NOAA/NCDC Commit Scienctic Fraud... Through Data Manipulation..

[Billy_Bob]

I told you all that they would try and bring out some big guns in an effort to make the stop in temperature rise go away and here it is.

The paper is Karl et al (2015) Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus.

How did they do it... Easy... they cooled the warmer end of the 20th century.. and then added more warming to recent temperatures via manipulations of vast areas of sea surface temperatures..

Karl Et Al, the paper (The journal Science is the publisher, AAAS, the science society,is the source of this information. Please hyperlink to www.sciencemag.org when publishing online.)

The review by Judith Curry, Anthony Watts, and Bob Tisdale is a stunning rebuke of the same kind of deception that Mann used in making the MEWP and RWP disappear.

Same old parlor tricks by the same old fear mongering, power hungry fools. The deception is easily revealed and they thought they could get away with removing the stop in warming by rewriting the temperature records and infilling vast areas of ocean to raise temperatures..

Source

Exposing the deception so that Paris does not become a fools paradise of command and control socialists...

 

[Crick]

From that paper Billy Boy. Note the lower graph which clearly displays the effect of the corrections. It is NOT doing what you claim it to be. The corrections are significantly warming pre-1940 surface temperatures.

 

[mamooth]

The whole denier conspiracy theory makes no sense, given that the overall adjustments make the past global average look warmer, and thus makes the current warming look smaller.

How do deniers try to pass off their scam? They ignore the oceans. But since the oceans aren't ignored in the global average, that's not honest of the deniers.

If the goal was to make it look like there was more warming, why would scientists adjust past land temperatures down by a bit, and then totally overwhelm it by adjusting past ocean temperatures up by a lot? Scientists could have instead done nothing at all, and that would have made the warming look bigger. Instead, the scientists put great amounts of effort into making the warming look ... smaller.

The answer, of course, is that their is no fraud, except by the deniers. The scientists correct all the data for accuracy, and that just happens to make the current warming look smaller.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Yes Crick they cooled down previous years and added temp to the last 15 years.. Unless you actually looked at the data closely you would not see what it is they have done.. Had you or your sock puppet mantooth read the article at my source you would have understood that. But again you failed to read and posted crap..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Dr Judith Curry;

"My bottom line assessment is this. I think that uncertainties in global surface temperature anomalies is substantially understated. The surface temperature data sets that I have confidence in are the UK group and also Berkeley Earth. This short paper in Science is not adequate to explain and explore the very large changes that have been made to the NOAA data set. The global surface temperature datasets are clearly a moving target. So while I’m sure this latest analysis from NOAA will be regarded as politically useful for the Obama administration, I don’t regard it as a particularly useful contribution to our scientific understanding of what is going on."

Its only use is POLITICAL.. It has no scientific use and is at best garbage. The "very large changes" are not justified or explainable. I expect that this will be wildly hailed by left wing propagandist sites and the facts of their deception will be largely ignored.

Source

 

[mamooth]

I wonder if WUWT will break its old record of 17 for articles attacking a new paper, which was for a Lewandowsky paper. They're up to 5 already.

Basically, the more WUWT screams, the better the paper was. This paper rips apart their stupid conspiracy, so they're calling in everyone they've got.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I wonder if WUWT will break its old record of 17 for articles attacking a new paper, which was for a Lewandowsky paper. They're up to 5 already.

Basically, the more WUWT screams, the better the paper was. This paper rips apart their stupid conspiracy, so they're calling in everyone they've got.

I provided physical evidence and cited sources... you provided... jack shit and adhom bull shit...

The source provided all the data and how the conclusion was reached.. You spout nothing but pure bull shit..

 

[mamooth]

Yes, your cited "sources". However, your sources are all denier cranks with a history of making everything up.

In contrast, Crick showed you how the actual data from the actual paper directly refutes your stupid claim. You ignored that.

I pointed out your grand conspiracy as a whole makes no sense, since the combined past adjustments make the current warming look smaller. You ignored that too.

You ignore everything that points out your conspiracy theory is stupid. As you run, you try to cover by posting nonsense graphs from cranks. That's because you have no defense against the charges that your conspiracy theory is stupid and dishonest.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Yes, your cited "sources". However, your sources are all denier cranks with a history of making everything up.

In contrast, Crick showed you how the actual data from the actual paper directly refutes your stupid claim. You ignored that.

I pointed out your grand conspiracy as a whole makes no sense, since the combined past adjustments make the current warming look smaller. You ignored that too.

You ignore everything that points out your conspiracy theory is stupid. As you run, you try to cover by posting nonsense graphs from cranks. That's because you have no defense against the charges that your conspiracy theory is stupid and dishonest.

You are a left wing fruit cake.. How do you justify the changes to the historical record made by these fools? Your tinfoil hat is on to tight again snagletooth. And yes the left wing conspiracy to gain power and control has been going on for decades. Being a socialist party remember you probably approve of it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Pravda....er, NOAA reports:


"NOAA Fiddles With Climate Data To Erase The 15-Year Global Warming ‘Hiatus’
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists have found a solution to the 15-year “pause” in global warming: They “adjusted” the hiatus in warming out of the temperature record.

New climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years."
Read more: NOAA Tampers With Data To Erase The Global Warming Hiatus The Daily Caller

 

[Billy_Bob]

Right after the production of satellite data sets which show their data manipulations fraud in one easy step, these fools produce a paper and place it in a PAL REVIEW JOURNAL. They didn't think that a real and honest review would be done before Paris and certainly not in time to cause them problems. They are simply stuck on stupid.

Today should be great fun as I ask for hard facts and explanations for their changes.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Pravda....er, NOAA reports:


"NOAA Fiddles With Climate Data To Erase The 15-Year Global Warming ‘Hiatus’
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists have found a solution to the 15-year “pause” in global warming: They “adjusted” the hiatus in warming out of the temperature record.

New climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years."
Read more: NOAA Tampers With Data To Erase The Global Warming Hiatus The Daily Caller

They too attended the Michale Mann school of deception.. It seems to be acceptable scientific practice to make up data to suit your agenda..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Real scientists need to understand that the Decline Hiders are not reasonable, fellow scientists, but are a death worshipping Cult with a goal of redistributing American wealth. The AGWCult told us as much and we need to respond accordingly

 

[CrusaderFrank]

AGWCult Motto: when the data fails to validate the theory, adjust the data

 

[Billy_Bob]

This is how easily their fraud is shown.

If SST’s really have been rising (as their paper indicates) since 1998, then atmospheric temperatures would follow.

This is a simple matter of physics. We know from satellite data this has not happened.

if 72% of the world was warming the temps above that region would all have warmed substantially, yet we find cooling... I can say with impunity that these people are FRAUDS and LIARS! The paper is junk! Even the ICE increase around Antarctica would have to be a figment of our imagination if this were true. Empirical evidence does not support their paper in any way, shape or form,

The Stupid, it Burns...

 

[mamooth]

The responses from real scientists, as opposed to denier cult Stalinist frauds.

EXPERT REACTION Global warming slowdown an illusion created by bad data Science AusSMC - Australian Science Media CentreAusSMC - Australian Science Media Centre
---
There’s nothing all that new in this paper and nothing that surprises me. The bottom line is that multiple data sets and multiple lines of evidence have shown that global warming hasn’t stalled at all. This is another paper adding to this evidence. - Professor Matthew England, Chief Investigator at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at UNSW

...This suggests that the much-discussed recent slowdown in global temperatures is far less pronounced than previously thought. In addition, estimates of climate sensitivity constrained by past observations may need a slight upwards revision, increasing the risk of negative consequences from our warming climate in future. - Dr Ed Hawkins, climate scientist at NCAS, University of Reading

A whole cottage industry has been built by climate skeptics on the false premise that there is currently a hiatus in global warming. This is despite climate data showing continued warming of the Earth surface. Much of the media have latched on to this supposed slow-down as it continues the ‘for and against’ climate change debate. The weight of evidence for anthropogenic climate change is overwhelming and this new study shows that the global warming hiatus was just wishful thinking. - Prof Mark Maslin, Professor of Climatology at University College London

This reassessment of global temperatures, which gives that there has been no pause or slowdown in surface warming since 1998, is very important as it comes from an extremely well regarded group at a US Government laboratory. It has been known that the storage of the excess heat caused by increased greenhouse gases has continued, and it had been thought that the reduction in surface warming must be due to natural variation in the heat exchanged between the atmosphere and ocean. Now it appears that any such exchange of heat between the atmosphere and ocean has not been large enough to obscure the global warming trend, even in the relatively short period we have so far had in the 21st century. It also suggests that some of the lower estimates of warming that depend on the low trend in recent temperatures may no longer be credible. - Prof Sir Brian Hoskins, Chair of the Grantham Institute, Imperial College London

...Nevertheless, I would caution against dismissing the slowdown in surface warming on the basis of this study, nor to downplay the role of natural decadal variability for short-term trends in climate. There are other datasets that still support a slowdown over some recent period of time, and there are intriguing geographical patterns such as cooling in large parts of the Pacific Ocean that were used to support explanations for the warming slowdown. It will be interesting to see if these patterns are still present in the revised NOAA dataset (the new paper shows only the global average temperature). Furthermore, a key feature of the apparent slowdown in surface warming was that it left the observed warming close to the bottom of the range of climate model projections of warming during the last few years at least. The newly revised NOAA data can be used to update that comparison, though it’s not likely to resolve that issue. - Prof Tim Osborn, Professor of Climate Science at the University of East Anglia

...Overall this study demonstrates the importance of further work in narrowing down uncertainties in global temperature datasets and in better understanding climate variability. These are areas the Met Office has been working on for a number of years. The numbers in this study are within the uncertainty ranges calculated in our own global temperature dataset and we’re in the midst of a long-term project to further improve and narrow down our understanding of uncertainties. Understanding variability in the rate of global average surface warming is an ongoing and active research topic. - Dr Peter Stott, Head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution at the Met Office Hadley Centre

The results and conclusions reached by Thomas Karl and others are certainly in accord with what we are seeing amongst the world’s glaciers, where melting – retreat or thinning – is taking place very widely. The results are also consistent with broader disruptions in the global climate system that the world’s people are feeling. The idea being pushed blindly by some with vested interests that somehow the planet is not responding to continued emissions of greenhouse gases doesn’t make sense from a simple physics viewpoint; but the climate-change denialism also doesn’t sit well with people who can read the newspaper and watch the TV news about climate change in action and who can recognize the effects in their own experiences. - Prof Jeffrey Kargel, Glaciologist at the University of Arizona

This is a careful and persuasive analysis, and I think shows clearly that the so-called ‘hiatus’ does not exist and that global warming has continued over the past few years at the same rate as in earlier years. - Prof Peter Wadhams, Professor of Ocean Physics at the University of Cambridge
---

RealClimate NOAA temperature record updates and the hiatus
---
This kind of update happens all the time as datasets expand through data-recovery efforts and increasing digitization, and as biases in the raw measurements are better understood. However, this update is going to be bigger news than normal because of the claim that the ‘hiatus’ is no more. To understand why this is perhaps less dramatic than it might seem, it’s worth stepping back to see a little context...The harrumphing from the usual quarters has already started. The Cato Institute sent out a pre-rebuttal even before the paper was published, replete with a litany of poorly argued points and illogical non-sequiturs. From the more excitable elements, one can expect a chorus of claims that raw data is being inappropriately manipulated. The fact that the corrections for non-climatic effects reduce the trend will not be mentioned. Nor will there be any actual alternative analysis demonstrating that alternative methods to dealing with known and accepted biases give a substantially different answer (because they don’t). - Dr Gavin Schmidt of GISS NASA
---

 

[Billy_Bob]

The responses from real scientists, as opposed to denier cult Stalinist frauds.

EXPERT REACTION Global warming slowdown an illusion created by bad data Science AusSMC - Australian Science Media CentreAusSMC - Australian Science Media Centre
---
There’s nothing all that new in this paper and nothing that surprises me. The bottom line is that multiple data sets and multiple lines of evidence have shown that global warming hasn’t stalled at all. This is another paper adding to this evidence. - Professor Matthew England, Chief Investigator at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at UNSW

...This suggests that the much-discussed recent slowdown in global temperatures is far less pronounced than previously thought. In addition, estimates of climate sensitivity constrained by past observations may need a slight upwards revision, increasing the risk of negative consequences from our warming climate in future. - Dr Ed Hawkins, climate scientist at NCAS, University of Reading

A whole cottage industry has been built by climate skeptics on the false premise that there is currently a hiatus in global warming. This is despite climate data showing continued warming of the Earth surface. Much of the media have latched on to this supposed slow-down as it continues the ‘for and against’ climate change debate. The weight of evidence for anthropogenic climate change is overwhelming and this new study shows that the global warming hiatus was just wishful thinking. - Prof Mark Maslin, Professor of Climatology at University College London

