Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Temperature Data Corruption

A big step from misunderstanding what you are examining to misrepresenting what you are examining.

While instructing me on how to live my life.

And picking my pocket.

Feb 5, 2017 at 7:27 PM | Unregistered Commenterssat

ssat, you are very polite to use the word "misrepresenting", without "fraudulently" preceding it.

Feb 5, 2017 at 11:12 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

The problem for the Phil Clarkes of the world is that the genie is out of the bottle. And, unexpectedly, not a Clinton around to save their pant-suits.

Random search results.

http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-02-05-global-warming-world-map-fake-science-noaa-caught-in-blatant-temperature-data-fraud.html

https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/former-noaa-scientist-confirms-colleagues-manipulated-climate-records

Feb 6, 2017 at 2:08 AM | Unregistered Commenterclipe

Natural News, Clipe? Really?

For the uninitiated, NN is a fake news site run by one Mike Adams aka 'The Health Ranger', who when he isnt copy-pasting absurd conspiracy lies, as here, promotes pseudo-scientific quackery up to and including a homeopathic cure for the Ebola virus.

Karl et al has been independently confirmed in the literature, the fake whistleblower was only tangentially connected with the underlying research, and his substantive claims are demonstrably false. All surface datasets indicate no significant pause.

The time taken for the journey from David Rose bombshell to pathetic sputtering damp squib grows ever shorter ;-)

Feb 6, 2017 at 8:13 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

Phil

"Karl et al has been independently confirmed in the literature" rather depends on your definition of independent. ;-)

Feb 6, 2017 at 8:59 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Hodgson

Also depends on what you accept to be "literature".

Feb 6, 2017 at 9:16 AM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

Appeal to 'the literature'

Logical Phillacy.

Feb 6, 2017 at 9:29 AM | Unregistered Commenterssat

For the uninitiated, ... is a fake news site run by one ... aka '...', who when he isnt copy-pasting absurd conspiracy lies, as here, promotes pseudo-scientific quackery up to and including a homeopathic agent of Armageddon.

Insert climate blog of choice.

Feb 6, 2017 at 9:36 AM | Unregistered Commenterssat

The poor darling climate kooks. They have been brave blog warrioirs, full of the vitriol and arrogance of their ilk. Only the rug is pulled out from under them and it turns out all they have is used horse food.

Feb 6, 2017 at 9:52 AM | Unregistered Commenterhunter

http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~kdc3/papers/ihsst2016/background.html

Feb 6, 2017 at 10:11 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

PC,

The greenhouse effect is a miss-match between the planet temperature externally and the bottom of its atmosphere internally. The greenhouse effect is easily demonstrated to be a function of gravity and radiative gases.

The ocean surface is not part of the atmosphere just as the land surface is not. We don't measure the land surface, we measure the base of the atmosphere. Temperatures at the base of the atmosphere show a pause. The meaning of that is that energy in the atmosphere has remained constant.

If, if, the energy in the oceans has increased, that is not GE: It is a scientific curiosity.

Feb 6, 2017 at 11:22 AM | Unregistered Commenterssat

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/09/why-greenhouse-gases-heat-the-ocean/

http://variable-variability.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/david-roses-alternative-reality-noaa-Karl.html

Feb 6, 2017 at 11:34 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/09/why-greenhouse-gases-heat-the-ocean/

http://variable-variability.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/david-roses-alternative-reality-noaa-Karl.html

Feb 6, 2017 at 11:34 AM | Phil Clarke

Neither of those sites has ever noticed anything wrong with Mann's Hockey Stick, or Gergis (twice) Are they reliable character witnesses for Karl? Who actually Peer Reviewed any of them?

Feb 6, 2017 at 12:09 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Phil Clarke, all you are doing is reiterating how pointless Peer Review is in Climate Science.

Climate Science has proved itself incapable of finding it's own mistakes, let alone correcting them. It is not a science worthy of taxpayer funding.

