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

[flacaltenn]

None of this actually matters. Since whatever they do the modern temperature record to make the pause deniable --- is gonna start conflicting with the satellite records. You know -- those expensive spacecraft that NASA is supposed to favor for unbiased accuracy..

They'll go a bit too far and get nailed because their cooked version starts to "significantly" as CrickHam asserts, diverge from the satellites..

 

[jc456]

so I'm confused with these lefties. I thought they were all about evolution right? So all of these posts by old crock, isn't that evolution? Why can't he accept that? Sorry but, I mean, really.

 

[toxicmedia]

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...

Why do I think you probably had to look up "data manipulation" in the phone book Billy Bob?

 

[flacaltenn]

Been there -- Done that GoldiRocks on the Oceans turning acidic..

ALL of the bio research papers I read only illustrate how little is known about natural variation in the daily environs of sea creatures.

Taking species from the ocean and putting them in tanks for research is not
the MOST ideal way of studying "stress" or "metabolic changes".. And probably MANY of the papers you cited actually admit this.. (The dozen or so I've read have largely admitted) And a change from a GLOBAL value of PH of 8.2 to 8.1 is NOT an environmental crisis for ANY specie..

It's only the inflammatory language of the COULDS and MAYBEs that the author are required to include in the abstracts (in order to get paid under a GWarming inspired grant) that seem to get the press attention.

CO2 hides in COLD water. Warmer surfaces would ameliorate the accumulation. It's more of a DEEP water issue than a surface issue.

 

[mamooth]

None of this actually matters. Since whatever they do the modern temperature record to make the pause deniable --- is gonna start conflicting with the satellite records. You know -- those expensive spacecraft that NASA is supposed to favor for unbiased accuracy..

Wow. You never tire of manufacturing new fictional realities.

If you didn't just fabricate that, please show where NASA ever said such a thing. You know, that satellite temperatures should be used in favor of surface temperatures.

They'll go a bit too far and get nailed because their cooked version starts to "significantly" as CrickHam asserts, diverge from the satellites..

The crazy conspiracy theory is all you have left now, as you sure don't have any science. And that conspiracy theory has failed. Why not just admit you messed up? You'll have to do so eventually, and the earlier you do it, the less painful it will be.

 

[flacaltenn]

None of this actually matters. Since whatever they do the modern temperature record to make the pause deniable --- is gonna start conflicting with the satellite records. You know -- those expensive spacecraft that NASA is supposed to favor for unbiased accuracy..

Wow. You never tire of manufacturing new fictional realities.

If you didn't just fabricate that, please show where NASA ever said such a thing. You know, that satellite temperatures should be used in favor of surface temperatures.

They'll go a bit too far and get nailed because their cooked version starts to "significantly" as CrickHam asserts, diverge from the satellites..

The crazy conspiracy theory is all you have left now, as you sure don't have any science. And that conspiracy theory has failed. Why not just admit you messed up? You'll have to do so eventually, and the earlier you do it, the less painful it will be.

I WOULD apologize if there was ever a reason to. Way past time for YOU to take that path..

So -- why is it that all these convienient "warmest year on record" press releases from NASA GISS (the satellite dudes/dudettes) are based on the highly cooked Surface records and always manage to be 0.006deg above the satellite records? At least before the retraction comes out in the FOLLOWING week and acknowledges that NASA only has a 30% confidence in the "warmest year" claim...

Why is Hansen the chief Chef of the GISS cooking at NASA? Shouldn't he take 20 or 40 of the data preppers and put on meaningful SPACE SYSTEMS tasks? One gets the impression that Dr Hansen values that assembly line kitchen more than the NASA space systems they are SUPPOSED to be championing??

 

[mamooth]

So -- why is it that all these convienient "warmest year on record" press releases from NASA GISS (the satellite dudes/dudettes)

So you can't support your statement that NASA ever said satellite data was better. You just made that up, and don't want to admit it.

are based on the highly cooked Surface records and always manage to be 0.006deg above the satellite records?

First, because satellites measure the temperature at around 14,000 feet. An intelilgent person, if the goal was to find the average surface temperature, would measure the temperature at the surface. A crazy person would declare that you get surface temperature by measuring at 14,000 feet.

Second, the satellite data is twiddled, fudged and manipulated much more than surface data, and is even regarded by the satellite people themselves as much less reliable.

At least before the retraction comes out in the FOLLOWING week and acknowledges that NASA only has a 30% confidence in the "warmest year" claim...

That's not a retraction. It's a statement of statistics. Which you don't seem to understand.

Why is Hansen the chief Chef of the GISS cooking at NASA?

You're simply not capable of rational discussion on this topic. You instantly frame everything as part of the vast conspiracy that you know must exist, which makes everything you say look kind of insane.

 

[flacaltenn]

Didn't answer my questions didya? And your understanding of satellite temp. measurements stinks.. NO WAY there are the arbitrary decisions to modify ancient satellite data on the flimsiest of excuses..

Answer my questions troll..

 

[mamooth]

Didn't answer my questions didya?

I didn't let your lame attempted diversion sidetrack me from my original question , no. Very smart of me.

My original question, which you still haven't answered, was whether you can back up your claim that NASA said satellite data was superior to surface data. That's the first question here. I need not bother with any of yours until you answer it.

And your understanding of satellite temp. measurements stinks..

I also asked you if taking temperatures at 14,000 feet was a better way to measure surface temperatures than taking surface temperatures. You didn't answer that either. My questions clearly make you very uncomfortable. That's because they debunk your conspiracy theory.

NO WAY there are the arbitrary decisions to modify ancient satellite data on the flimsiest of excuses.

And no way is that done with the surface temperatures. Only conspiracy cultists make such a crazy claim, and nobody cares what they think.

Now shall I link to the RSS guy again, where he states the surface record is more trustworthy?

Answer my questions troll..

Indirectly, you've answered mine. You don't have any evidence to back up your conspiracy theory that NASA said satellite temps were better. So my point is made, which is that you're fabricating stories to bolster your conspiracy theory.

 

[skookerasbil]

Billy..........I thought the science was "settled"!!???

So............why do the most important scientific organizations keep ******* with the data?




BREAKING New Climate Data Rigging Scandal Rocks US Government - OSNet Daily

 

[skookerasbil]

The scandal of fiddled global warming data - Telegraph

 

[skookerasbil]

Climate Change Emails Reveal Rigged Consensus - WSJ

 

[skookerasbil]

Climategate these e-mails explicitly refer to falsification and rigging of data Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

 

[skookerasbil]

NASA.........as corrupt as it gets in government.

New Climate Data Rigging Scandal Rocks US Government

 

[skookerasbil]

Red Ice Radio - Tim Ball - Climategate The Anthropogenic Global Warming Fraud

 

[mamooth]

Skook, endlessly spamming the same phony conspiracy theories from kook bloggers won't make them any less crazy or dishonest. After all, the birthers and 9/11 truthers spam conspiracy theories as well. Has it gotten them anywhere?

You've got Republicans leaving the reservation now and spending big money against you. You've even lost FOX. Flee Denierstan now. Beat the rush, and get on the roads before they jam up with refugees.

 

[skookerasbil]

so much gheyness...............

 

[skookerasbil]

Skook, endlessly spamming the same phony conspiracy theories from kook bloggers won't make them any less crazy or dishonest. After all, the birthers and 9/11 truthers spam conspiracy theories as well. Has it gotten them anywhere?

You've got Republicans leaving the reservation now and spending big money against you. You've even lost FOX. Flee Denierstan now. Beat the rush, and get on the roads before they jam up with refugees.

meh


"Conspiracy theories"!!!


Its all there in black and white as we used to say in the old days!!


The NOAA even admits screwing with the data s0n!! >>> NOAA Confirms Model-Defying Global Temperature Stagnation 2012 Was Among Coolest In 21st Century NoTricksZone

As usual.............you lose.


Oh.....and would you like me to post up the poll on how important global warming is to people?




[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/Kool-aid-mobile-wallpaper.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[skookerasbil]

NASA.............nailed in 2014 fudging the data >>>

Global warming data FAKED by government to fit climate change fictions - NaturalNews.com



[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/happy_man_laughing_5.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[Wry Catcher]

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

Tucker Carlson? Is it true he has been appointed to be the ring master at Fox to announce each clown as they depart from the clown care for the debates?