This reassessment of global temperatures, which gives that there has been no pause or slowdown in surface warming since 1998, is very important as it comes from an extremely well regarded group at a US Government laboratory. It has been known that the storage of the excess heat caused by increased greenhouse gases has continued, and it had been thought that the reduction in surface warming must be due to natural variation in the heat exchanged between the atmosphere and ocean. Now it appears that any such exchange of heat between the atmosphere and ocean has not been large enough to obscure the global warming trend, even in the relatively short period we have so far had in the 21st century. It also suggests that some of the lower estimates of warming that depend on the low trend in recent temperatures may no longer be credible. - Prof Sir Brian Hoskins, Chair of the Grantham Institute, Imperial College London

...Nevertheless, I would caution against dismissing the slowdown in surface warming on the basis of this study, nor to downplay the role of natural decadal variability for short-term trends in climate. There are other datasets that still support a slowdown over some recent period of time, and there are intriguing geographical patterns such as cooling in large parts of the Pacific Ocean that were used to support explanations for the warming slowdown. It will be interesting to see if these patterns are still present in the revised NOAA dataset (the new paper shows only the global average temperature). Furthermore, a key feature of the apparent slowdown in surface warming was that it left the observed warming close to the bottom of the range of climate model projections of warming during the last few years at least. The newly revised NOAA data can be used to update that comparison, though it’s not likely to resolve that issue. - Prof Tim Osborn, Professor of Climate Science at the University of East Anglia

...Overall this study demonstrates the importance of further work in narrowing down uncertainties in global temperature datasets and in better understanding climate variability. These are areas the Met Office has been working on for a number of years. The numbers in this study are within the uncertainty ranges calculated in our own global temperature dataset and we’re in the midst of a long-term project to further improve and narrow down our understanding of uncertainties. Understanding variability in the rate of global average surface warming is an ongoing and active research topic. - Dr Peter Stott, Head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution at the Met Office Hadley Centre

The results and conclusions reached by Thomas Karl and others are certainly in accord with what we are seeing amongst the world’s glaciers, where melting – retreat or thinning – is taking place very widely. The results are also consistent with broader disruptions in the global climate system that the world’s people are feeling. The idea being pushed blindly by some with vested interests that somehow the planet is not responding to continued emissions of greenhouse gases doesn’t make sense from a simple physics viewpoint; but the climate-change denialism also doesn’t sit well with people who can read the newspaper and watch the TV news about climate change in action and who can recognize the effects in their own experiences. - Prof Jeffrey Kargel, Glaciologist at the University of Arizona

This is a careful and persuasive analysis, and I think shows clearly that the so-called ‘hiatus’ does not exist and that global warming has continued over the past few years at the same rate as in earlier years. - Prof Peter Wadhams, Professor of Ocean Physics at the University of Cambridge
---

RealClimate NOAA temperature record updates and the hiatus
---
This kind of update happens all the time as datasets expand through data-recovery efforts and increasing digitization, and as biases in the raw measurements are better understood. However, this update is going to be bigger news than normal because of the claim that the ‘hiatus’ is no more. To understand why this is perhaps less dramatic than it might seem, it’s worth stepping back to see a little context...The harrumphing from the usual quarters has already started. The Cato Institute sent out a pre-rebuttal even before the paper was published, replete with a litany of poorly argued points and illogical non-sequiturs. From the more excitable elements, one can expect a chorus of claims that raw data is being inappropriately manipulated. The fact that the corrections for non-climatic effects reduce the trend will not be mentioned. Nor will there be any actual alternative analysis demonstrating that alternative methods to dealing with known and accepted biases give a substantially different answer (because they don’t). - Dr Gavin Schmidt of GISS NASA
---

Too Funny you use the IPCC fraudsters to validate other fraudsters....

 

[Old Rocks]

Billy Boob, you silly ass, you have pulled so much nonsense out of your ass on this board, do you really think that you have credibility with anyone? The fraud is the people like you that lie constantly about the data and the scientists.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Billy Boob, you silly ass, you have pulled so much nonsense out of your ass on this board, do you really think that you have credibility with anyone? The fraud is the people like you that lie constantly about the data and the scientists.

Old fraud cant even see that Karl Et Al has tried and failed to rewrite Thermal Fluid Dynamics.. The shit from alarmist drones is deep. Even the BBC and Science Journal have EDITED their Releases after they got pummeled by real scientists..

 

[Old Rocks]

Thermal fluid dynamics? Someone put epson salt in your oatmeal? Really, Billy Boob, just throwing out terms without the slightest idea of what they mean makes you look the fool.