Are Government Temperature Graphs Credible?

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
No trolling, off topic complaining and no attack on the source or the writer. I do request replying on the CONTENT of the article, good or bad.

Real Climate Science

Are Government Temperature Graphs Credible?
Posted on April 7, 2021 by tonyheller

Excerpt:


Ninety years ago, the New York Times reported unanimous consensus that Earth’s climate was controlled by the sun.



TimesMachine: July 2, 1931 – NYTimes.com

Now NASA reports 97% consensus that Earth’s climate is controlled by CO2.

“Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.”


Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

I agree with them – the warming trends over the last century are primarily due to human activities – data tampering by organizations like NASA and NOAA. For example, over the past 20 years NASA has turned a 70 year cooling trend in the US from 1930 to 2000 into a warming trend. This is the 1999 version.




NASA 1999

And this is NASA’s current graph.



NASA 2021

Here is an animation showing how the data has been altered over the past 20 years.

LINK

=======

This is a VERY LONG post, thus worth reading as it utterly destroys warmist/alarmists lies so effectively using their own material.

It is going to entertaining to see how warmists/alarmists will be able to handle all this.

:cool:
 

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,323
Reaction score
6,474
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
No trolling, off topic complaining and no attack on the source or the writer. I do request replying on the CONTENT of the article, good or bad.

The content doesn't back up your wild claim at all. It provides no actual evidence that the NASA GISS data is bad.

Oh, READ MY LINK!


Note that I have now backed up that claim to the same degree that you backed up yours.

If you'd like a deeper discussion, then point us to the specific evidence, and discuss it in your own words. Yelling "IT'S IN MY LINK!" is not an argument.
 
Last edited:

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
6,062
Reaction score
2,437
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Better computers is one reason ... according to Moore's Law, we can put 4,000 times the number of transistors per square millimeter on IC chips today ...

The emperical data is available over the internet ... pick an airport, copy/paste the data into a spreadsheet and spend a few minutes typing in the formulas to get annual average temperatures ... then post your graph ... see if it's showing a warming trend ...

Fighting statistics with more statistics doesn't work ...
 

MisterBeale

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
30,620
Reaction score
12,453
Points
1,590
No trolling, off topic complaining and no attack on the source or the writer. I do request replying on the CONTENT of the article, good or bad.

Real Climate Science

Are Government Temperature Graphs Credible?
Posted on April 7, 2021 by tonyheller

Excerpt:


Ninety years ago, the New York Times reported unanimous consensus that Earth’s climate was controlled by the sun.



TimesMachine: July 2, 1931 – NYTimes.com

Now NASA reports 97% consensus that Earth’s climate is controlled by CO2.

“Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.”


Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

I agree with them – the warming trends over the last century are primarily due to human activities – data tampering by organizations like NASA and NOAA. For example, over the past 20 years NASA has turned a 70 year cooling trend in the US from 1930 to 2000 into a warming trend. This is the 1999 version.




NASA 1999

And this is NASA’s current graph.



NASA 2021

Here is an animation showing how the data has been altered over the past 20 years.

LINK

=======

This is a VERY LONG post, thus worth reading as it utterly destroys warmist/alarmists lies so effectively using their own material.

It is going to entertaining to see how warmists/alarmists will be able to handle all this.

:cool:

So. . . what?

I heard on the radio this morning, that we had record high temps. yesterday. . . . was that a lie, is that what you are saying? :dunno:
 

MisterBeale

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
30,620
Reaction score
12,453
Points
1,590
I LOVE that SunsetTommy (now a WUWT parrot) TRIED to make term of the debate that you can't criticize the source.
A Source whose name is even a Pseudonym/in question!

