We’re warming because NASA and David Farrar say so?

Two days ago David Farrar posted a dishonest chart (wonky axis, wonky data) to claim that the planet is warming alarmingly because in 100 years we have warmed a whole one degree.

He got pissy too when challenged on it.  Basically NASA and he were right…because NASA data.

Unfortunately David is a bit out of the loop on developments in the climate change debate, because NASA has been busted by a whistle blower for manipulating the same data that Farrar claimed was good…because NASA.

A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented “global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records.

Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a retired geologist and data computation expert. He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

According to Günter Ederer, the German journalist who has reported on Ewert’s findings:

From the publicly available data, Ewert made an unbelievable discovery: Between the years 2010 and 2012 the data measured since 1881 were altered so that they showed a significant warming, especially after 1950. […] A comparison of the data from 2010 with the data of 2012 shows that NASA-GISS had altered its own datasets so that especially after WWII a clear warming appears – although it never existed.   

Apart from Australia, the planet has in fact been on a cooling trend:

Using the NASA data from 2010 the surface temperature globally from 1940 until today has fallen by 1.110°C, and since 2000 it has fallen 0.4223°C […]. The cooling has hit every continent except for Australia, which warmed by 0.6339°C since 2000. The figures for Europe: From 1940 to 2010, using the data from 2010, there was a cooling of 0.5465°C and a cooling of 0.3739°C since 2000.

But the activist scientists at NASA GISS – initially led by James Hansen, later by Gavin Schmidt – wanted the records they are in charge of maintaining to show warming not cooling, so they began systematically adjusting the data for various spurious reasons using ten different methods.

The most commonly used ones were:

• Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
• Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
• Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
• Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
• Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
• With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.

Ewert’s findings echo that of US meteorologists Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts who examined 6,000 NASA weather stations and found a host of irregularities both with the way they were sited and how the raw data had been adjusted to reflect such influences as the Urban Heat Island effect.

The so-called facts and consensus are crumbling daily. There has been a massive rort perpetrated against nations, perhaps the biggest fraud we have ever seen.

Claiming stupidly that NASA knows best when they didn’t even exist until 1958 and the first satellite in space was only launched a year earlier is ridiculous. NASA has changed the measurement system at least three times in the data sets that Farrar claimed were accurate, and most of the world wasn’t even covered by measurement until climate satellites were launched in the 1980s.

The fact is we aren’t even yet at the average temperatures that existed in the Medieval Warming Period, a period he should know well as it coincided in part with the rise of his treasured Roman Empire.

Farrar is a stats freak and his charts were a travesty. If he had presented the axis scales correctly then there would have been an almost flat chart. If he had used Kelvin instead of Celsius then it would have looked even flatter.

 

– Breitbart

 

Please support Whaleoil.
Click Here
to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

Be part of making sure Whaleoil's voice continues.

  • Ross15

    There is a website run by Tony Heller (aka Steve Goddard) –realclimatescience.com which “specialises” in looking at the NASA manipulations. He is an environmentalist and a computer engineer but definitely a climate skeptic. He basically does it in two ways –he either looks back on their website, say 5 – 10 years and takes the data on a particular aspect and then compares it to the exact same data on their site today. He then does a simple animated graph to show the change. Often he does the same thing for last year compared to this year.
    In short he uses their own data to show them up.
    He also looks back at old news reports to debunk their current reports.
    He keeps it all very short and simple so anyone can understand it.
    Another thing to look out for is Marc Morano who runs the Climate Depot site is coming out with a film called “Climate Hustle”. They are going to do the red carpet premier (ie. Hollywood style ) in Paris in the next few days.

    • Wheninrome

      So when the Movie arrives here red carpet and all what will our Media Celebrities do, they just so love a red carpet do with all the attendant photos and coverage? Will they be scrambling for front row seats, will the invites be fought over?

      • Ross15

        Ok Wheninrome , I was a bit loose with my words saying it was a film –obviously it is a documentary.

        • Wheninrome

          And I was being tongue in cheek to an extent, but will the MSM know that it is a documentary or will they think it a work of fiction and still want to be front row and “first to have seen it”.

  • Colin

    Our very own NIWA did the same thing, ‘adjusting’ NZ’s raw temperature data from a warming rate of 0.05C per century to just under 1C. When reality doesn’t match the models, it’s reality that gets adjusted.
    And yet, we’re the ones labelled deniers!

  • Seriously?

    Why not ask why they made the adjustments? I can understand that there may be a need to modify old data so that it can be compared to current data (or the other way around) if the two would otherwise be apples and oranges. To say it is all a big conspiracy sounds a bit “no moon landing” to me, particularly when they make the data public so every man and his dog can see it has changed – we are not talking about Greenpeace here, these are respected and skilled scientists.

    I tried google, and got lots of hits like the above, but did see this explanation which may or may not relate directly to the NASA data:

    “The biggest change to the NOAA records comes from a correction to ocean-temperature readings, to account for differences in measurements from ships and buoys. Scientists have long known that ships log slightly warmer ocean temperatures than do buoys operating in the same location. The influx of data from an expansion of buoys during the past two decades has reduced the apparent rate of ocean warming. NOAA has now adjusted for this effect, in line with similar changes that the UK Met Office made to its global temperature record.

    The NOAA data set had previously been modified to account for a shift in the way that ships measure ocean temperatures. After the Second World War, ships began to monitor sea water directly through engine intakes, instead of sampling it with buckets. Karl’s team adjusted the data to account for new information suggesting that some ships have continued bucket measurements.

