NASA Climate Data Inferior to Climategate Data, Space Agency Says

So much for James Hansen's GISS data and the NOAA data that predicts gloom and doom on a monthly basis; we've already seen multiple instances where this data has been proven untrustworthy.

Scandal-ridden UEA CRU data is 'more accurate' than the data invalidated by the Climategate scandal.

It doesn't take a scientist to look at this mess and discern that it's nothing but a political propaganda campaign and witch hunt against all scientists not willing to go along with the imaginary "consensus."

NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched Climate-gate data.

E-mail messages obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that NASA concluded that its own climate findings were inferior to those maintained by both the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) -- the scandalized source of the leaked Climate-gate e-mails -- and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center.

The e-mails from 2007 reveal that when a USA Today reporter asked if NASA's data "was more accurate" than other climate-change data sets, NASA's Dr. Reto A. Ruedy replied with an unequivocal no. He said "the National Climatic Data Center's procedure of only using the best stations is more accurate," admitting that some of his own procedures led to less accurate readings.

[From FOXNews.com - NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits]

Statistician Slams 'Hockey Stick' Graph

Speaks for itself...I've written many times about the statistical manipulations used to exaggerate and CREATE warming when there is none. You've all been scammed and fed a lie.

A key piece of evidence in climate change science was slammed as “exaggerated” on Wednesday by the UK’s leading statistician, in a vindication of claims that global warming sceptics have been making for years.

Professor David Hand, president of the Royal Statistical Society, said that a graph shaped like an ice hockey stick that has been used to represent the recent rise in global temperatures had been compiled using “inappropriate” methods.

“It used a particular statistical technique that exaggerated the effect [of recent warming],” he said.

The criticism came as part of a report published on Wednesday that found the scientists behind the “Climategate” e-mail scandal had behaved “honestly and fairly” and showed “no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice”.

[From FT.com / Global Economy - Global warming graph attacked by study]

AP Covers Climate Data Revision, Slams Skeptics

Trying to walk the truth high-wire, the AP is trying to prove its journalistic integrity by covering the fact that the U.N.’s IPCC must examine and likely revise its temperature data. Why must the IPCC examine and revise its own data? Because it has been shown to be full of errors and alarmist hype, and we’re using their Nobel-winning, erroneous reports to drive global governance of carbon emissions. This global governance of carbon will cost each person in our country dearly. We must ENSURE that it’s not all a lie and we must not simply trust some government-anointed “consensus” because they said, “trust us, we’re right...skeptics are wrong.” Oh yeah, prove us skeptics wrong BASED ON scientific data. The paltry number comprising the “consensus” has been shown to lack integrity in recent accumulating scandals in climatology.

Of course, the point the AP misses (what a surprise) is that THIS RENEWED SELF-SCRUTINY by the IPCC WAS A RESULT OF SKEPTICISM! If skeptics weren’t asking for raw data from the “consensus” to examine (and researching Hansen’s claims, and reading ten years of CRU emails, and so on), none of the errors, manipulations, cover-ups, obstructions, and lies would have been discovered, and the global warming scare cult would go along as it has for years—unchecked and unquestioned.

But, predictably, the AP takes the alarmist’s advocacy tactic of criticizing the skeptic or “denier,” if you will. Ad hominem attacks refuse to address the central issue: Show me unquestionable proof that atmospheric carbon has warmed the Earth in the last 200 years and continues to do so.

It's interesting to see the contrast between the AP's story and the one from Fox News. Fox actually gives some time to the scandals that the AP just tries to gloss over and bury.

GENEVA -- World weather agencies have agreed to collect more precise temperature data to improve climate change science, officials said Wednesday, as U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged environment ministers to reject efforts by skeptics to derail a global climate deal.

[From UN weather meeting agrees to refine climate data - Forbes.com]

Just one year ago a pronouncement from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) was all that was needed to move nations and change environmental policies around the world. But today, the panel's creditability and even its very existence are in question.

In the wake of its swift and devastating fall from grace, the panel says it will announce "within the next few days" that it plans to make significant though as yet unexplained changes in how it does business.

[From FOXNews.com - EXCLUSIVE: U.N. Climate Panel to Announce Significant Changes]

Obama's New Climate Agency Czar Suppressed Data

The scandals relating to all things manmade-climate-change continue to mount. This new NOAA agency was just announced several days ago, and it turns out that the appointed head of the nascent agency is responsible for some data obstructionism of his own in relation to his work with the IPCC and the scientists at East Anglia, including the disgraced Phil Jones.

The scientist who has been put in charge of the Commerce Department's new climate change office is coming under attack from both sides of the global warming debate over his handling of what they say is contradictory scientific data related to the subject.

Thomas Karl, 58, was appointed to oversee the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center, an ambitious new office that will collect climate change data and disseminate it to businesses and communities.

***

But Roger Pielke Sr., a climatologist affiliated with the University of Colorado who has crossed horns with Karl in the past, says his appointment was a mistake. He accused Karl of suppressing data he submitted for the IPCC's most recent report on climate change and having a very narrow view of its causes.