Feb 6, 2017 at 12:28 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/09/why-greenhouse-gases-heat-the-ocean/

Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

So what? A warmer ocean is not a warmer GE. The GE is a temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, 33degC above the average radiating temperature to space which is ~ 5Km higher. P1V1T1 = P2V2T2 down the lapse rate. P2V2T3 is a Climate Science invention. If you have to add water temperature to atmospheric temperature to make your hypothesis work then don't pester me about it.

Feb 6, 2017 at 12:50 PM | Unregistered Commenterssat

It's amusing watching them fake up science for a faked up climate conference, which accomplished nothing.

On time and under budget requires a little different ethic.
=============

Feb 6, 2017 at 2:13 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

Besides, arguing increasingly volubly about whether there was or whether there was not a 'pause', just brings it ever more concretely to those not involved in the debate that there is a debate. And it highlights, nay, underscores, nay, places in extreme relief, the fact that the scary warming scenarios are not happening.

The Phils, the Kens, the moshes, the Zeke's and a few more are spotlighted defending bad science. Their tarentella intensifies. The money, the power, the fame, that triple component toxin, still jangles their exhausted ganglia, but the herky-jerky show bores the onlookers more now than it terrifies them. The crowd is thinning, Phil, but dance on; you must.
==================

Feb 6, 2017 at 2:27 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

kim. Is the Rose revelation then a wolf spider's bite? The dance grows evermore disjointed till it resembles a dervish spin, going around in circles, going nowhere. Venom or religious fervour, take your pick.

Feb 6, 2017 at 2:52 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

Supertroll, it provides ammunition for all politicians currently in opposition, to raise concerns about politicians in Government, who may have signed up their countries to the Paris Climate fiasco.

Those politicians most enthusiastic about shouting "Denier" at their opponents, may find themselves in opposition, for denying freedom of speech.

Climate Scientists have circled their wagons defensively, but most of their rifles are pointing into the circle. Trump has not yet issued the order "All Climate Scientists. Fire Now!"

Feb 6, 2017 at 4:19 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

A follow up of the John Bates story, by David Rose, and found by NotALotOfPeopleKnowThat :) :
NotALotOfPeopleKnowThat: DailyMail: DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep twisting the truth

(Will NOAA survive the deluge? Give it 40 days for the air to clear. :) )

Feb 12, 2017 at 10:13 PM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

This is getting beyond a joke!

If a highly disproportionate number of non-urban weather stations are removed from the global temperature archive, the urban-based thermometers will be weighted much more heavily than they were before the non-urban stations were removed. And therefore, the temperature record will show (much) more warming — even though the additional warmth is not climatic, but artificial.
...
Astonishingly, as many as half (49% as of 2009) of the weather stations across the globe used by the GHCN are now located on the (paved) grounds of airports.

NoTricksZone: More Data Manipulation By NOAA, NASA, HadCRUT…Cooling The Past, Warming the Present

There is plenty more in the article.

Feb 13, 2017 at 10:04 PM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

This is getting beyond a joke!

Cooling The Past, Warming the Present.

So, current zero trend less artificial trend = cooling.

Panic over.

Feb 13, 2017 at 10:36 PM | Unregistered Commenterssat

Feb 13, 2017 at 10:36 PM | ssat

In Climate Science, you are guaranteed to get the best trend that money can buy, with historical records amended to prove it.

Feb 13, 2017 at 11:32 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Big article on adjustments over at NTZ.

Feb 14, 2017 at 11:05 AM | Unregistered CommenterSchrodinger's Cat

Big article on adjustments over at NTZ.

Feb 14, 2017 at 11:05 AM | Schrodinger's Cat

http://notrickszone.com/2017/02/13/more-data-manipulation-by-noaa-nasa-hadcrut-cooling-the-past-warming-the-present/#sthash.pmuMFzVn.dpbs

Feb 14, 2017 at 12:40 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie