Scientist Ruthlessly Debunks One of NOAA's Central Climate Claims
Dr. John Christy testified before the House science committee on February 2, 2016.
By Michael Bastasch Published on*February 2, 2016
http://tinyurl.com/hm8svsf
In face of intense criticism from alarmist scientists, Dr. John Christy went to great lengths in a Tuesday congressional hearing to detail why satellite-derived temperatures are much more reliable indicators of warming than surface thermometers.
"That's where the real mass of the climate system exists in terms of the atmosphere," Christy, a climate scientist at the University of Alabama and Alabama's state climatologist, said in a Wednesday hearing before the House science committee.
"When a theory contradicts the facts" you need to change the theory, Christy said. "The real world is not going along with rapid warming. The models need to go back to the drawing board."...
***********
NOAA's climate change science fiction
The environmental intelligence agency ignores satellite data
By Lamar Smith - - Thursday, November 26, 2015
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ience-fiction/
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is the nation's leading collector of climate data. Every day, NOAA analyzes vast amounts of data to predict changes to our climate, weather, oceans and coasts. The agency also publishes monthly temperature averages across the nation and compares those numbers to historical temperature records.
As the nation's self-proclaimed authority on "environmental intelligence," NOAA should be held to the highest scientific standards. This means their conclusions should be objective, independent of political consideration and based on all available sources of information.
NOAA's top official, Kathryn Sullivan, has described the agency's role as providing "timely, reliably, and actionable information — based on sound science — every day to millions of Americans."
In testimony before the House Science Committee, NOAA's deputy administrator, Manson Brown, made similar remarks, noting the importance of satellite data. He said that NOAA's ability "to deliver environmental intelligence starts with keeping the pulse of the planet, especially the atmosphere and the ocean, and this is the central capability where space-based assets come into play." So why does NOAA leave out satellite data when it releases climate projections?
...
***********
MASSIVE GLOBAL COOLING process discovered as Paris climate deal looms
'Could explain recent disagreements'
30 Sep 2015
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09...climate_talks/
As world leaders get ready to head to Paris for the latest pact on cutting CO2 emissions, it has emerged that there isn't as much urgency about the matter as had been thought.
A team of top-level atmospheric chemistry boffins from France and Germany say they have identified a new process by which vast amounts of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are emitted into the atmosphere from the sea - a process which was unknown until now, meaning that existing climate models do not take account of it.
The effect of VOCs in the air is to cool the climate down, and thus climate models used today predict more warming than can actually be expected. Indeed, global temperatures have actually been stable for more than fifteen years, a circumstance which was not predicted by climate models and which climate science is still struggling to assmilate...
***********
Climate scientists criticize government paper that erases 'pause' in warming
By Maxim Lott
Published June 10, 2015
http://tinyurl.com/og34e4t
Until last week, government data on climate change indicated that the Earth has warmed over the last century, but that the warming slowed dramatically and even stopped at points over the last 17 years.
But a paper released May 28 by researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has readjusted the data in a way that makes the reduction in warming disappear, indicating a steady increase in temperature instead. But the study's readjusted data conflict with many other climate measurements, including data taken by satellites, and some climate scientists aren't buying the new claim.
"While I'm sure this latest analysis from NOAA will be regarded as politically useful for the Obama administration, I don't regard it as a particularly useful contribution to our scientific understanding of what is going on," Judith Curry, a climate science professor at Georgia Tech, wrote in a response to the study.
***********
Amidst An Epidemic of Bad Research, Man-made Climate Change Is 'Settled Science'
Jim Jamitis
May 28, 2015 at 11:03 am
http://tinyurl.com/ntovtz4
This was a banner week for the unquestioning apostles of Science!, specifically in the area of climate science—the one scientific discipline for which all questions have already been*exhaustively*answered.
First, there is flooding in Texas which everyone knows beyond all doubt is a result of man caused climate change. There is no other possible explanation.*Just ask Bill Nye the Mediocre-Television-Comedian-With-A-Bachelors-In-Engineering Guy:
Second, a "study" was released which purports to tell us how the Montreal Protocol saved the planet from certain doom at the hands of the ozone hole (the notion that the dire predictions about the ozone hole may not have come to fruition is not to be considered.) Like most of the unrealized predictions about man-caused global warming, the ozone hole study is based on man-made simulations.
As it's not possible to do a controlled laboratory experiment on an entire planet, computer simulations are the best we can muster. Unfortunately, that means we are required to take it on faith that those who created the simulations did so with infallible knowledge of how a planetary atmosphere and climate will react to different inputs. That is "settled science" after all.
***********
More Countries Caught Manipulating Their Climate Data
By Michael Bastasch Published on May 20, 2015
https://stream.org/countries-caught-...-climate-data/
Weather agencies in Australia, Paraguay and Switzerland*may be*manipulating temperature data to create a sharper warming trend than is present in the raw data — a practice that has come under scrutiny in recent months.
Most recently, Dr. H. Sterling Burnett with the Heartland Institute detailed how the Swiss Meteorological Service adjusted its climate data "to show greater warming than actually measured by its temperature instruments."
In his latest*article, Sterling wrote that Switzerland's weather bureau adjusted its raw temperature data so that "the temperatures reported were consistently higher than those actually recorded." For example, the cities of Sion and*Zurich*saw "a doubling of the temperature trend" after such adjustments*were made.
But even with the data tampering, Sterling noted that "there has been an 18-year-pause in rising temperatures, even with*data-*tampering."
"Even with fudged data, governments have been unable to hide the fact winters in Switzerland and in Central Europe have become colder over the past 20 years, defying predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other climate*alarmists," according to Sterling.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Cardinal TT