Steven Goddard (Tony Heller)
Credentials
  • Masters in Electrical Engineering – Rice University. [1], [2]
  • BS Geology – ASU. [1], [2]
Background
Steven Goddard is a climate science denier, regular contributor to WattsUpWithThat (WUWT), and operator of ”The Deplorable Climate Science Blog.” The name “Steven Goddard” is a pseudonym used by Tony Heller, which he confirmed himself in June 2014. [3], [4], [2], [30], [32]

Tony Heller describes himself as “an independent thinker who is considered a heretic by the orthodoxy on both sides of the climate debate.” He has degrees in Geology and Electrical Engineering, and lives in Columbia, Maryland. He describes global warming as the “biggest scientific fraud in history.” [30], [9]

Steven Goddard is known for a 2008 article in The Register where he posited that Arctic Sea ice is not receding and claimed that data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) showing the opposite was incorrect. Goddard later issued a retraction on his statement. [5], [6]

Goddard operates a blog titled “Real Science”, originally located at Real-Science.com, then at Stevengoddard.wordpress.com (until May, 2016), and now at Realclimatescience.com. [7], [8]

Stance on Climate Change
“Make no mistake about it, global warming is the biggest scientific fraud in history.” [9]
“Global warming is indeed Mann-made, by Michael Mann and James Hansen. But it has nothing to do with climate or science.” [10]
“”The 97% consensus quoted daily by Barack Obama is based on a few fraudulent studies of a handful of published papers.”[11]
“There is no global warming crisis. There is a crisis of the White House having government agencies manipulate data, in pursuit of their global warming agenda. There is also a crisis of the White House attacking the Bill of Rights in pursuit of their global warming agenda.” [12]
Key Quotes
February 24, 2017

Tony Heller moderated a discussion panel sponsored by the CO2 Coalition at the 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). After Craig Idso finished his talk, Heller noted: [38]

“My takeaway from that [Craig Idso’s talk] is that efforts to reduce CO2 are not only anti-science, but they’re anti-human.” [38]
July, 2016

“I completely agree with Fred [Singer] that there probably has been little or no warming since the 1940s.” [2]
August, 2008

“The Arctic did not experience the meltdowns forecast by NSIDC and the Norwegian Polar Year Secretariat. It didn’t even come close. Additionally, some current graphs and press releases from NSIDC seem less than conservative. There appears to be a consistent pattern of overstatement related to Arctic ice loss.” [5]
Undated

“Nothing about climate science reeks more of confirmation bias, than the changes scientists make to their own data sets over time. They all show exactly the same pattern of monotonically cooling the past and warming the present, regardless of the instrumentation.” [13]
“Climate fraudsters say that glaciers melting is an ‘early sign of global warming.’ They are lying. Glaciers have been melting for a very long time, and were melting during NASA’s claimed coldest years ever.” [14]
“”In summary, the NASA global and US temperature records are neither accurate, nor credible representations of reality.” [15]
“The claimed agreement in temperature data is simply not legitimate. The people involved know that their data is inadequate, tampered and largely made up. […] The reason that the data sets agree is due to collusion, not independent research as they claim. It is the biggest scientific fraud in history.” [16]
“NASA scientists have a strong conflict of interest in that they expect to see warming, and they the more alarm they create, the more money they obtain. This is why climate scientists have no business touching the temperature data. They have no training in signal processing and they have shown repeatedly that they will alter data to suit their needs.” [17]
“NASA shows 3.24 mm/year sea level rise on their web site. They call it ‘Facts’ – when in fact it is blatant fraud.” [18]
“In 1927, CO2 levels were very low. An endless series of disasters struck the world, and glaciers were rapidly melting. What we can conclude from all this is:
  1. The climate was not better at lower levels of CO2
  2. The climate would not get better if we reduced CO2 levels
  3. The NASA temperature record is complete garbage” [19]
Comments Surrounding 2021 Capitol Insurrection
Tony Heller (@Tony_Heller on Twitter) was among dozens of the individuals and organizations profiled in DeSmog’s Disinformation Database who posted online or gave interviews about the events surrounding the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection. Some posted claims of election fraud, similar to those that drove the Stop the Steal rally on Jan. 6. Some circulated dubious information about the insurrection itself. DeSmog has preserved a selection of notable posts related to the events of Jan. 6, 2021, including some that were later deleted or removed.



