Changing The Data to Get Climate Change

[easyt65]

LINK: Changing the Data to Get Climate Change - Breitbart

Changing the Data to Get Climate Change

The science is clear. For nearly two decades, the satellites that measure global temperature have shown no discernible increase. This fact has been very inconvenient to the Obama administration that wants to promote an extreme climate change agenda at an international meeting next month in Paris.
More conveniently, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently published a study in the journal Science that made “adjustments” to global temperature data. The study was conducted in order to refute the notion that there has been any pause in global warming.

The NOAA study claimed to use “new methods” of data collection that changed historical temperatures from both land and oceans. This is beyond suspicious. Just in time for this administration’s final carbon emission regulations and international climate negotiations, NOAA changed the way it has analyzed data for decades to get results that support the president’s agenda.

American citizens are tired of “trust me” pseudo-science. They are tired of research conducted behind closed doors where they only see pre-ordained conclusions, not the facts. The data should be publicly available and the process transparent.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Facts be damned...they will keep promoting this fraud because there is money to be made

 

[edthecynic]

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently published a study in the journal Science that made “adjustments” to global temperature data. The study was conducted in order to refute the notion that there has been any pause in global warming.

That's a lie! As always from the Right!

The study was conducted because ocean temps are now measured with buoys which are more accurate and when ships and buoys took measurements in the same locations, the ship measurements were consistently off. So a correction factor was derived from the overlapping data sets to correct for the ship measured errors.

In the past when there was a difference between ground measurements and satellite measurements, the ground measurements proved to be correct.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

What were the ground temps in oh....let's say 1,000 BC? Thirty to fifty years is but a hiccup in the grand scheme of things

 

[CrusaderFrank]

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently published a study in the journal Science that made “adjustments” to global temperature data. The study was conducted in order to refute the notion that there has been any pause in global warming.

That's a lie! As always from the Right!

The study was conducted because ocean temps are now measured with buoys which are more accurate and when ships and buoys took measurements in the same locations, the ship measurements were consistently off. So a correction factor was derived from the overlapping data sets to correct for the ship measured errors.

In the past when there was a difference between ground measurements and satellite measurements, the ground measurements proved to be correct.

Wait a second, so we don't have accurate data on the oceans?

 

[mamooth]

This sort of conspiracy kookery should rightfully be moved to the conspiracy folder, as it's literally every bit as crazy as birtherism, 9/11 trutherism, antivaxxism, flat earthism, jewish illuminati banker stories, and all the other crank rants out there.

Sadly, there's rampant political correctness involved here. This particular loony conspiracy theory gets special protection, solely because it agrees with American conservative political dogma. It's not politically correct to point out that deniers are raving conspiracy cranks, a tiny band of right-wing-extremist political fringers who have been dumped from the political scene everywhere except the USA. The denier cult has withered, smothered under the weight of the evidence.

Not being PC myself, I'll continue to point out deniers are just conspiracy cranks. When the entire planet says you're crazy, it doesn't mean the entire planet is engaged in a VastSecretGlobalSocialistPlot against you. It means you're crazy.

So, why this sudden howling from the deniers? Because October 2015 was the hottest month ever in the historical record, and 2015 will be the hottest year ever in the record, by a wide margin. The evidence shows deniers have been totally wrong about everything for many years running. So rather than admit they've been bamboozled, which would require honesty and self-examination, the cultists are doubling down on the crazy and declaring that all the evidence is fake. Deniers have retreated into their anti-reality fortress and shut the gates.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

LOL GLOBULL warming believes are funny....and a bunch of duped fools.

 

[easyt65]

That's a lie! As always from the Right!

PROVE IT with more than opinion...put up or..., well, you know the rest.

 

[edthecynic]

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently published a study in the journal Science that made “adjustments” to global temperature data. The study was conducted in order to refute the notion that there has been any pause in global warming.

That's a lie! As always from the Right!

