100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering...

[RWNJ]

...and here is the proof. 100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

 

[LaDexter]

Every single piece of "evidence" that the planet is "warming" is fraud.

The most hilarious are the "sinking" Pacific Islands.... right on the lip of the PROF, but the tippy toppiest top "scientists" just can't notice that...

 

[deannalw]

True cause of warming in the US is all those open mouthed liberals shouting, whining and blithering

 

[MACAULAY]

Its too complicated. We have to rely on Experts to tell us what's going on.

Obama's Federal Government has been paying the Experts for eight years, and here is what they have come up with:

1) When its too hot; that's Global Warming. When its too cold, that's just Weather.

2) If there is a long trend of Cooling, as over the last decade and a half, as I understand----that's "Climate Change", which is just as bad as "Global Warming".

3) The Syrian Civil War was caused by Global Warming, or Climate Change, depending on whether it was too hot or too cold in Syria leading up to the unrest.

4) No. 1 & 2 & 3 above are all settled science, and the debate is over. (Obama told us that, so we know its true.)

We could add that Leftists Liberal Loons are Bat-Shit Crazy, but that has become so obvious that the debate is over. Its settled political science.

 

[LaDexter]

The NYT claims the Syrian civil war was caused by Global Warming causing a drought there...

PROBLEM - the warmer Earth gets, the wetter it gets, there would be fewer droughts if the Earth was warming


Hence, the NYT, lying about Global Warming, got the science 180 degrees WRONG in the process of putting out 100% FAKE "news."

 

[mamooth]

It's funny, when some basement-dwelling Trump-snowflake reads an old bit of propaganda for the first time, falls for it hard, and then breathlessly runs to post it on the internet, totally aware it's been laughed off the internet hundreds of times before.

It almost makes you feel sorry for the kid. Almost.

Those who aren't brainless Trump-cultists know that the adjustments to global temperature have made the warming look _smaller_. This isn't a discussing, trumptards. This is you being schooled on reality. There's no point in you lying about it, because everyone familiar with the topic knows you're lying. The only people you can fool are your fellow retards.

<data:blog.pageTitle/>

See, snowflakes? The adjustments make the past look warmer, which makes the total warming look smaller.

What? You mean your masters didn't tell you that? Ruh-roh. They lied to you. You have a choice now. You can demand to know why they lied to you, or you run back to them, drop to your knees, lick their boots even more feverishly, and beg for more lies. And you'll all choose the latter, because it's what gutless Trump-snowflakes do every time.

 

[LaDexter]

know that the adjustments to global temperature

and that's the problem right there. The RAW DATA Should be published. We should not allow these despicable and treasonous left wing liars to doctor the data before we see the data.

BTW - Mamooo.... tell us again why the Marshall Islands are "sinking..."


Life in a disappearing country

 

[mamooth]

and that's the problem right there. The RAW DATA Should be published.

It is. Only cult liars pretend otherwise. I've shown you where to get it before, so you know you're lying.

Why did you tell that lie, and why did you think you wouldn't be reamed for telling it?

And why do you lie and say the raw data would show less warming, when the raw data shows more warming? Peculiar, how scientists, according to you, are faking data to show less warming. Why would they do that?

 

[deannalw]

Mamoof seems... excited

 

[LaDexter]

It is.

US science agency refuses request for climate records

climate scientists refuse data - Google Search

 

[LaDexter]

Why would they do that?

They didn't.

The data did and still does say the same thing...

1. NO WARMING in the atmosphere - highly correlated raw data from satellites and balloons
2. NO WARMING in the oceans
3. NO NET ICE MELT
4. NO RISE in ocean levels - which is why they lie about the Marshall Islands
5. NO BREAKOUT in cane activity - that's an understatement - we are in record territory for lack of strong canes hitting the US

 

[LaDexter]

The only "warming" in the raw data is from the SURFACE GROUND series, the one measured in URBAN AREAS, which warm as they become more populated...


NASA - Top Story - URBAN HEAT ISLANDS MAKE CITIES GREENER - July 29, 2004

"Urban areas with high concentrations of buildings, roads and other artificial surfaces retain heat, creating urban heat islands. Satellite data reveal that urban heat islands increase surface temperatures compared to rural surroundings."


That right there is the fraud.

The FRAUD of Global (non) warming is

THE DELIBERATE MISINTERPRETATION of the URBAN HEAT SINK EFFECT on the SURFACE GROUND TEMP series, the only series showing any warming in the raw data.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Why would they do that?

They didn't.

The data did and still does say the same thing...

1. NO WARMING in the atmosphere - highly correlated raw data from satellites and balloons
2. NO WARMING in the oceans
3. NO NET ICE MELT
4. NO RISE in ocean levels - which is why they lie about the Marshall Islands
5. NO BREAKOUT in cane activity - that's an understatement - we are in record territory for lack of strong canes hitting the US

The manipulation is in the "no sensor available" regions where the left wing computer models put made up temps in for their GCM's to work.

WE took snippets of program sequences and checked regions for comparable temperatures. What we found were temps 2-6 Deg C higher than what would be reasonable to see in those regions. this gives the false warming trend globally. Computer modeling at its worst, that they claim is as accurate as real temperatures...

 

[ScienceRocks]

We either have the noaa maintain the infrastructure to collect data or we don't have data....every nation that isn't a full blown shit hole has their own infrastructure, thankfully, but losing America would suck.

Honestly, I trust them to maintain it and respect the method of science....

If you really believe we shouldn't have a database and study climate,,,well, you're anti-civilization.

 

[mamooth]

Mamoof seems... excited

Your poor snowflake. You actually believed the denier conspiracy crap, didn't you?

I am not sorry that I triggered you all here by pointing out the truth. You cultists need to be dragged kicking and screaming back into reality, no matter how much pain it causes you.

 

[Mustang]

...and here is the proof. 100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

Mentioning the NOAA brings to mind a true story from a few years ago regarding a Republican Rep whose name, I'm sad to say, I can't recall.

In referring to the NOAA, this Rep said that we (meaning the taxpayers) didn't need the NOAA for weather forecasting (among other things) and that their budget should be seriously scaled back because....

Are you ready for this?

...because we could get our weather forecasts from TV. Well, there's just one very serious problem with that idea! It's the fact that TV news, in actuality, gets THEIR weather forecasts FROM the NOAA. That's just one example of the poorly informed Republicans who think they know what they're talking about when, in reality, they don't have a clue.

 

[Fenton Lum]

And cigarettes are good for me, no health impact at all.

 

[Fenton Lum]

...and here is the proof. 100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

Mentioning the NOAA brings to mind a true story from a few years ago regarding a Republican Rep whose name, I'm sad to say, I can't recall.

In referring to the NOAA, this Rep said that we (meaning the taxpayers) didn't need the NOAA for weather forecasting (among other things) and that their budget should be seriously scaled back because....

Are you ready for this?

...because we could get our weather forecasts from TV. Well, there's just one very serious problem with that idea! It's the fact that TV news, in actuality, gets THEIR weather forecasts FROM the NOAA. That's just one example of the poorly informed Republicans who think they know what they're talking about when, in reality, they don't have a clue.

Not a problem, their adherents repeatedly and consistently rebuff any and all who do know what they're talking about. This is what Reality America is, we prefer the lie to dealing with issues.

 

[ScienceRocks]

...and here is the proof. 100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

Mentioning the NOAA brings to mind a true story from a few years ago regarding a Republican Rep whose name, I'm sad to say, I can't recall.

In referring to the NOAA, this Rep said that we (meaning the taxpayers) didn't need the NOAA for weather forecasting (among other things) and that their budget should be seriously scaled back because....

Are you ready for this?

...because we could get our weather forecasts from TV. Well, there's just one very serious problem with that idea! It's the fact that TV news, in actuality, gets THEIR weather forecasts FROM the NOAA. That's just one example of the poorly informed Republicans who think they know what they're talking about when, in reality, they don't have a clue.

Bingo...This is just how dumb these people are. The noaa maintains the thermometers, wind gauges, and other weather data sources all over this country on the hour. They maintain the computer models like the gfs, etc and they are the ones that make the forecast that t.v stations use freely....Those pretty radar or satellite shots you see on the nightly news? NOAA!

Most importantly they're the ones that warn republicans of tornadoes, hurricanes and flash floods.

 

[Fenton Lum]

...and here is the proof. 100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

Mentioning the NOAA brings to mind a true story from a few years ago regarding a Republican Rep whose name, I'm sad to say, I can't recall.

In referring to the NOAA, this Rep said that we (meaning the taxpayers) didn't need the NOAA for weather forecasting (among other things) and that their budget should be seriously scaled back because....

Are you ready for this?

...because we could get our weather forecasts from TV. Well, there's just one very serious problem with that idea! It's the fact that TV news, in actuality, gets THEIR weather forecasts FROM the NOAA. That's just one example of the poorly informed Republicans who think they know what they're talking about when, in reality, they don't have a clue.

Bingo...This is just how dumb these people are. The noaa maintains the thermometers, wind gauges, and other weather data sources all over this country on the hour. They maintain the computer models like the gfs, etc and they are the ones that make the forecast that t.v stations use freely....Those pretty radar or satellite shots you see on the nightly news? NOAA!

Most importantly they're the ones that warn republicans of tornadoes, hurricanes and flash floods.

We don't need no stinkin' science, we have the bible and the earth is only ~6000 years old.