THE TOP CLIMATE SCIENTIST WHO EXPOSED NOAA AS FRAUDS

THE TOP CLIMATE SCIENTIST WHO EXPOSED NOAA AS FRAUDS

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ‘correct’ data they don’t like, and ‘fail to archive the evidence’ — they are frauds in the eyes of many.

Former top NOAA scientist, Dr. John Bates, led the agency’s climate data records program for ten years.

Since his time at the agency, however, Bates has spoken of data tampering and serious malfeasance; specifically, he accuses NOAA of publishing a flawed report which supposedly disproved the pause observed in global warming between 1998 to 2012.

Bates charges that study’s lead author, NOAA official Tom Karl, with using unverified data sets, ignoring mandatory agency procedures, and failing to archive evidence, all in a “blatant attempt to intensify the impact” of the paper in advance of a crucial UN Climate Change Conference back in 2015.

The paper, “Possible Artifacts of Data Biases in the Recent Global Surface Warming Hiatus,” was published in Science magazine in the June of 2015, just a few months before world leaders gathered in Paris to hammer out a costly global pact on climate-change mitigation.

The study claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998, as revealed by UN scientists in 2013, never actually existed, and that world temperatures had instead been rising even faster than scientists expected.

Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, the paper’s findings were splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

That widely observed pause in global warming simply wasn’t to be accepted by the AGW Party, and, in turn, NOAA’s climate data office was tasked with challenging the IPCC findings and prove that the hiatus did not exist. That was their aim, by hook or by crook, disappear that pesky pause, and do it in time for that crucial climate meeting in Paris.

Journalist Julie Kelly writes in her nationalreview.com article dated Feb, 7, 2017: The Climate activists were sweating over the acknowledgement by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2013 that “the rate of warming over the past 15 years is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951.” The IPCC walked back its own predictions from 2007 that short-term temperatures would rise between 1 and 3 degrees Celsius. The IPCC in 2013 “concluded that the global surface temperature” has shown a much smaller increasing linear trend over the past 15 years [1998 to 2012] than over the past 30 to 60 years” and the rise in global temperatures was “estimated to be around one-third to one-half of the trend over 1951–2012.”

It didn’t take NOAA’s Tom Karl very long at all to ‘develop’ a way to artificially raise sea-temperatures. Karl did this by discarding readings collected by buoys, which are more accurate, and replaced them with the temperature readings collected by ships, which are found to be warmer.

“In regards to sea surface temperature, scientists have shown that across the board, data collected from buoys are cooler than ship-based data,” said one of the study’s co-authors. It was therefore necessary, the NOAA scientists argued, to “correct the difference between ship and buoy measurements, and we are using this in our trend analysis.”

13th- I use a simple calendar to keep track of the weather around the globe and it’s been a bit cooler here in the last few years. We had some blistering summers that just happened to coincide with heavy sun spot activity so I assume it was the peak of a cycle and now the pendulum is swinging the other way. Ignoring it is foolish but they’ll keep ignoring it until it’s too late. Why? They’d rather you starve or freeze before they’ll admit they were lying about global warming.

%d bloggers like this: