Jump to content

Climate Change Bombshell


3 replies to this topic

#1
wishcast_hater

    Instigator

  • Members
  • 844 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dutchess County
  • Lagrangeville
  • NY
What we knew all along, at least the ones who don't swallow the MSM lies....

A new peer-reviewed study by scientists and a statistician claims to reveal that “nearly all” of the warming shown in current temperature datasets from NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Met Office in the United Kingdom are the result of adjustments made to the datasets after temperatures were recorded, calling into question just how much warming is real and how much is pure fantasy.
In the report, titled “On the Validity of NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU Global Average Surface Temperature Data and the Validity of EPA’s CO2 Endangerment Finding,” authors James P. Wallace III, Joseph S. D’Aleo and Craig Idso examine the accuracy of global average surface temperature data.

“The objective of this research was to test the hypothesis that Global Average Surface Temperature (GAST) data, produced by NOAA, NASA, and HADLEY, are sufficiently credible estimates of global average temperatures such that they can be relied upon for climate modeling and policy analysis purposes,” the authors wrote.

Many people misunderstand how global temperature is calculated. As the authors of the study note, GAST data is not simply the raw temperature recordings. Rather, the data is adjusted after it is recorded to account for various problems, such as “contamination by urbanization.” Because many temperature recordings come from urban areas, where numerous factors affect temperature readings, they need to be adjusted to more accurately reflect the true temperature.

Critics of the most widely used global average surface temperature datasets have said they think these adjustments have been exaggerated to favor the view humans are causing climate change.
To test the validity of the GAST data adjustments, the researchers examined other historical data and known cyclical patterns to determine whether the adjustments were appropriate.

“As a result, this research sought to validate the current estimates of GAST using the best available relevant data,” the authors wrote. “This included the best documented and understood data sets from the U.S. and elsewhere as well as global data from satellites that provide far more extensive global coverage and are not contaminated by bad siting and urbanization impacts.”
The researchers concluded based on their study that “the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality.”
“The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality,” the authors wrote. “In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever — despite current claims of record setting warming.”

“Nearly all of the warming they are now showing are in the adjustments,” meteorologist Joe D’Aleo, who co-authored the study, said to the Daily Caller News Foundation.“Each dataset pushed down the 1940s warming and pushed up the current warming.”
“You would think that when you make adjustments you’d sometimes get warming and sometimes get cooling. That’s almost never happened,” D’Aleo said.

The noted climate-skeptic website Watts Up With That? called the study a “bombshell.”
If the researchers’ findings are accurate, it would mean that the global temperature data most often used to show increasing temperatures are potentially not accurate and that the true global temperature is likely lower than is currently reported, further undermining climate-change alarmists’ claims.

https://thsresearch....port-062717.pdf
"We will know that our disinformation program is a success when everything the American people know are lies!" - Former CIA Director William Casey
"It easier to fool someone than convince them they have been fooled" - Mark Twain
Truth to a liberal is as salt to a slug.

#2
gpsnavigator

  • Members
  • 1,399 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Morris County, NJ
Since you would probably be inclined to point out all of the unqualified people in favor of climate science, I would point out that of all seven people in high places cited in the report, one was on the payroll of multiple energy companies and 4 of the 7 have Ph.D's in other fields not really relevant to climate.

I would not claim that skeptics on this issue don't pose fair questions. But the preponderance of the scientific and mathematical evidence suggests the planet is warming and that humankind is driving much of that warming.
-GPSNav
Home: Rockaway, NJ - Morris County -- Elevation 745 feet
Work: Newton, NJ - Sussex County -- Elevation 570 feet
Interests: weather, hiking, kayaking, math, science, current events, classic cars, and craft beer

#3
carribeanpirate

  • Members
  • 3,296 posts
  • Gender:Male

View Postgpsnavigator, on 12 July 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

Since you would probably be inclined to point out all of the unqualified people in favor of climate science, I would point out that of all seven people in high places cited in the report, one was on the payroll of multiple energy companies and 4 of the 7 have Ph.D's in other fields not really relevant to climate.

I would not claim that skeptics on this issue don't pose fair questions. But the preponderance of the scientific and mathematical evidence suggests the planet is warming and that humankind is driving much of that warming.

That last part is really the question, right? The earth is warming, that I agree with. However, I am not ready to say its manmade, a natural cycle or some other cause. I dont think the answer will be known in my lifetime (I'm 47). In the 70's, there was a magazine cover that touted the next Ice Age. Its hard to beleive that within 40 years we went from a cooling planet to a man made heating planet. I'll reserve judgement for years from now.

#4
wishcast_hater

    Instigator

  • Members
  • 844 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dutchess County
  • Lagrangeville
  • NY

View Postgpsnavigator, on 12 July 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

Since you would probably be inclined to point out all of the unqualified people in favor of climate science, I would point out that of all seven people in high places cited in the report, one was on the payroll of multiple energy companies and 4 of the 7 have Ph.D's in other fields not really relevant to climate.

I would not claim that skeptics on this issue don't pose fair questions. But the preponderance of the scientific and mathematical evidence suggests the planet is warming and that humankind is driving much of that warming.

There are many scientists out there who claim NASA and NOAA are inflating the numbers to drive the false narrative of global warming. This lie that science is settled is just that - a lie. 97% of scientists do not agree with the IPCC report from years ago, more than 3/4 of the scientists listed in that report are not scientists nor did they state an opinion regarding global warming. The lies that people will not know what snow is or that sea levels should have risen 20 feet is nonsense. Global Warming / Climate Change is the imminent apocalypse that never happens.
"We will know that our disinformation program is a success when everything the American people know are lies!" - Former CIA Director William Casey
"It easier to fool someone than convince them they have been fooled" - Mark Twain
Truth to a liberal is as salt to a slug.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users