The IPCC is charged with reviewing scientific data on climate change and providing policy makers and others with an assessment of current knowledge.

[From FOXNews.com - New Climate Agency Head Tried to Suppress Data, Critics Charge]

NASA Alarmist: Last Decade Warmest

So, how does this jibe with disgraced CRU (IPCC) scientist Phil Jones' admission just yesterday that there has been no significant warming for 15 years and other studies that show no warming since 1998 even with increasing CO2? Good question. Stories like these keep the warming alarmists out there believing in the myth, even after numerous scandals and empirical evidence to the contrary.

Let's look at the problems with the proclamations in this article (since alarmists will just accept what it says without question). The first problem is the source--alarmist radical Dr. James Hansen at NASA's GISS. Much has been written about him by skeptics, including in this blog. He is the one who said that oil executives should be put on trial and wrote a letter to Thulsa Doom Obama urging a carbon tax to redistribute wealth. Sound like a level-headed, unbiased climate scientist to you, whose only concern is scientific truth?

Next, let's look at his past assertions and the erroneous data behind them. Hansen is the scientist who called October 2008 the hottest October on record and then had to publicly recant that contention after mathematical mistakes were found in his data (and those errors were ONLY DISCOVERED because SKEPTICS SCRUTINIZED HIS NUMBERS). Hansen has proven time and again that he is a climate radical, and therefore, biased. Amazing that skeptics are often denigrated (even after being vindicated in their scrutiny of his work), while chumps like Hansen are just continually accepted as 'bringers of truth.' No one has put two-and-two together here. Why isn't the media questioning this proclamation after his past mistakes are a matter of record?

The problems with surface temperature measurements and sweeping contentions drawn from those data (such as the contention made here) were just recently discussed in the news. First, the "next climate scandal" discussed NOAA's >75% reduction in temperature monitoring stations that occurred in 1990 (and, surprise...most of those were stations in cooler areas). Second, the "urban island effect" is a factor, though it is often poo-poo'd away by alarmists as irrelevant. However, if you've ever watched professional tennis events like the Australian Open or U.S. Open, the players and commentators will often discuss how much warmer it is on the court, simply because of the reflected sun and heat energy coming off the concrete and onto players (this is almost common sense). If you live in a hot part of the country, do an experiment yourself; wait until the hottest part of the day (usually 1600 or so) and see which is warmer: your driveway or the grass in your yard? Use your hand or thermometer...doesn't matter. Clearly, urban areas will be hotter than non-urban areas, regardless of how alarmists might try to cover up that fact. An accurate temperature measurement in or around urban areas is problematic.

The next problem with Hansen and GISS is that, much like the scandal-ridden CRU's refusal to release data, Hansen has continually blocked attempts to release data for independent verification under the Freedom of Information Act. NASA is currently being sued to release more data. If they ever do, I assert that skeptical scrutiny will uncover more errors, just as they have before with Hansen and all the recent IPCC report errors.

The point here is that these calculations (or any others) by the radical alarmist, Dr. Hansen, should not be given full credence absent careful scrutiny. Unfortunately, the alarmists and media organizations with interests (like the BBC) in continuing the global warming myth will simply accept what GISS says without the slightest question. Much like the now debunked CRU data and IPCC reports, GISS's proclamations will be taken as gospel by those who don't want their religious-like belief in manmade climate change disrupted.

The 2000s were the warmest decade on record according to analysis by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).

Goddard's surface temperature record shows an upward trend of about 0.2°C (0.36°F) per decade over the past three decades and a rise of 0.8°C (1.5°F) since 1880 since reliable record-keeping began in 1880.

2005 was the warmest year of the past decade and, by NASA's estimate, is the warmest year since 1880 (the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization gives 1998 that title). 2009 was only slightly cooler than 2005, although it was the warmest year on record in the Southern Hemisphere. 2010 is expected to be even warmer due, in part, to the return of El Niño, a cyclical phenomenon.

[From The warmest decade on record]

IPCC Scientist Uses U.N. Guards to Silence Reporter: Climategate

Still believe those Climategate revelations are meaningless? If they're so meaningless, why do people like this U.N. dufus and Al Gore continue to avoid debate at all costs by resorting to armed goons and turning off microphones?

In the words of the great Jedi Master Yoda to the evil Emperor Palpatine:

"If so powerful you are... why leave?"

A Stanford Professor has used United Nation security officers to silence a journalist asking him “inconvenient questions” during a press briefing at the climate change conference in Copenhagen.

Professor Stephen Schneider’s assistant requested armed UN security officers who held film maker Phelim McAleer, ordered him to stop filming and prevented further questioning after the press conference where the Stanford academic was launching a book.

McAleer, a veteran journalist and film maker, has recently made a documentary “Not Evil Just Wrong’ which takes a sceptical look at the science and politics behind Global Warming concerns.