    Finally, the researchers made use of a new database of land-based temperature readings, which more than doubled the number of stations available to NOAA. It also extended coverage further into the Arctic, which has warmed faster than the rest of the globe in recent decades.”

    http://www.nature.com/news/climate-change-hiatus-disappears-with-new-data-1.17700

    • Ross15

      ” It also extended coverage further into the Arctic, which has warmed faster than the rest of the globe in recent decades.”
      This is an example of what has happened. They say it has warmed faster than the rest of the globe in recent decades —how do they know that when they have just added in the data of the extended coverage ?
      The HadCrut data set did something similar –in about 1990 they reduced the number of stations they took data from, globally, quite dramatically. Then in recent years they decided to add some more back in especially those in Arctic regions. When they did it they adjusted the data from those stations for the early 1990s , but the Icelandic climate scientists said there was no need as they had already made adjustments but the HadCrut did not listen to them —it did not fit their agenda.

      • Seriously?

        I’m a skeptic on most things, and for me the jury is still out on the degree to which (rather than if) human activity is impacting on the climate and what, if anything, we ought to do about that. But I simply don’t buy that the huge majority of experts in this field are a part of some vast conspiring to manipulate the data in order to feather their own nests (or whatever other motivation is attributed to them).

        Sure, there may be some experts in relevant fields who disagree, certainly with the conclusions and maybe even with the methodology, but you get a few with anything (think the anti-vaccination lobby).

  • LesleyNZ

    “Climate Change” is the latest warmist catch phrase/word. Those of us who disagree with the latest global warming climate change media/political campaign are being labelled as non-believers in climate change and are at the receiving end of some real nasty abusive comments – especially on facebook. It is time to fight back and reclaim the original meaning of the words “climate change” and state that we do believe in climate change as the earth’s climate has been changing since the world was born and will continue to do so until life on earth ends or until the sun stops shining. I can’t believe that David F. has joined the man-made global warming climate change chorus. Same goes for all those in the National Party who are catching and boarding the Man-Made Climate Change Bandwagon.

    • Kevin

      The biggest weapon we have to use against climate change zealots is ridicule. It’s the same with all SJWs.

    • MarcWills

      One of the reasons why National has to “toe the line” is so we are not seen to be out of step with our trading partners. I look on it as them swallowing dead rats – something which politicians have to do in the interests of diplomacy all the time. Tim Groser explained it perfectly when he said we should not be seen as leaders in the ‘Climate Change’ boondoggle, but are expected to be ‘fast followers’ in the politics which infests these political cluster whatsits.

    • Dave of the West Bank

      Any political entity that follows the AGW meme is not getting my vote!

  • Metricman

    This really hoses me off, no punishment is too harsh such a far reaching fraud. VW has nothing on these Guys (and Girls)

  • Boondecker

    I give it two weeks and some other ‘newsworthy’ event or two, and this Paris junket will all be old hat and well off the front pages. Sure as eggs is eggs. The only ‘fossils’ these days are those in the mainstream media and people living off the ‘climate change’ bandwagon.

    btw; just so it’s clear, I’m not a so-called ‘cc denier’, as I do believe in it… in that climate has changed since time began on Earth six billion years ago. So, when the MSM tell me I’m going to have the sea lapping at my doorstep, in around 250 to 350 years approximately inconclusively but that the science “is there”, I am enthralled… as I hope to be around to see it. I will need a new doormat around then anyway.

  • SteveWrathall

    And apparently global warming can be fought be having solar panels facing east, not north.

    • Metricman

      No, they just need a hot air recycling device. Oh wait, here comes the press gallery.

  • Gazza

    Oh thats just great…Global Cooling….the new trough to hit the market

  • azza

    No sorry, I don’t believe this. I saw a guy in a white coat and glasses on TV talking about how the planet has warmed over the past century and is heading to a catastrophic tipping point unless we completely change our way of life and pay more tax immediately. Scientists are always 100% objective and never subject to bias, groupthink or influenced by funding sources.
    And thankfully Len Brown and a crack team from the council is over in Paris as we speak looking at how he can solve the problem. If us ratepayers don’t change immediately the skytower will be under water in 6 months.

  • Toby

    I’ve always said we have far more to fear from an Ice Age than from Global Warming.

    • OneTrack

      I’ve always said we have more to fear from leftists and their “solutions” to global warming than we do from global warming itself.

  • rustyjohn58

    I do find it ironic that while the world rallies against global warming, they are in fact cooling. As opposed to Australia who under Tony Abbott refused to accept that global warming exists but are in fact warming. Poor old Aussies, even when they are right they are wrong.

  • JohnO

    Here is the current graph of data from satellite air-temperature measurements of the atmosphere below the inversion layer. It looks to me as if the red line is going to go up again soon, busting the “temperature increase plateau” evident since 2002.

  • Dave of the West Bank

    The Paris Con(p)21 is extremely strong evidence of one of two things: they’re all as thick as a sack of hammers, or they’re a bunch of manipulative, lying mendacious swine. They can take their pick!

    Ironic, I think, that 40,000 or 50,000 troughers are in Paris (think of the cost!) pontificating on a perceived threat that has killed no one, while thousands of security guys and cops protect them from a very real threat that only a couple of weeks ago killed 130 in Paris, and 10s (100s?) of thousands of others elsewhere in recent years.

    I really think a meeting of the Mafia bosses and the Mexican and South American drug cartels would do less damage to world health, prosperity and freedom than the hysterical numpties polluting Paris at present.

59%