The study was conducted because ocean temps are now measured with buoys which are more accurate and when ships and buoys took measurements in the same locations, the ship measurements were consistently off. So a correction factor was derived from the overlapping data sets to correct for the ship measured errors.

In the past when there was a difference between ground measurements and satellite measurements, the ground measurements proved to be correct.

Wait a second, so we don't have accurate data on the oceans?

We do now.

 

[jc456]

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently published a study in the journal Science that made “adjustments” to global temperature data. The study was conducted in order to refute the notion that there has been any pause in global warming.

That's a lie! As always from the Right!

The study was conducted because ocean temps are now measured with buoys which are more accurate and when ships and buoys took measurements in the same locations, the ship measurements were consistently off. So a correction factor was derived from the overlapping data sets to correct for the ship measured errors.

In the past when there was a difference between ground measurements and satellite measurements, the ground measurements proved to be correct.

Wait a second, so we don't have accurate data on the oceans?

We do now.

how do you figure?

 

[SSDD]

In the past when there was a difference between ground measurements and satellite measurements, the ground measurements proved to be correct.

Interesting isn't it that the raw ground measurement data agrees with the satellites but the heavily massaged data doesn't....and you call that data correct.

 

[edthecynic]

That's a lie! As always from the Right!

PROVE IT with more than opinion...put up or..., well, you know the rest.

Climate-change ‘hiatus’ disappears with new data

The biggest change to the NOAA records comes from a correction to ocean-temperature readings, to account for differences in measurements from ships and buoys. Scientists have long known that ships log slightly warmer ocean temperatures than do buoys operating in the same location. The influx of data from an expansion of buoys during the past two decades has reduced the apparent rate of ocean warming. NOAA has now adjusted for this effect, in line with similar changes that the UK Met Office made to its global temperature record.

The NOAA data set had previously been modified to account for a shift in the way that ships measure ocean temperatures. After the Second World War, ships began to monitor sea water directly through engine intakes, instead of sampling it with buckets. Karl's team adjusted the data to account for new information suggesting that some ships have continued bucket measurements.

Finally, the researchers made use of a new database of land-based temperature readings, which more than doubled the number of stations available to NOAA. It also extended coverage further into the Arctic, which has warmed faster than the rest of the globe in recent decades.

All told, Karl's team finds that global temperatures increased at a rate of 0.116°C a decade in 2000–14, compared to a rate of 0.113°C in 1950–99. And Karl says that rate will probably go up once his team calculates the temperature increase for the entirety of the rapidly warming Arctic. Researchers found in 2013 that gaps in Arctic observations artificially cooled the Met Office temperature record2.

 

[edthecynic]

In the past when there was a difference between ground measurements and satellite measurements, the ground measurements proved to be correct.

Interesting isn't it that the raw ground measurement data agrees with the satellites but the heavily massaged data doesn't....and you call that data correct.

Baloney.

 

[mamooth]

Interesting isn't it that the raw ground measurement data agrees with the satellites but the heavily massaged data doesn't....and you call that data correct.

The satellite data is twiddled, fudged, massaged and twisted far more than the surface data. Only the most desperate cultists still pretend otherwise.

Normal people, if they wanted to see surface temperatures, they'd use the directly measured surface temperatures. Deniers, they go with satellites that don't even measure surface temperatures, and which don't measure temperature directly at all. It's a favorite tactic of pseudoscience cranks to throw out good clear data in favor of the bad fuzzy data, and that's the only tactic deniers have left now.

And given that the temperature adjustments to the raw data make the current warming look _smaller_, it's particularly dishonest of the deniers to put forth a conspiracy theory that states the exact opposite of reality. Yet nearly every single one of them still proudly tells that blatant lie. The cult has commanded them to lie, so they do it, period.

 

[Wyatt earp]

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently published a study in the journal Science that made “adjustments” to global temperature data. The study was conducted in order to refute the notion that there has been any pause in global warming.