Heller also uploaded a video in which a participant in the failed Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection claims that antifa had infiltrated the mob:



In another video, a person identified as “Katherine” says “All of us were fairly peaceful. There were a couple undercover ANTIFA that were in the group. They were disguised. Some of them had red bandanas but most of them were wearing like Trump hats either backwards or like loosely fitted in order to kind of like stand themselves out”:



In that video, a person identified as “Katherine” says “All of us were fairly peaceful. There were a couple undercover ANTIFA that were in the group. They were disguised. Some of them had red bandanas but most of them were wearing like Trump hats either backwards or like loosely fitted in order to kind of like stand themselves out.”

The Washington Post reported on Jan. 7, 2021, in response to similar claims, “In fact, many of the Trump supporters who stormed into the Capitol openly boasted about their participation, live-streaming as they forced their way past police and bashed the building’s doors and windows.” [49], [50], [51], [52], [53]



The following is from a video Tony Heller released titled “Insurgents In The Capital [sic]”:

[00:08:51] Whatever was going on there doesn’t really look like a plot by the president of the United States to overthrow his own government. The way this has been portrayed by the press seems to have little to do with reality. I don’t know what happened there that day, but it looks a lot more like a coup to overthrow the president of the United States than the other way around. [00:09:10]
@Tony_Heller posted the following on Jan. 7, 2021 and on Jan. 11, 2021:





Key Deeds
June 2019

Heller posted a video claiming to have discovered “data tampering” by NOAA/NASA regarding the climate tipping point. [47]






“They’ve quadrupled warming mainly by cooling past temperatures and warming present temperatures,” Heller claimed in the video. “When you’re willing to manipulate data you can show any result you want, and they wanted to show warming,” He concluded.
Heller’s claims were featured in an article at The New American, which introduces Heller as a “scientist.” [48]

March 5, 2018

Heller posed for a photo with Chris Horner, Marc Morano, and Steve Milloy of Junk Science at what appeared to be an event promoting Morano’s new book,The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change, by Regnery Publishing. Horner had written the first version of the book in 2007. [46]

Heller described them as the “The Washington DC global warming scam demolition team.” He also tweeted the image: [46]




2017

Tony Heller is listed as a contributor to the upcoming release of Climate Change: The Facts 2017, a book released by the Institute for Public Affairs (IPA) and edited by Jennifer Marohasy. While investigating the authors, DeSmog noted that one of the IPA‘s listed “leading experts” involved in the book is New Zealand’s Ken Ring, who in addition to being a described “long range weather forecaster” has written “two, possibly three, books about cats” including Pawmistry: How to Read Your Cat’s Paws in 1998. [41]

According to the book description: [42]

Climate Change: The Facts 2017 brings together contributions on the latest climate science from some of the world’s leading experts in the field including John Abbot, Sallie Baliunas, Paul Driessen, Tony Heller, Craig Idso, Clive James, Pat Michaels, Jo Nova, Ian Plimer, Tom Quirk, Peter Ridd, Ken Ring, Nicola Scafetta, Willie Soon, Roy Spencer, and Anthony Watts.
There are also essays by Matt Ridley, and Bjørn Lomborg on the economics of climate change, and by Simon Breheny on how the freedom to discuss climate change science is under threat.” [42]
Prior versions of the book featured contributions from a range of prominent climate change deniers, and describes mainstream climate change research as “pseudo-science.” [43]

August 23, 2017

Writing at The Deplorable Climate Science Blog, Heller claimed that, since 1990, “The measured NOAA data shows no warming.” “The data is simply fake,” he said. [44]

Apart from himself, Heller does NOT CITE ANY EXTERNAL SOURCES to explain how he reached his conclusion. However, he signs off with a final statement that “This is the biggest and most cynical scam in science history.” [44]


Writing at Breitbart, James Delingpole shared Goddard’s graph, echoing his sentiment that “All of recent U.S. warming has been faked by NOAA.” .....

[................]

