National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists have found a solution to the 15-year “pause” in global warming: They “adjusted” the hiatus in warming out of the temperature record.
New climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years.
Judith Curry: All this is more depressing than I thought. The 0.12C adjustment to the buoy data makes no sense – I get it that there is a problem with ship data, but why try to solve this by warming the buoy data?
It is called adjusting the data to conform with the agenda.
To a layman the 10 year absence of Class 3 or worse hurricanes would seem to be an indication that the equatorial Atlantic is near a record cool period.
NOAA junk scientists committing fraud again. End their funding.
This raises the obvious question: how must today’s readings be adjusted in order to be taken as real, valid readings needing no correction or adjustment five years from now? Any warmist care to answer that?
0.12C over 15 years . statistical chatter .
need more carbon taxes for more research .
Aren’t there a number of investigations around data tampering of the NOAA and other organizations? Are these charlatans so far in to this they are willing to risk criminal charges for continuing this fraud? If they think they can pull a Clinton “the rules are for little people,” wait until the progressives throw them under the bus to save themselves as voters worldwide reject carbon taxation and the shrill justification for it.
Those NOAA “scientists” should try adjusting their bank balances the same way to see if it works.
Please Miss? (Hand reaching eagerly in the air for the attention of Miss), Why don’t they use the satellite data?
They added 0.12C degrees to all buoy measurements, although the error in this offset has been previously described as +/- 1.2C ?
Exactly Robert, only ten more adjustments and they’ll be exactly where they want.
Models. I saw a picture of a model once. Beautiful. Then I discovered that her nose had been “reduced” to make it smaller, her bust “enhanced” to make it bigger, and heavy makeup applied to make her eyes stand out. Even worse, it turns out her photo had been “adjusted” to remove all the little wrinkles and other little skin “flaws” using a well known photo software.
Models…. how can they not be what they seem??
Science. They keep using that word. I don’t think it means what they think it means.
My questions is – which is the greatest:
1. man-made climate change
2. natural climate change
3. data adjustments
I read that some forgein powers have been fudging with the data over Global Warming
Seriously, I would have been kicked out of engineering school 30 years ago if I would have proposed a theory backed by constantly evolving fabricated data like this.
…. and if the ‘science is settled’ why are they continuing to modify old data? Hasn’t everything already been proved?
I picked this up (Curry link)…My logic suggests they moved the Temperature the wrong way… If a rough estimate is that bucket temperature was .5 deg cooler than actual… it must be that the present Buoy data must be “lowered” to match. Note statement
“Cooling Quickly”
Dr Robert E Stevenson, cited in a comment by dennisambler
@ Jo Nova 4th june ’15, 2.12am:
“They came from the U.S. Navy. Galvanized iron buckets were preferred, mainly because they lasted longer than the wood and canvas. But, they had the disadvantage of cooling quickly in the winds, so that the temperature readings needed to be taken quickly. I would guess that any bucket-temperature measurement that was closer to the actual temperature by better than 0.5° was an accident, or a good guess”
what a great group. lie, lie some more and then eliminate the lies from the record.
The changing of DATA is not scientific.. it is corruption of the first order.. The methodology of all scientific measurement demands consistency & accuracy. Dr Robert E Stevenson’s historical data MUST not be subjected to “unknown” corrections that can’t be proven accurate. The normal historical practice of calibration & procedural methods used in the collecting of accurate data would have resulted in the data been corrected at the source, historically it is what it is!
The falsifying of more accurate data (Buoy measurements) is mathematical fraud without sound scientific reasoning. You don’t falsify valid data for any reason, other than fraud.
The data can’t be hidden any longer, there is no warming. And too many people are experiencing the cooling trend we are in, and the cold winters we’ve had.
This is naked desperation. Soviet-style desperation. They know hey are wrong, but they push the Big Lie anyway, and think that Stalin was right, that the Big Lie repeated often and loud enough, will eventually be accepted. And there are plenty of idiots out there willing to credulously accept whatever comes from the warmist camp.
I spent a career (40 years) EE design & Broadcast Engineering Management at the NBC Television Network NYC.. In retirement, as a hobby, I repair and calibrate Oscilloscopes (~ 450 MHZ Analog) to the existing scientific “traceable” standard. The process has not changed over the years except the equipment under calibration now has “Smart” computer controlled routines that call for valid inputs from calibrated test equipment.
The Calibration test equipment MUST be calibrated to a standard, it is that Standard that MUST be “traceable” to the most accurate reference (usually Cesium, or Rub in the past ) The measurement equipment, or the data obtained, MUST not be altered or the accuracy of the data will be invalid…
The deliberate alteration of measured data corrupts ALL scientific value of the data.. It has no “traceable” degree of accuracy. The use of older methods or equipment does not mean that the data obtained is invalid if the error is know & addressed at the source. (Standard correction charts)
The NOAA data freaks, by changing measured values of the past or present, have nothing but corrupted data “numbers” that are meaningless drivel
JMHO
I’m afraid that science continues to be displaced with green theology and democracy with green theocracy. The warmers are all lock step in line with whatever corruption former science institutions pass off as “studies” as long as it supports the narrative which used to be referred to as an hypothesis. A sure sign that the dominant culture is depraved is that when an organization tampers with data so blatantly to reinforce the hypothesis, the “consensus” fascists act as their cheerleaders rather than curious clients paying for questionable work.
The road back to serfdom is paved with green hysteria.
I enjoy what you guys are usually up too. Such clever work and reporting!
Keep up the great works guys I’ve added you guys to our blogroll.