NASA / NOAA Climate Data Is Fake Data

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
43
48
64


Tony Heller -- NOAA has almost no temperature data from Africa, and none from central Africa. They simply made up the record temperatures.

Related from John Bates:
In the following sections, I provide the details of how Mr. Karl failed to disclose critical information to NOAA, Science Magazine, and Chairman Smith regarding the datasets used in K15. I have extensive documentation that provides independent verification of the story below. I also provide my suggestions for how we might keep such a flagrant manipulation of scientific integrity guidelines and scientific publication standards from happening in the future.
Or read the non-sciencey version in the Daily Mail. Grab a coffee.


NOAA shows the Earth red hot in December, with record heat in central Africa.


NOAA has almost no temperature data from Africa, and none from central Africa. They simply made up the record temperatures.











Satellites show that NOAA’s” record hot regions in Africa were actually close to normal.

Gavin Schmidt at NASA claims the imaginary NOAA data has been replicated by many other institutions.



However, when Gavin is confronted about his obviously bogus temperature graphs, he defends by saying “it is not my data, I get it from NOAA.” In fact, all of the supposedly independent agencies get the lion’s share of their data from NOAA.



NASA and NOAA are engaged in the biggest fraud in science history, and this needs to end now that criminals are no longer in control of our government. Under the Trump administration, government employees stand to make huge amounts of money by whistleblowing fraud. Contact Kent Clizbe for details.


https://realclimatescience.com/2017/02/nasa-noaa-climate-data-is-fake-data/











Similarities to Jim Jones and the Cult of Climate Change –

1. Climate doomsayers believe they possess truths about the past, present and future and their truths cannot be disputed by anyone.

2. Doomsayers refuse to debate their belief. They call their dogma “settled science” and attack any critics that dare to whisper in the dark.

3. Just like a cult, doomsayers has a formal doctrine-setting body. The reports by the “ruling” body are thought to be the main source of authority and the texts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are quoted as unholy scripture.,

4. Liberal doomsayers make you believe in their falsehoods. Bruce Jenner is now a woman. Rachel Dolezal is black. Elizabeth Warren is native American. The integrity of these people is just mind boggling. I remember when Obama told us, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” And he said it with a straight face! Well, guess what Obama? My health plan isn’t the one I used to pay $225/month for. I’m paying $500 for second rate coverage. My car insurance is still $25/month (from Insurance Panda) and my renters insurance is still $10/month, thank god. So don’t you dare be messing those up too, Obama! The left lives in la-la land.

5. Staying with the Jonestown analogy, the climate change alarmists have created mythologies intentionally built on lies and half-truths. The fallacy can be ascribed as an appeal to everyday experiences, giving the listener some sense of truth-based teaching to mix with the soup of confusion.

Just as Jones and his small leadership group built lies on a foundation of lies and misinformation, the “sky-is-falling-crowd” spreads hoaxes to support their form of theology.
 

Wake

Electoral Member
Feb 17, 2017
112
0
16
Even more on the David Rose bombshell article: How NOAA Software Spins the AGW Game

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/02...article-how-noaa-software-spins-the-agw-game/
Oddly enough there are literally dozens of scientists who have written books disproving AGW and very few supporting it. NOAA can get away with this citing anonymity of the sources but if you write a book your name is out there for all to see as Dr. Mann has discovered to his dismay. I believe that Dr. Mann's error was honest and nothing more than a mistaken hypothesis. But Climategate wasn't a mistake. It was a planned counterfeiting of data to fit a preconceived result. And a as was shown the Pause-gate is nothing but more of the same.

No steps have been taken against scientists willfully destroying data that they used to counterfeit papers for that agreed that AGW was real. So why shouldn't they do it again?

We have a VERY large question - where and why did climate change ever become a subject in which oil companies etc. could be held accountable?
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,197
113
...and very fake data news
;)
...but UNtruedoh will like that tax anyway though
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
3
36
Corrected!

NASA/NOA/FBI/CIA/DHS/IRS/BBC/EU/GCHQ/NATO/NAFTA/TPP/CNN/UN Data Is Fake Data

Everybody's a liar!

Everybody!
 

Wake

Electoral Member
Feb 17, 2017
112
0
16
Corrected!

NASA/NOA/FBI/CIA/DHS/IRS/BBC/EU/GCHQ/NATO/NAFTA/TPP/CNN/UN Data Is Fake Data

Everybody's a liar!

Everybody!
Can you at least try to make it a discussion based upon some science?

