on the errors by bad publicity.
The conclusion is that this document is not fit for any policy making. Nor will it get any better in the near future.
This is a perfectly good solution. So all policy making must stop, all existing policies based on flawed science must be wound back and we sit and wait until the IPCC can deliver a document containing meaningful science.
10
It seems the two key questions in this whole debate revolve around the temperature record and the corresponding CO2 record. From what I’ve seen here and over at WUWT the temperature record is not of a quality to make a commercial decision let alone a policy decision with global consequences. Likewise the CO2 record is also open to interpretation. An article and follow up comments at Rocket Science Journal ( Acquittal of CO2) casts doubts on the conclusions being drawn from Vostok ice cores and the reliability of measurements from Hawaii.
The AGW crowd have put together a convincing argument but the way in which old data was used and the less than foolproof way in which current data is collected and treated would be enough to cast severe doubt on the veracity of any conclusions.
If nothing else one would hope that governments would spend less on super computers and much much more on providing appropriate recording stations and collecting real data. There is no way we should be spending on a theory which at present lacks the evidence to be convincing. What makes it worse is that most new research makes the theory even more specious.
Bush Bunny, Suing Al Gore would take longer than it will take for the seas to rise 6 metres. Each side would have an expert witness list loger than the Sydney phone book and every law firm in the Western World would have a brief. The judgement when written would be bigger than the Bible. No. Al Gore and the manipulating scientists will simply suffer the extreme embarrassment of being WRONG and irrelevant. No punishment could be worse for these egos.
10
So we see that even monumental embarrassment will be “explained” away.
It convinces me more than ever that our fight has to be political, not just science. The message must get out by some means to the average citizen living on side-street, in any-town, in any-country. If we can do that then voting habits will change and the problem will be corrected. I’m encouraged by media attention in Australia. But I’m not seeing anything here in the states. The National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) announcement may have been covered somewhere but if so, I missed it.
10
Chris Horner has NASA/GIS emails on FOI:
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2UzMmZhYzE3Nzc2ZWU0YThhYzA0YTMyN2YzODgzMmM
10
More commentary on NASA/GIS emails:
http://co2realist.com/2010/01/17/nasa-emails-released-by-freedom-of-information-act/
10
The IPCC scientists know what the real problems are. The trouble is that “sciencespeak” isn’t dramatic enough to get the media excited.
Professor Ann Henderson-Sellers reported on what the IPCC thought about its report in 2007:
http://environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/article/opinion/35820
With a scientific mind, it’s not pretty – mistakes and false assumptions all known at the time, corrupted by the political editing process.
10
[…] malpractice where adjusting and hiding data was de-rigueur. Hello Fraud. ClimateGate also spread to the US, where 75% of worldwide data is systematically ignored or “adjusted” until it tells the right […]
10
By the way…..Here is a thing about Harrabin (ref my last post about the BBC) that shows how his finger is on the pulse of science/tech…..
‘Roger Harrabin doesn’t trust Bill Gates himself because he hasn’t published the Microsoft computer code or the microprocessor production techniques which makes his Ipod work’
Errrrr…Just had a look at my IPod for a Microsoft logo and cannot find it!
More? ‘Roger Harrabin says he doesn’t trust Coca Cola, mobile phones or Ipods because the makers have refused to publish how they are made’.
and now for the big ones!
Roger Harrabin refuses to fly in an Airbus 360 because the software running the take-off process hasn’t been published.
Roger Harrabin doesn’t support the Army in Afghanistan because they haven’t published the names of Intelligence sources.
My thanks to Mr Corbyn (I wonder if he has yet had a reply?) at
http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=4905
Do not trust the BBC till they clear out these Eco warriors!
10
OOps! Wrong thread! 🙁 My apologies but things are moving so fat!)
10
[…] Climategate arrives in the USA, […]
10