Doctored Data, Not U.S. Temperatures, Set a Record This Year

Discussion in 'Environment' started by bripat9643, Jun 26, 2012.

  1. bripat9643
    Offline

    bripat9643 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    67,707
    Thanks Received:
    8,060
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +27,242
    Doctored Data, Not U.S. Temperatures, Set a Record This Year - Forbes

    “Americans just lived through the hottest 12 months ever recorded, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported Tuesday,” according to the May 15 Los Angeles Times.

    Which begs the question, what does “recorded” mean?
    Hillary Clinton Needs A New Global Warming Travel Agent James Taylor James Taylor Contributor

    To most people, the hottest temperatures ever “recorded” would imply that quality controlled thermometers registered higher readings during the past year than had ever occurred before. If you believe that this is what the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) means by hottest temperatures ever “recorded,” then you are wrong.

    Raw temperature data show that U.S. temperatures were significantly warmer during the 1930s than they are today. In fact, raw temperature data show an 80-year cooling trend. NOAA is only able to claim that we are experiencing the hottest temperatures on record by doctoring the raw temperature data.

    Doctoring real-world temperature data is as much a part of the alarmist playbook as is calling skeptical scientists at Harvard, Princeton, Columbia, MIT, NASA, NOAA, etc., “anti-science.” Faced with the embarrassing fact that real-world temperature readings don’t show any U.S. warming during the past 80 years, the alarmists who oversee the collection and reporting of the data simply erase the actual readings and substitute their own desired readings in their place. If this shocks you, you are not alone.
     
  2. francoHFW
    Offline

    francoHFW Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Messages:
    33,367
    Thanks Received:
    2,171
    Trophy Points:
    1,115
    Location:
    NY 26th FINALLY DEM!
    Ratings:
    +5,571
    Sure. He's a BS blogger from the "Heartland Institute". Pure Pubcrappe. TY
     
  3. bripat9643
    Offline

    bripat9643 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    67,707
    Thanks Received:
    8,060
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +27,242
    The article is from Forbes magazine, moron.
     
  4. Artevelde
    Offline

    Artevelde Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Messages:
    3,431
    Thanks Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brussels, Belgium
    Ratings:
    +262
    Interesting piece, thanks. Unfortunately I'm already too jaded by the complete dishonesty in the climate "debate" to be shocked at this.
     
  5. theDoctorisIn
    Offline

    theDoctorisIn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    29,990
    Thanks Received:
    5,783
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    East, but still West
    Ratings:
    +11,915
    And yet, the author of the op-ed in Forbes is in fact a blogger from "The Heartland Institute".
     
  6. bripat9643
    Offline

    bripat9643 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    67,707
    Thanks Received:
    8,060
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +27,242

    Who gives a fuck? The fact is the data in all the major climate data bases is doctored. It's "homogenized." The fact has been demonstrated over and over again.
     
  7. skookerasbil
    Offline

    skookerasbil Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    24,144
    Thanks Received:
    2,909
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +6,175


    but still.........who's not winning s0n??


    [​IMG]
     
  8. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,189
    Thanks Received:
    1,070
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,440
    what part of the article do you warmists disagree with? you always just besmirch the character of the author of something that you dont like, rather than rebut the ideas. do you disagree that the past has been cooled and the recent readings have been warmed? repeatedly?
     
  9. flacaltenn
    Online

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,014
    Thanks Received:
    4,652
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,339
    OR you just pop in a century worth of warming in a 2 year period. Like in my favorite stinky example of bad data doctoring..

    [​IMG]

    That is the difference between the OFFICIAL US Surface Temp record and the simpler prep done at UAH using population density adjustment on the raw data.

    Thermometers are NOT that complicated --even when they're installed in a weather station. HERE --- SOMEONE has added nearly an entire CENTURY of warming between 1996 - 1998.

    You believe the OFFICIALLY MANGLED version -- or the well - behaved version?
     
  10. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,419
    Thanks Received:
    5,406
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,279
    Oh my. NASA, ESA, and all the rest are in on this nefarious plot to doctor the data. As well as all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities of the world.

    We have only you little tinfoil hat wearers to protect from the filthy plots of these pinko commie fascist liars. Get out your Bible, silver cross, and wooden stake. Something must be done to keep reality from entering the minds of the masses.
     

Share This Page