We now know that the NOAA data was totally incorrect. For one point they did not correct it for the massive growth of urban areas. These areas naturally have large increases in temperature from the increases in concrete. There are even photos about on the web showing these temperature monitoring stations sitting within inches of galvanized steel sheds or in the middle of parking lots. They gain MOST of their temperature monitoring from these hugely increasing areas such as Tokyo, Singapore, Moscow, New York City and the like.

If this sort of monitoring that's all well and fine but you MUST correct these sources. Open forest and farm land closely adjacent to these areas in fact show no heating whatsoever.

Some sources correcting for the urban grown say that no heating beyond the normal chaotic weather patterns exist. And that instead of us being in a warming period we are actually in a cooling period.

At least one study looking at the actual effects of mixed gases in the atmosphere at varying altitudes shows that CO2 rather than a greenhouse gas actually is a coolant. (Something I have been arguing for years)

What about the melting glaciers? What about them - they expanded during the Little Ice Age and they haven't retreated to the levels they were then.

What about the rise in sea levels? We presently have had an increase in the land area in the world. In the Solomon Islands - a group thought to be most in danger from rising sea levels, they have actually gained land area. My own observations of San Francisco Bay is that the low tide dries out more area than it used to. This COULD be because of rising land, filling mud flats or some other natural process. Certainly on the San Francisco Piers that have been there since around 1880, the tide gauges do not show any increase in sea levels.

If the atmosphere WERE heating the oceans would be as well. And if they were heating they would be releasing one HELL of a lot more CO2 than man is making. Certainly the permafrost in the northers continental areas is melting away and that measurably has been spewing CO2 into the atmosphere.

So where is all of this CO2 going? Well, if it is cooling,rather than the oceans releasing CO2 they would be taking it up. Perhaps that's where all of this excess CO2 is going. It most assuredly is not appearing in the atmosphere.

So any and all of this is open to discussion. But if you're going to discuss it then please be honest about it and not use a religious belief in Man-Made Climate Change.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
25,323
5,947
113
B.C.
Can you at least try to make it a discussion based upon some science?

We now know that the NOAA data was totally incorrect. For one point they did not correct it for the massive growth of urban areas. These areas naturally have large increases in temperature from the increases in concrete. There are even photos about on the web showing these temperature monitoring stations sitting within inches of galvanized steel sheds or in the middle of parking lots. They gain MOST of their temperature monitoring from these hugely increasing areas such as Tokyo, Singapore, Moscow, New York City and the like.

If this sort of monitoring that's all well and fine but you MUST correct these sources. Open forest and farm land closely adjacent to these areas in fact show no heating whatsoever.

Some sources correcting for the urban grown say that no heating beyond the normal chaotic weather patterns exist. And that instead of us being in a warming period we are actually in a cooling period.

At least one study looking at the actual effects of mixed gases in the atmosphere at varying altitudes shows that CO2 rather than a greenhouse gas actually is a coolant. (Something I have been arguing for years)

What about the melting glaciers? What about them - they expanded during the Little Ice Age and they haven't retreated to the levels they were then.

What about the rise in sea levels? We presently have had an increase in the land area in the world. In the Solomon Islands - a group thought to be most in danger from rising sea levels, they have actually gained land area. My own observations of San Francisco Bay is that the low tide dries out more area than it used to. This COULD be because of rising land, filling mud flats or some other natural process. Certainly on the San Francisco Piers that have been there since around 1880, the tide gauges do not show any increase in sea levels.

If the atmosphere WERE heating the oceans would be as well. And if they were heating they would be releasing one HELL of a lot more CO2 than man is making. Certainly the permafrost in the northers continental areas is melting away and that measurably has been spewing CO2 into the atmosphere.

So where is all of this CO2 going? Well, if it is cooling,rather than the oceans releasing CO2 they would be taking it up. Perhaps that's where all of this excess CO2 is going. It most assuredly is not appearing in the atmosphere.

So any and all of this is open to discussion. But if you're going to discuss it then please be honest about it and not use a religious belief in Man-Made Climate Change.
Don't sweat it Wake there are none so blind as those that refuse to see .
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,197
113
Was the increase less then the margin of error?

"But while the WMO study found El Nino contributed to the record-breaking temperatures, the organization's secretary general said manmade carbon emissions remain the driving force behind the earth's warming."

holy crap
that is highlarious

12000 years ago we had two mile high glaciers at both ends of the planet, and the water has since come up over 300 feet...(though not much at all in the last couple hundred years...)

CO2 eh?
HA HA! that's funny
:)
 
Last edited: