1907 Weather Review Explained The Purpose Of This Blog

ScreenHunter_811 Jul. 04 09.21 ScreenHunter_809 Jul. 04 09.21ScreenHunter_812 Jul. 04 09.23

docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/035/mwr-035-01-0007b.pdf

About stevengoddard

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

6 Responses to 1907 Weather Review Explained The Purpose Of This Blog

  1. Cathy says:

    As always it is better to have ethical, honest researchers than the lying ‘scientists’ we have today. This whole generation has been corrupted by government $.

  2. _Jim says:

    Wow … even 107 years ago ‘they’ realized the tenacity of the scoundrels to ‘cook the weather books’.

    – – – – – –

    January. 1907. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW

    . . . . . . . IS NOT HONESTY THE WISEST POLICY

    It is wrong to mutilate or suppress the record of an observation of a phenomenon of nature, but it is also wrong to make bad use of the record. In fact, it is the misuse of meteorological data, not the observing or publishing, that constitutes a crime against the community.

    Observation and careful research are to be encouraged as useful. Misrepresentations are to be avoided as harmful. The “Independent Press” as the “Voice of the People” should be not only “Vox Populi” but “Vox Dei”, repressing all cheats and hoaxes, defending the truth and the bet interests of the whole nation as against the self-interest of a few. -C.A.

    – – – – – – –

  3. gregole says:

    Wow. Nothing new going on today – it still stinks but is not unique to our time. Liars and charlatans have been with us forever.

    Incidentally, is C.A. the author of the 1907 article, in any way possibly an ancestor or yours? Just kidding! In any case, just as there have always been fraud, there have always been a few people interested in the real truth.

  4. Eliza says:

    My dad was a meteorologist. I never occurred to me that they would torture data though, in those times especially. Now its obvious why but then for what reason?

    • _Jim says:

      Allocation of farm subsidies? Cheating on rainfall reporting? Trying to be the first or highest on reported temperature(s)? Making ‘bets’ pay off in a particular direction or for a particular result? Politicians in the big cities needing higher ‘numbers’ for some twisted purpose?

  5. Leon says:

    But that’s the “old way” of doing science, as well as the old attitude regarding the press.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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