That's a lie! As always from the Right!

The study was conducted because ocean temps are now measured with buoys which are more accurate and when ships and buoys took measurements in the same locations, the ship measurements were consistently off. So a correction factor was derived from the overlapping data sets to correct for the ship measured errors.

In the past when there was a difference between ground measurements and satellite measurements, the ground measurements proved to be correct.

Wait a second, so we don't have accurate data on the oceans?

We do now.

Sooo 11 years of temperature reading buoys is accurate statistical, to predict a trend of a planet that is 4.5 billion years old in your little mind?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Interesting isn't it that the raw ground measurement data agrees with the satellites but the heavily massaged data doesn't....and you call that data correct.

The satellite data is twiddled, fudged, massaged and twisted far more than the surface data. Only the most desperate cultists still pretend otherwise.

Normal people, if they wanted to see surface temperatures, they'd use the directly measured surface temperatures. Deniers, they go with satellites that don't even measure surface temperatures, and which don't measure temperature directly at all. It's a favorite tactic of pseudoscience cranks to throw out good clear data in favor of the bad fuzzy data, and that's the only tactic deniers have left now.

And given that the temperature adjustments to the raw data make the current warming look _smaller_, it's particularly dishonest of the deniers to put forth a conspiracy theory that states the exact opposite of reality. Yet nearly every single one of them still proudly tells that blatant lie. The cult has commanded them to lie, so they do it, period.

Flipping a coin would be more accurate then the data we have on ocean temperatures.

 

[Old Rocks]

So, how does that affect the present? Bear, you are mindlessly repeating rightwingnut nonsense. If you truly knew and understood the geological history of this planet, you would be more than a little worried. Indications are that the rate of temperature rise we are seeing from the increase in GHGs more than matches that of the GHG caused extinction periods in the geological record.

 

[Old Rocks]

Interesting isn't it that the raw ground measurement data agrees with the satellites but the heavily massaged data doesn't....and you call that data correct.

The satellite data is twiddled, fudged, massaged and twisted far more than the surface data. Only the most desperate cultists still pretend otherwise.

Normal people, if they wanted to see surface temperatures, they'd use the directly measured surface temperatures. Deniers, they go with satellites that don't even measure surface temperatures, and which don't measure temperature directly at all. It's a favorite tactic of pseudoscience cranks to throw out good clear data in favor of the bad fuzzy data, and that's the only tactic deniers have left now.

And given that the temperature adjustments to the raw data make the current warming look _smaller_, it's particularly dishonest of the deniers to put forth a conspiracy theory that states the exact opposite of reality. Yet nearly every single one of them still proudly tells that blatant lie. The cult has commanded them to lie, so they do it, period.

Flipping a coin would be more accurate then the data we have on ocean temperatures.

Now why don't you just wear a big sign saying "I am stupid". What you are doing is denying huge amounts of research and measurements done by scientists of all nations all over the world. And doing so without any research on your part into their methods or findings. You are a willfully ignorant ass, and proving it every day.

 

[jc456]

So, how does that affect the present? Bear, you are mindlessly repeating rightwingnut nonsense. If you truly knew and understood the geological history of this planet, you would be more than a little worried. Indications are that the rate of temperature rise we are seeing from the increase in GHGs more than matches that of the GHG caused extinction periods in the geological record.

so rocks, I asked you a question earlier to which you never replied, are the current data sets biased? yes or no? I'm still waiting for your answer.

 

[mamooth]

Sooo 11 years of temperature reading buoys is accurate statistical, to predict a trend of a planet that is 4.5 billion years old in your little mind?

Of course not. If you want to put forth that kook theory like that, you'll have to justify it.

By the way, pretending we believe in your kook nonsense isn't honest. If you can't debate what we say, then admit it, instead of making up crazy stories about what we supposedly believe.

Also, stop pretending the ocean temperature record is only 11 years old. Get in touch with reality.