LINK

`
I'm not sure. . . but it seems to me, this post is a flagrant violation of forum rule number bullet point seven;

"You may not disclose any personal information about other members. Name, E-Mail, phone number, address, occupation, pictures, quotes, etc. that has NOT first been posted here at USMB by the member themselves (Include Link), this includes links to sites that contain said personal information. No Off Site Data Mining Members. "

So, um. . . yeah. What is up with that? :heehee:
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
1,050
Points
315
I'm not sure. . . but it seems to me, this post is a flagrant violation of forum rule number bullet point seven;

"You may not disclose any personal information about other members. Name, E-Mail, phone number, address, occupation, pictures, quotes, etc. that has NOT first been posted here at USMB by the member themselves
(Include Link), this includes links to sites that contain said personal information. No Off Site Data Mining Members. "

So, um. . . yeah. What is up with that? :heehee:
YOU IDIOT!
He's NOT "a member of this forum," and is a public figure/well known denier with a Blog who has himself disclosed his name/pseudonym many times.
You can't be that ******* stupid.
But you are.

`
 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
91,155
Reaction score
31,972
Points
2,290
No trolling, off topic complaining and no attack on the source or the writer. I do request replying on the CONTENT of the article, good or bad.

Real Climate Science

Are Government Temperature Graphs Credible?
Posted on April 7, 2021 by tonyheller

Excerpt:


Ninety years ago, the New York Times reported unanimous consensus that Earth’s climate was controlled by the sun.



TimesMachine: July 2, 1931 – NYTimes.com

Now NASA reports 97% consensus that Earth’s climate is controlled by CO2.

“Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.”


Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

I agree with them – the warming trends over the last century are primarily due to human activities – data tampering by organizations like NASA and NOAA. For example, over the past 20 years NASA has turned a 70 year cooling trend in the US from 1930 to 2000 into a warming trend. This is the 1999 version.




NASA 1999

And this is NASA’s current graph.



NASA 2021

Here is an animation showing how the data has been altered over the past 20 years.

LINK

=======

This is a VERY LONG post, thus worth reading as it utterly destroys warmist/alarmists lies so effectively using their own material.

It is going to entertaining to see how warmists/alarmists will be able to handle all this.

:cool:
Nothing the government says is credible.
 

MisterBeale

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
30,620
Reaction score
12,453
Points
1,590
I'm not sure. . . but it seems to me, this post is a flagrant violation of forum rule number bullet point seven;

"You may not disclose any personal information about other members. Name, E-Mail, phone number, address, occupation, pictures, quotes, etc. that has NOT first been posted here at USMB by the member themselves
(Include Link), this includes links to sites that contain said personal information. No Off Site Data Mining Members. "

So, um. . . yeah. What is up with that? :heehee:
YOU IDIOT!
He's NOT "a member of this forum," and is a public figure/well known denier with a Blog who has himself disclosed his name/pseudonym many times.
You can't be that ******* stupid.
But you are.

`
551xzt.jpg


Maybe he is quoting himself? :dunno:
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
64,941
Reaction score
15,816
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
No trolling, off topic complaining and no attack on the source or the writer. I do request replying on the CONTENT of the article, good or bad.

The content doesn't back up your wild claim at all. It provides no actual evidence that the NASA GISS data is bad.

Oh, READ MY LINK!


Note that I have now backed up that claim to the same degree that you backed up yours.

If you'd like a deeper discussion, then point us to the specific evidence, and discuss it in your own words. Yelling "IT'S IN MY LINK!" is not an argument.
Awesome. You link to your cult's official website and stamp your feet when rational people laugh at you.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
64,941
Reaction score
15,816
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Better computers is one reason ... according to Moore's Law, we can put 4,000 times the number of transistors per square millimeter on IC chips today ...

The emperical data is available over the internet ... pick an airport, copy/paste the data into a spreadsheet and spend a few minutes typing in the formulas to get annual average temperatures ... then post your graph ... see if it's showing a warming trend ...

Fighting statistics with more statistics doesn't work ...
Airports have acres of asphalt and concrete which absorb solar radiation and heat the surrounding air.

Not a great place to get representative temperatures...unless you want to show an artificial warming trend.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
70,742
Reaction score
25,580
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
No trolling, off topic complaining and no attack on the source or the writer. I do request replying on the CONTENT of the article, good or bad.

Real Climate Science

Are Government Temperature Graphs Credible?
Posted on April 7, 2021 by tonyheller

Excerpt:


Ninety years ago, the New York Times reported unanimous consensus that Earth’s climate was controlled by the sun.



TimesMachine: July 2, 1931 – NYTimes.com

Now NASA reports 97% consensus that Earth’s climate is controlled by CO2.

“Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.”


Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

I agree with them – the warming trends over the last century are primarily due to human activities – data tampering by organizations like NASA and NOAA. For example, over the past 20 years NASA has turned a 70 year cooling trend in the US from 1930 to 2000 into a warming trend. This is the 1999 version.




NASA 1999

And this is NASA’s current graph.



NASA 2021

Here is an animation showing how the data has been altered over the past 20 years.

LINK

=======

This is a VERY LONG post, thus worth reading as it utterly destroys warmist/alarmists lies so effectively using their own material.

It is going to entertaining to see how warmists/alarmists will be able to handle all this.

:cool:





Nope, not since they decided to get political.
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
No trolling, off topic complaining and no attack on the source or the writer. I do request replying on the CONTENT of the article, good or bad.

The content doesn't back up your wild claim at all. It provides no actual evidence that the NASA GISS data is bad.

Oh, READ MY LINK!


Note that I have now backed up that claim to the same degree that you backed up yours.

If you'd like a deeper discussion, then point us to the specific evidence, and discuss it in your own words. Yelling "IT'S IN MY LINK!" is not an argument.

Ha ha, you didn't back up anything since the IPCC link has more than 100 pages in it, you didn't specify any particular area for me to read that addresses the article, you are just blowing smoke as usual.

Secondly all the charts that are from PISS and NASA are from their websites. You didn't address them at all, they were CREATED by those website, you being exposed as a fool here.

Third the article is very long, yet YOU didn't bring up a single cogent objection to any of it. :laugh:

Fourth the article was written by Tony Heller and on his website, I didn't make the claims, he did, yet you seem to address it to me, I am flattered that you think so, but I am not a plagiarist like Biden is......

Your entire post was dead on arrival, since YOU didn't address any particular claim in the article......, thus you have NOTHING!

At least you didn't violate my requests for staying on topic and not trolling..... Congratulations!!!

:WooHooSmileyWave-vi:
 
Last edited:

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
6,062
Reaction score
2,437
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Airports have acres of asphalt and concrete which absorb solar radiation and heat the surrounding air.
Not a great place to get representative temperatures...unless you want to show an artificial warming trend.

Do you think the airport temperature is the same over the whole airport? ... it can be several degrees different where the planes are touching down ... a half mile away ... but the reported temperature is close enough for aviation purposes ... why install more thermometers if they don't give us useful information ...

This doesn't change what I asked you to do ... if you won't do it, then don't say I'm wrong ...
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
Better computers is one reason ... according to Moore's Law, we can put 4,000 times the number of transistors per square millimeter on IC chips today ...

The emperical data is available over the internet ... pick an airport, copy/paste the data into a spreadsheet and spend a few minutes typing in the formulas to get annual average temperatures ... then post your graph ... see if it's showing a warming trend ...

Fighting statistics with more statistics doesn't work ...

Uh okay, but was there anything about the article that you liked or disliked?
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
Gee no one can address the article's CONTENT at all, must be too hard to do and maybe 100% correct after all.

:dance:
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
1,050
Points
315
Gee no one can address the article's CONTENT at all, must be too hard to do and maybe 100% correct after all.

:dance:
YOU put up NO personal Content.
YOU Copied an article.
I Copied one that pointed out your author was a two-named clown and caught in many previous bogus claims.
That is refuting content.

