NOAA/NASA Temperature Corrections Are Junk Science At Its Worst

NOAA/GISS temperature corrections are larger than the claimed trend, and actually reverse the polarity. No serious scientist would attempt to publish graphs which have an error bar larger than the trend, much less present it as settled science without any error bars.

ScreenHunter_1833 Jan. 15 14.00

The standard excuse is that someone wrote a paper once about TOBS, but the actual temperature adjustments are linear and implausible under any vaguely legitimate theory. These adjustments are fraud, intended to create the appearance of a non-existent warming.

ScreenHunter_1818 Jan. 15 10.05

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to NOAA/NASA Temperature Corrections Are Junk Science At Its Worst

  1. Jason Calley says:

    I live in north Florida near towns with names like “Mandarin” and “Orange Park”. One hundred and twenty years ago, this area was home to large commercial orange groves. Now it is too cold to grow citrus on a commercial scale. You may have some sheltered microclimates where individuals have orange trees — but not on a commercial scale, not any more. To see commercial groves, you will need to hope in your car and drive two hours south on the Interstate.

    I have asked several CAGW cultists why that is. How can it be that people used to have citrus groves here, but now it is too cold? The only answer I ever get is hand waving and subject changing.

    • Dave N says:

      Usually it’s a case of “that’s your area; we’re talking globally”, right after they exclaim that prolonged heat waves in one city or another are a sign of AGW. They’re total morons.

    • weather says:

      It’s probably because more cold outbreaks now reach the area when compared to 100 years ago. The planet is warming up (increased energy), and this allows the cold air to be released from the Arctic closed circulation and it’s then pushed farther south by the strengthened Polar Jet.

      • In 1974 scientists blamed the deep dips in the jet stream on global cooling. Now they blame them on global warming. Real geniuses.

        Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world.,9171,944914,00.html

        • weather says:

          Warm air from below results in the ‘expansion’. We can follow the sequence. And we have been following it for a few winters since the 2011 event. Some years we’re luckier than others because of coincidences with the longwave pattern. I’m optimistic that it won’t get much worse.

    • Latitude says:

      Jason, in the 1800’s there were citrus groves as far north as Virginia…..

  2. gator69 says:

    Something the alarmists will never admit.

  3. Fascists lie and rewrite history. The cult of warm is no different than the cult of Adolf or Joe in this regard. Stupid is now science.

  4. NikFromNYC says:

    No wonder skeptical seminars are full of seniors: they alone are old enough to remember hotter times, personally. Yet since the reputation of colleges is still wrapped up in warmism, down to the very core of what academia is supposed to stand for, which is as bastions of reason, inertia carries them way out on a limb now. Meanwhile their students waste their time building imaginary social media resumes that nobody cares about except a few useless fly by night startups, and they are still so far oblivious about the smartest people on the planet informally boycotting their generation of unemployably obnoxious Gorebots. Already the liberal arts departments that contain half the faculty are now suffering a severe loss of liberal arts majors on their way to being suddenly ejected from campus completely now that science departments bring in most of the money. The global warming hoax is but a little mouse that is subjecting a huge house of cards to demolition.

    -=NikFromNYC=-, age 48

    • Eric Simpson says:

      Also, senior citizens remember the storms. Looking back decades, seniors remember that it’s just the same now as it ever was, or it was hotter then. And stormier.

      It was hotter and stormier decades ago. There’s something totally afoul with the agw thesis, and with their data. Just because they manipulate their data to show that it’s hotter now than it was… doesn’t mean that that’s true.

      • weather says:

        Yes, they remember impressive events but do they understand how weather works?

        • gator69 says:

          Who are you? Not even the IPCC can predict weather or climates, and yet you claim to have all the answers. A sure mark of lunacy.

        • weather says:

          I predict the weather every day. I don’t claim to have all the answers, in fact I’m not even convinced that we have enough data yet to make the predictions that have been made.

          There might still be increased outflow in the future due to the warming and increased convection (dry air entrainment) or a step up in the ocean’s absorption rate. I’m not a climatologist.

        • gator69 says:

          “I’m not a climatologist.”

          Obviously. And no scientist either, as scientists do not use words like ‘denier’.

        • weather says:

          It’s not politically correct to call you a denier because that’s a derogatory term.

        • gator69 says:

          It is anti-science, and you have shown your hand.

  5. Descartes Jr says:

    Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley compared IPCC-warmists to NAZI-officers. I agree.

  6. Eric Simpson says:

    These adjustments are fraud, intended to create the appearance of a non-existent warming.

    And while the warmists may give a plausible basis for a particular adjustment, what doesn’t withstand any conceivable muster is that ALL THE ADJUSTMENTS BENEFIT THE WARMISTS! Not a single adjustment of any kind has ever been made to the benefit of our side.

    Oh, I know, it’s all about exaggerating the bull$hit. Al Gore says they need to “over-represent how dangerous it is.” Making any type of adjustment to the benefit of the “deniers” would be to under-represent how dangerous it is. So, as far as I now of, there have been no adjustments at all of that kind. None. Yes, the scare mongering Chicken Littles have over-represented the danger alright. Because there’s NO danger. It’s all disingenuous bs and flat out lies. Nothing more. The Prophets of Doom, to further their leftist agenda, have been trying to scare the people, and the children, for decades. It’s shameless, and probably criminal. Now we see that every single prediction of disaster they’ve ever made has not even come close to coming true. And that holds true for their laughable climate models. A complete joke.

    • Jason Calley says:

      Hey Eric, I wish I had the details in front of me, but I remember an amusing incident a few years ago. A particular data set had been “adjusted” to show a warming trend. When the monotonic nature of the adjustments was pointed out, one of the CAGW crowd replied that (paraphrasing) they “couldn’t have changed the trend because all their adjustments averaged out to zero.” Well, it was, in fact, true that their adjustments “averaged out to zero” but they had most definitely changed the trend to warming. They had placed all their negative changes in the early data and all their positive changes in the later data. That sort of obfuscation is one more reason why we know they are not just mistaken, they are lying.

    • weather says:

      according to wiki

      The severe cold causes high mortality among the emerald ash borer. The progressive loss of ash trees in North America due to this insect has probably been delayed by this deep freeze.

  7. Andy DC says:

    After this January, the “adjustments” will have to be exponential to keep up with the extreme cold.

  8. Phil Jones says:

    There could be a mile high Glacier covering Canada and parts of Minnesota and they’d still be harping on about the need to reduce CO2…

  9. SMS says:

    The crime here is that NOAA relies on a poorly justified study done by Tom Peterson on UHI. Tom Peterson’s poorly justified study showed that UHI is insignificant. NOAA currently uses this study to justify not including any negative adjustments for UHI in their temperature records.

    Steve McIntyre eviscerated this study, showing how incredibly ignorant and biased it was in a very and simple and elegant way; leaving no doubt that UHI plays a powerful role in adding temperature to thermometers everywhere.

    To use the Tom Peterson study as a reason to not include UHI in any temperature adjustment after reading Steve McIntyre’s review is criminal on the part of NOAA. Absolutely criminal. You only have to read the review to know how badly NOAA is acting.

    Go Here to see;

    • weather says:

      They look at the trends and not just the actual temperatures but I don’t understand why deniers don’t bring up the point that temperatures can’t be consistently recorded accurately. Every few minutes you’re going to get a tenth of a degree change during most time periods.

      • SMS says:

        Weather, which side of “stupid” were you born on? When you look at rural temperature records, there is no warming trend. So what trend are you talking about? Once you take the adjustments out of the temperature record, we are cooling as a planet. Pull you head out boy.

    • weather says:

      The thirty-year trend is slightly up, but it’s early in the AGW phenomenon. As GHGs increase so will the temperatures, at least in the tropospheric profile. What could turn this around and give us a downward trend? The solar cycles might rescue us, because the plasma in the interior of the sun has never moved so slowly as it does now. (Of course, we don’t have a lot of past data about this.) As the plasma slows there’s is a lag but within a decade or so there’s less solar activity.

      • gator69 says:

        “The thirty-year trend is slightly up, but it’s early in the AGW phenomenon. As GHGs increase so will the temperatures…”

        So sayeth the “not a know it all”, who is also admittedly “not a climatologist”, and who does not realize that those who may have questions about a scientific hypothesis are not called “deniers”.

        Enough already.

        • weather says:

          You’re right we shouldn’t discuss this. It makes people angry. Within a few years there will be no doubt anyone’s mind.

      • SMS says:

        AGW is Logarithmic, not exponential. There is no bang left in the AGW phenomenon. As soon as the AMO switches, temperatures are going down and people like you aren’t going to be able to find enough rocks to hide under.

  10. Phil Jones says:

    All one has to do is LOOK at temperature readings as SG has pointed out here… NO need for some elaborate Hoax of a study $$ or a $$ Computer Model when all one had to do is take a few readings…

    Once again we have Hoaxers relying on manipulation rather than Real World…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s