Fraudster Katherine Hayhoe Lying About Satellite Data

One of the charts, which used data from upper troposphere, appeared to show that the climate isn’t warming as much as scientists would expect. I checked that out with Hayhoe, who told me this is a common data manipulation: The upper troposphere is above the area of the atmosphere where most carbon dioxide accumulates, meaning it’s not a representative way to measure climate change. Surface temperatures, from the lower troposphere, are what we experience. (After this article was first published, Hayhoe wrote me that, more importantly, there were errors in troposphere data, which are commonly misused by climate skeptics.)

Why so many who doubt climate change here? (Opinion) –

Skeptics don’t use upper troposphere data, they use lower troposphere data.

The predicted mid-upper troposphere hot spot is due to the exact opposite of what she is saying. CO2 mixes evenly through the troposphere, but H2O stays closer to the surface. Thus an increase in CO2 will warm the mid-upper troposphere more than the surface.

The lead scientists for both sets of satellite data say that troposphere warming has been well below what is predicted by climate models.

ScreenHunter_2671 Aug. 07 13.58

Climate Analysis | Remote Sensing Systems

Katherine Hayhoe is either incompetent, dishonest, or both.  She seems to have no qualms about lying or telling utter nonsense to the press.

About stevengoddard

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

29 Responses to Fraudster Katherine Hayhoe Lying About Satellite Data

  1. Henry P says:

    there is no man made global warming

    none whatsoever

    (100% correlation for the drop in minima)

  2. omanuel says:

    Thank you, Steven Goddard aka Tony Heller, for speaking frankly about seven decades of deceit disguised as 97%-consensus science.”

    After 1945 we had only comic book science in the West, but suspected nothing until late November 2009 when Climategate emails exposed the tip of the iceberg of deceit that had been growing in federal research agencies since nations and national academies of science were united into a giant Orwellian Ministry of Consensus Science (UN)Truths on October 24, 1945.

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) best illustrates the growth of deceit after seventy years (1945-2015).

    DOE now denies the source of energy that powers the universe and causes it to expand and fill interstellar space with hydrogen – NEUTRON REPULSION in cores of:

    1. Heavy atoms like Uranium
    2. Some planets like Jupiter
    3. Ordinary stars like the Sun
    4. Galaxies like the Milky Way
    5. The now expanding Cosmos

    Click to access Solar_Energy.pdf

    My research mentor, the late Prof. Paul K. Kuroda, tried to prevent this deception by secretly retaining a copy of Japan’s successful atomic bomb design for fifty-seven years (1945-2002):

  3. Andy DC says:

    None of these “climate scientists” are anything resembling scientists. No true scientist would claim that the science is settled, especially when virtually every past prediction based on their hypothesis has failed miserably.

    They are instead propagandists for an obvious political cause, world government and world communism. Taking away whatever is left of our freedom. Redistributing whatever is left of our wealth. Giving us the lifestyle of a 16th Century serf.

    • It doesn’t matter. President Trump will be cutting off their funding and they will have to flip burgers for $15 / hour

      • Robertv says:

        Who would want to hire these incompetent dishonest people for $15 / hour ?

      • AndyG55 says:

        Seriously, Morgan… !!!!

        I’m sure most proprietors would rather hire a pimple faced junior or cute young lass as burger flippers.

        Janitors.. you might be on the mark !

        After all, BS is their trade.!!!!

  4. willys36 says:

    Sorry, never heard of Kathy Hayhole but if she works for the Federal Government, by definition she is lying.

    • rah says:

      She predicted that Hurricane severity would increase with warming. It has gone down instead.

      She predicted that the drought in Texas would be permanent. It didn’t, and when the rains and flooding changed she changed her story to say that the flooding was a manifestation of GW etc. etc. etc.

      Just another voice from public academia making one false claim after another and deceiving her audiences no matter who they may be.

      • gregole says:

        And the media laps it up and wants more. No wonder the lies just keep coming. Their are plenty of media whores out there that will say anything – amazing lack of integrity from Hayhoe and the media.

        • rah says:

          They never question the likes of Hayhoe on their failed previous claims but instead go back to them as if they are real “experts” who’s word is absolute truth. There are no professional standards for these academics it seems. They’re work is never reviewed critically by their employers. They would never survive professionally in the real world unless their daddy owned the company they were working for.

        • rah says:

          they’re = their.

  5. JN says:

    I attended one of Hayhoe’s presentations. She is genial, but she outright lied to the crowd on several specifics and misled on others. Of course, the crowd consisted mostly of employees of the Sierra Club and other environmental organizations, government employees, university students/professors, and a few retired hippies, so they loved it. But there were a few besides me who grumbled about the deception.

  6. g2-9ed9acc685824c6663c51c5b093476cc says:

    Who is she?

    • rah says:

      look at the links I provided above. She’s an Associate Professor of Political Science at Texas Tech University who has a pHd in Atmospheric Sciences.

      • Dave N says:

        Once again showing that qualifications (and/or experience) mean absolutely zero when determining whether or not crap is coming from their mouths.

  7. The other place where CO2 is evenly mixed and yet the water vapor is mostly gone is the poles. I wonder what excuse Kathy Hooey has for why the poles aren’t warming.

  8. bleakhouses says:

    How can anyone look at that chart and to conclude that it was the El Nino?

  9. bleakhouses says:

    Edit “not” not “to.”

  10. Jim Steele says:

    Hayhoe is a Christian advocate of global warming, and thus has been prominently paraded by alarmists, hoping that she can appeal to their religion. Heyhoe was featured in one segment of the drama-mentary Years of Living Dangerously that I critqued at WUWT

  11. gator69 says:

    This is their new “the US is only 3% of the globe” talking point. I usually see it expressed as “the satellites do not measure the part of the atmosphere where we live”. Which is correct, we live on the UHI.

  12. AndyG55 says:

    A question I have been pondering.

    How can the surface and the lower troposphere have very different trends?

    Has someone change the lapse rate or something ????

    • People build things where they live. So surface weather stations are mostly in urban rather than rural areas. Over time these locations are encroached upon by other man made objects. All of which absorb heat and then radiate the heat out at night more slowly than natural objects like trees, plants and dirt. UHI (Urban Heat Island) effect is real. Rural weather stations do not show the dramatic rise in temperatures of urban stations
      And it gets worse. The data is ‘adjusted’ but not in the way you would expect. Instead of reducing the temperature readings of newer data to cancel out the artificial UHI it is actually raised and older less corrupted data is adjusted down at the same time. This creates a temperature increase that doesn’t exist in the real (raw) data. Then to make it even worse, they use these urban stations to ‘invent’ temperature readings for locations where no weather stations are located. Often creating data that is warmer than actually exists.

      So you have a satellite based system that actually measures the entire globe versus a spotty surface system that has the mark of man on it in many different forms.

      In that respect, “man made” global warming is real.

  13. iurockhead says:

    “Katherine Hayhoe is either incompetent, dishonest, or both.”

    I suspect it is both. But mostly dishonest.

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