Let me also Personally point out your author used NASA graphs for 1999 and 2021.
Only problem?
They are graphs of the USA ALONE - 2% of the planet's surface.
(the 20-yr consistent Global ones were available at same websites but not used by the fraud author. Ooops)
Consistent with your author's other Fraudulent claims that try and make NASA look wrong.


And Finally, and for the THIRD Time, I ask for THEE most Important content: YOUR POSITION on Warming!!!
You have denied ANY warming, And liked denials of any warming GW or AGW (ie, in Skookerasbil's threads posting cold weather to deny any warming, as well as other independent posts of your own that show graphs it isn't.)

So you not only deny AGW, you deny GW in scores of posts here... incl this one.

So please state for the record that is your position officially.
You deny AGW and even GW.
Correct?

The most important piece of individual uncopied content one can post in this section.
I bet you won't/can't do it.. again.

`
 
Last edited:

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
6,062
Reaction score
2,437
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Uh okay, but was there anything about the article that you liked or disliked?

Obviously I didn't like to complete reliance on statistics ... no experimental results [wink wink] ...
I didn't like the non-rigid structure ... the author appealed to emotion rather than reason ...
So, it didn't take much bogus information for me to quit reading ...

The diagram showing "The US temperature record is very important, because the vast majority of global stations in the NOAA GHCN database with a long term daily temperature record are located in the US." is so misleading as to qualify as a deceptive lie ... blue water shipping provides data, and there many many more ships at sea today that even twenty years ago ...

Bottom line ... we don't have the 5% inconsistencies to spin out a proper Conspiracy Theory ... the article was very amateurish attempt and thus falls flat ...

I did like the diagrams of naked women ... always nice to include a few of those in an otherwise boring article ...
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
Uh okay, but was there anything about the article that you liked or disliked?

Obviously I didn't like to complete reliance on statistics ... no experimental results [wink wink] ...
I didn't like the non-rigid structure ... the author appealed to emotion rather than reason ...
So, it didn't take much bogus information for me to quit reading ...

The diagram showing "The US temperature record is very important, because the vast majority of global stations in the NOAA GHCN database with a long term daily temperature record are located in the US." is so misleading as to qualify as a deceptive lie ... blue water shipping provides data, and there many many more ships at sea today that even twenty years ago ...

Bottom line ... we don't have the 5% inconsistencies to spin out a proper Conspiracy Theory ... the article was very amateurish attempt and thus falls flat ...

I did like the diagrams of naked women ... always nice to include a few of those in an otherwise boring article ...

I saw the article as being successful in showing that Government temperature charts are NOT credible since they make changes to it over and over, cooling the past warming the present. You saw the obvious difference between the 1999 and 2019 NASA charts, didn't you?

It isn't a conspiracy, it is a fact that our government are presenting bogus narratives in several places that are too obvious to ignore. Altered temperature charts, dishonest narratives of the bogeyman CO2 and the outlandish prediction failures from the "Godfather" of the warmist/alarmist camp, Dr. Hansen who in 1986 was quoted:


"In 1986, NASA’s James Hansen predicted 4-6 degrees warming for the US by the year 2020, and a huge increase in heatwaves.

“He said that with an expected doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide by 2040, the number of days each year with temperatures over 80 degrees would rise from 35 to 85 in Washington, D.C., and Omaha, Neb.”

The actual result was about 1 degree increase since 1958 according to USHCN.

There is a clear DECLINE of above 90 F days in the US, based on 110 years data.

1618070139343.png


How can you ignore the huge change from RAW temperature data to adjusted temperature data, the change is too large to ignore.

1618070409213.png


versus,

1618070499081.png


How can you ignore that as being "boring?" The differences are TOO LARGE to ignore, and shows their determination to promote fraud.
 

toobfreak

Tungsten/Glass Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
37,119
Reaction score
22,284
Points
1,915
Location
On The Way Home To Earth
Ninety years ago, the New York Times reported unanimous consensus that Earth’s climate was controlled by the sun.


Was that somehow wrong? I guarandamtee you that if I switched the Sun off right now, we would begin having the worst climate ever imagined about 8 minutes later.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top