More Smoking Guns Of Fraud By The RealClimate Team

In 1964, forty of the “world’s greatest authorities on climatology” met in Aspen and discussed “extraordinary climate variations in historic times

They also discussed a reversal of warming after 1940.


Chicago Tribune Archive | February 3, 1964

There was unanimous agreement of experts in 1961 that the world was getting colder.



Michael Mann erased these extraordinary climate variations with his 100% fraudulent hockey stick, and then Gavin Schmidt erased the post 1940 cooling.


Make no mistake about it. The key players in this scam are committing fraud.

About stevengoddard

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

13 Responses to More Smoking Guns Of Fraud By The RealClimate Team

  1. sfx2020 says:

    Looking at the February 3, 2014 entry here about this, I noticed somebody trying to switch the focus, and arguing with a strawman instead of directly discussing the uncomfortable issue, which seems obvious to me.

    These experts who keep changing the past don’t seem to realize that it isn’t making the public trust them more. In fact, it makes it hard to know if anything about global temperatures is accurate.

    • 25 years ago Petr Beckmann pointed out the dots on looter graphs were never from the same thermometers. Why not publish a graph of the temperatures reported in the daily paper of some town that hasn’t changed much this past century?

  2. oz4caster says:

    There is more evidence of highly suspect adjustments to recent global temperature anomaly estimates based on GHCN data and NOAA SST data. The global temperature estimates based on the Global Forecast System (GFS) data used to make weather forecasts four times a day shows a striking downward trend this century so far, at a rate of -1.68C per 100 years, whereas the NOAA NCEI GHCN based highly manipulated estimates show an upward trend of +1.08C per 100 years. Considering that we now have almost 15 years of data, this large discrepancy is getting to be a major red flag indicating mal-adjustment of the recent GHCN based estimates. During the 1979-2000 period, the GFS based and GHCN based estimates tracked fairly well, so there is no reason to expect this sudden departure.

    Satellite era comparison of the GFS based and GHCN based estimates:

    University of Maine Climate Change Institute GFS based estimate trend 2001-2015:

    NOAA NCEI estimate trend 2001-2015:

    BEST was not much better with a +0.72C/100 year trend for 2001-2015. The UAH satellite lower tropospheric temperature trend so far is +0.06C/100 years.

    • DD More says:

      Bryan, thanks for the heads up of another data set that is less ‘adjusted’.

      If you are interested in seeing what the weather is doing, a post at WUWT might interest you. the Weather map of Netatmo users.

      Temps and rain across the globe in real time.

      • oz4caster says:

        DD, you’re welcome. Many people are not aware of the GFS based global temperature anomaly estimates. In addition to the UM CCI, they are also derived by WxBell and can be seen at the WxBell website. The WxBell and UM CCI estimates track each other very closely so I feel confident that so far at least, there has not been any undue tampering. The amount of data put into the GFS initialization four times a day is much larger and has much better coverage than the GHCN network. The only downside is that there are a fair number of blemishes in that data, but I’m sure there are algorithms to deal with the worst outliers. I have plotted lots of weather data over the years and have seen the full variety of problems that can and do occur (many of which occur in GHCN data as well). Nonetheless, I believe this approach is likely to produce a more accurate assessment of global temperature trends than the GHCN approach. If the GHCN approach was more accurate, we should be using it to initialize the weather model runs.

        Being a meteorologist, I like to look at live weather reports around the globe on the WeatherUnderground’s “Wundermap”. There are hundreds of home weather stations reporting in the Austin area where I live and it is interesting to see all the local variability from a variety of causes. I have a wireless temperature sensor in heavy shade on a fence post in my backyard that I compare to nearby and area measurements.

  3. Gail Combs says:

    BEST is part of the Climate Team ™

    Muller was never a skeptic and he has a Shell Oil President, Marlan Downey, “Former President of the international subsidiary of Shell Oil, founder of Roxanna Oil; former President of Arco International” on the Advisory Board of Muller and Associates.

    Shell Oil and BP were in on CAGW from the beginning when they funded the CRU. And BP and ENRON were busy pedaling CAGW over here in the USA.

    The IPCC lead author for scenarios is Ged Davis VP of Shell Oil. Another Shell Oil exec Doug McKay was at the IPCC scenario meetings (per e-mails). McKay was also Senior Financial Analyst with the World Bank. Robert Watson worked for the World Bank while Chair of the IPCC. In the Ged Davis Climategate email of the draft scenarios we find Sustainable Development (B1) aka Agenda 21.

