► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘NOAA’

What Do You Call Scientific Theory Based On Faked Data?

by Flyovercountry ( 286 Comments › )
Filed under Communism, Fascism, Progressives at July 2nd, 2014 - 12:00 pm

Busted, you call it busted. Any statement past that is simply asinine. But, don’t worry my fellow inhabitants of the worker’s paradise formerly reserved for the free and brave, I’m sure that the whole climate change grievance theater will continue on, as if nothing has changed. We’ll still be bombarded with shouts of, “we have to self inflict economic hardship and damage now in order to save the Earth,” or, “anyone who denies that climate change isn’t real is just like someone who used to believe that the Earth was flat.” Let’s not forget my personal favorite, “anyone who denies climate science should be imprisoned for their heresy.”

That picture above? Oh, that’s just what happens when you try to reconcile the actual temperature data with the new and improved faked temperature data the NOAA and NASA peddled to American Citizens in order to make it appear as though the Earth’s mean temperatures were indeed rising. O.K., we’ll let that last bit sink in for just one moment.

Right after the year 2000, NASA and NOAA dramatically altered US climate history, making the past much colder and the present much warmer. The animation below shows how NASA cooled 1934 and warmed 1998, to make 1998 the hottest year in US history instead of 1934. This alteration turned a long term cooling trend since 1930 into a warming trend.

So, let’s take a rather brief walk down Chicken Little’s memory lane. The whole theory has morphed into this catch 22 style game, where computer models have predicted global catastrophe due to rising temperatures. Since Scientists have ruled out all natural causes for the rapidly increasing temperatures, man’s burning of fossil fuels, dumping Carbon Dioxide, and Methane now I guess, must be what’s to blame. This means that all economic development created by free market economics must be bad, while Socialism on the other hand, has been nothing short of a miraculous boon for Gaya.

So now, what we’ve seen is that the rising temperatures used to convince us all that this thing is real, turns out to have been falsely reported as such. When the temperatures in the past and present failed to live up to the predictions, the data was simply changed to show that the Earth was cooler in the past, and is getting warmer in the present. So, in order to prove that only man kind could possibly be responsible for the current warming trend, a warming trend was faked, and any other possibility for the warming trend was declared to be impossible, like say, its having been faked.

Don’t worry though, I’m sure we’ll get a flurry of dire predictions and warnings, as if this latest bombshell hadn’t been dropped on top of our heads, instead of the sky.

Well, maybe I’m not an engineer, nor a peer reviewed author of any scientific theory worthy of note, but I do know that needing to fake data in order to bolster a theory’s validity is considered deceptive, even in the world of academia. First we had the leaked email dump from East Anglia and Penn State, in which, “Climatologists,” were caught sending each other notes describing how they could continue perpetrating a fraud upon the entire world, and that was ignored. Now we have the faking of actual data used to convince us that this problem is very real, and an imminent threat. At some point, accountability must be introduced, even in the world of academia.

How silly of me, falling temperatures proves this theory too. Time for damage control now, see you in a few days, after all of the pieces designed to make us all forget that we saw the man behind the curtain. In the mean time, let’s get to work on that next Chicken Little scenario which will necessitate the self infliction of economic damage.

What were those possibilities again?

A) We need to prepare Earth for a possible invasion of Space Aliens.

B) All of the Honey Bees are suddenly dying off and no more plant will ever be pollinated, ever again.

C) The Ozone is disappearing.

D) Global Cooling, which we would’ve seen had we not faked the data to show a warming trend.

E) Hydraulic Fracturing causes Earth Quakes.

F) Nuclear Power Plants are causing fish to be born with three eyes, which will cause a planetary wide catastrophic loss of appetite, and subsequently world wide famine.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

NOAA: Ministry of Information, or Ministry of Silly Walks?

by snork ( 79 Comments › )
Filed under Climate at February 11th, 2010 - 5:00 pm

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, has a new website; www.climate.gov. As one writer put it, it lampoons itself. It looks like realclimate.org with flash animation.There’s no balance whatsoever; it’s all alarmism all the time, with a thin veneer of science and policy wonkery.

Now, NOAA is supposed to be there to provide useful information to the public and business and government industries alike. They’re the federal agency behind weather forecasting. They were established to give their best guess as to the weather over the week to 10-day horizon to benefit farmers, sailors, other commercial operations, and the public at large.

Somewhere along the line, somebody thought that they should get into the climate forecasting business. On its face, that seems like a rational thing to do, and there is a rational way to go about doing it. For whatever reason, the decision makers chose not to do that. Instead, they created a political advocacy site that pushes all of the alarmist talking points, whether established by science or not.

Questionable as that all is, one of the tabs links to ClimateWatch magazine. ClimateWatch? As if this is some sort of anti-corruption watchdog organization? This is an official US government “magazine”. And it’s full of alarmist dishonesty.

Let me single out one article to illustrate the point. It’s called “Rhode Island’s Rising Tide“. This caught my eye, because Rhode Island is a tiny bit of beach nestled between Connecticut and Massachusetts, about half way between the metropolitan areas of New York City and Boston. Why single out Rhode Island? Is the sea level there changing at a different rate than those cities?

Recurring flooding at a waterfront park in the City of Providence was a tip off to Rhode Island coastal resource managers that something was going on. The city having to close its hurricane gates numerous times a year to keep its riverfront walkways dry in the face of high tides pointed to a problem that the city couldn’t afford to ignore.

Sounds ominous, doesn’t it? As if the Loch Ness Monster were lurking off the RI shore. Notice they didn’t give a time frame? They imply that this is all recent, but they don’t say anything.  So they go on:

(more…)