[From Big Government » Blog Archive » UN Security Stops Journalist’s Questions About ClimateGate]

Climategate: UEA to "release data"

One problem, of course. They cannot release the RAW DATA, because it was destroyed. All they have are their manipulated figures--as in manipulated to "hide" cooling using a "trick."

The U-turn by the university follows a week of controversy after the emergence of hundreds of leaked emails, "stolen" by hackers and published online, triggered claims that the academics had massaged statistics.

In a statement welcomed by climate change sceptics, the university said it would make all the data accessible as soon as possible, once its Climatic Research Unit (CRU) had negotiated its release from a range of non-publication agreements.

[From Climategate: University of East Anglia U-turn in climate change row - Telegraph]

Raw Climate Data Destroyed: Climategate

Yes, that's right. All that the gang at East Anglia's CRU have left are their 'modified' climate figures--those that were subjected to a "trick" to "hide" the decline in temperatures. The original, raw data cannot be inspected by other scientists now, because it was DESTROYED. We're modifying our very social and political systems based on the alarmism of these "scientists," and they TOSS THE RAW DATA ASIDE? What scientist EVER does that? NONE.

This is so openly bullshit that it's not even funny. So, where are the hard questions from our "media?" Our joke of a media?

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

[From Climate change data dumped - Times Online ]

What they predicted; what actually happened

Similar to the wrong-headed, dire hurricane predictions over the past few years (where AGW was going to dissolve the coastline through high-powered cyclones), NOAA forecasters (also fueled by the global warming frenzy) forecasted a "warm winter" just a few months ago...

Warm Winter Predicted For United States:

ScienceDaily (Oct. 11, 2007) — NOAA forecasters are calling for above-average temperatures over most of the country and a continuation of drier-than-average conditions across already drought-stricken parts of the Southwest and Southeast in its winter outlook for the United States, announced at the 2007-2008 Winter Fuels Outlook Conference in Washington, D.C October 9, 2007.

Now, let's review a small sample of what actually happened (because the winter harshness was extensive):

NOAA: Coolest Winter Since 2001 for U.S., Globe :

The average temperature across both the contiguous U.S. and the globe during climatological winter (December 2007-February 2008) was the coolest since 2001, according to scientists at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. In terms of winter precipitation, Pacific storms, bringing heavy precipitation to large parts of the West, produced high snowpack that will provide welcome runoff this spring.

• Now, reputations fall like dominoes
• Arctic = Melting; North Da-ka-ka-kota = FREEZING
• Iowa snow 22 inches ABOVE NORMAL
• Recent climate-related headlines

Surprise, surprise! Global warming completely reversed in one year. The climate CHANGES all the time--go figure! It’s not “climate change”…it’s the changing climate. The climate can not be expressed as a flat-line graph; it goes up and down and has done so for 4.5 billion years. Notice this piece about snow cover at the bottom:

While there has been little trend in snow cover extent during the winter season since records began in the late 1960s, spring snow cover extent has been sharply lower in the past two decades as global temperatures have increased.

What they’re letting out of the bag here (reluctantly) is that all the hoopla about “loss of snow cover and ice” is based on a baseline measurement range that is not yet 50 years in width. Do you realize how SHORT that period of time is when stacked against the Earth’s estimated life of 4.5 billion years???!!! Any medical research with such shady statistics would be laughed at roundly by scientists, and no treatments would ever result from such garbage research.

As Newsbusters correctly points out:

Hmmm. These guys can't accurately predict climate conditions two months out, but we should radically alter our economy based on their forecasts decades into the future?

Residents hate winter, but media continues 'unusual' stratagem

Despite the empirical evidence (along with the overwhelming data) that shows "global warming" is a NON-EVENT), the media folks continue trying to preserve their dignities and reputations by explaining that this winter is 'unusual'...meaning 'caused by global warming.' So this is their tactic--dismiss the cold-assed winter as anthropogenic.

Please people! Notice only that the winter is UNUSUALLY cold; try not to notice the COLD part. Remember, global warming causes both the empirical warmth we've seen in the summers, but it also causes any unusual cold we've seen this winter, according to the socialists who want to save you from yourself. Here, have a light bulb and feel better.

If you believe that then you're misguided. Please don't be a media/politician-controlled sheep-zombie.

My Way News - Northern Residents Lament Snowy Winter:

CHICAGO (AP) - Betty Stewart's Tuesday started with her stepping into a slushy puddle just long enough to get her sock wet and having her newspaper blown from her hands and getting soaked on the ground. "Enough already," she said.

Like many others, the 30-year-old receptionist has had it with winter and what seems like unusually wet weather.
"Coming to work, people are mad at the world," said Olivia Young, a customer service associate in downtown Chicago. Winter, she said, "just puts you in an overwrought situation."

Experts say people in some northern states aren't just looking to complain; the weather this winter truly is worse in some ways.

In Boston, for example, 49.6 inches of snow has fallen this winter, or 19.3 inches more than normal. In Madison, Wis., where it never had snowed more than 76.6 inches, the city already had seen 77 inches by Feb. 12.