    Then we come to Zeke Hausefeather and the Mosh Pup who are all over Judith Curry’s and WUWT making comments and writing articles. They are the ones who convinced Anthony Watts to give Muller his temperature data. This let Muller beat Anthony to publication as a ‘skeptic’ and take the punch out of Anthony’s later paper. On top of that they made sure Anthony applied TOBS adjustment to his data.

    A year and a half ago Zeke Hausefeather did a hatchet job on Tony in his article @ Judith Curry’s Understanding Adjustments to Temperature Data. The Mosh pup is there defending BEST. Zeke and Mosher are defending the TOBS adjustments that Steve (and I) say are bogus.

    So the question becomes, is Zeke Hausefeather a skeptic or a Trojan Horse? This article at the Yale Climate Connection answers that question.
    Analysis: The Water Vapor Feedback , Common Climate Misconceptions by Zeke Hausefeather

    Water vapor is one of the most important elements of the climate system. A greenhouse gas, like carbon dioxide, it represents around 80 percent of total greenhouse gas mass in the atmosphere and 90 percent of greenhouse gas volume.

    Water vapor and clouds account for 66 to 85 percent of the greenhouse effect, compared to a range of 9 to 26 percent for CO2. So why all the attention on carbon dioxide and its ilk? Is water vapor the real culprit causing global warming?

    The answer is that water vapor is indeed responsible for a major portion of Earth’s warming over the past century and for projected future warming. However, water vapor is not the cause of this warming. This is a critical, if subtle, distinction between the role of greenhouse gases as either forcings or feedbacks. In this case, anthropogenic emissions of CO2, methane, and other gases are warming the Earth. This rising average temperature increases evaporation rates and atmospheric water vapor concentrations. Those, in turn, result in additional warming…..

    Amazing how many of those we think of as Skeptics aren’t. Such as Judith Curry and her business partner Peter Webster.

  4. omanuel says:

    I am concerned that the climate debate will continue endlessly until the next major solar eruption suddenly wipes out the communications and electrical power grid.

    Please read at least the jacket cover about the solar eruption of Sept 1859 and realize how terribly vulnerable modern civilization would be to such an eruption today:

    Oliver K. Manuel

    • Gail Combs says:

      “….Dr. Peter Vincent Pry is the executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, a Congressional advisory board dedicated to achieving protection of the United States from electromagnetic pulse and other threats. Dr. Pry is also the director of the United States Nuclear Strategy Forum, an advisory body to Congress on policies to counter weapons of mass destruction…….

      Natural EMP from a geomagnetic super-storm like the 1859 Carrington Event or the 1921 Railroad Storm, a nuclear EMP attack from terrorists or rogue states as practiced by North Korea during the nuclear crisis of 2013 are both existential threats that could kill 9 of 10 Americans through starvation, disease, and societal collapse.

      A natural EMP catastrophe or nuclear EMP attack could black out the National electric grid for months or years and collapse all the other critical infrastructures, communications, transportation, banking and finance, food and water, necessary to sustain modern society and the lives of 310 million Americans….

  5. Andy DC says:

    Numerous stations in Siberia recorded temperatures of 30-36(F) below zero during the last 24 hours. The eastern 80-90% of Russia is completely snow covered. It is not even close to the beginning of winter!

    Totally consistent with a planet undergoing catastrophic warming (right!). We are all going to die!

    Time for alarmists to get out their coloring books and their red/brown crayons. The snake oil show must go on, with the Paris meetings coming up in only a month!

  6. rah says:

    Oh BTW the American Meteorlogical Society doesn’t believe that taxpayers deserved to have access to the work associated communications of federally employed workers either.

  7. omanuel says:

    How Scientists Hid the Creator

    Click to access Scientists_Hid_the_Creator.pdf

    Was written for the opening of the United Nation’s COP21 Paris Conference.

    My ResearchGate account was locked, so I need your help getting this information to organizers of the UN’s COP21 Paris Conference.

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel

    PS: The decision to hide the Creator was made after unreported events at Konan, Korea changed the course of world history in AUG-SEPT 1945, before nations were united on 24 OCT 1945 into the UN.

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