Go Back   This Blue Marble, a Global Current Events Discussion Forum > Main Floor > Science Center

Science Center Our science center is equipped to facilitate a variety of general scientific discussions, including physics, environment science, astronomy and technology research.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-09-2017, 10:44 AM   #1
Exodia
Khan of the Golden Horde
 
Exodia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southeast PA
Posts: 11,341
Thanks: 2,657
Thanked 4,935 Times in 2,209 Posts
Default More junk data from NOAA pushed out before Paris Agreement

For those who have a hard time understanding why I have a hard time trusting this data. Just look at the amount of manipulation occurs. Boggles the mind that scientists would feel comfortable with this. Gives you a glimpse of why Sheldon smirks at those in the softer sciences...

Quote:
Exposed: How world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data

--The Mail on Sunday can reveal a landmark paper exaggerated global warming
--It was rushed through and timed to influence the Paris agreement on climate change
--America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules
--The report claimed the pause in global warming never existed, but it was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data


The Mail on Sunday today reveals astonishing evidence that the organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.

A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015.
The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.
But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.

It was never subjected to NOAA’s rigorous internal evaluation process – which Dr Bates devised.

His vehement objections to the publication of the faulty data were overridden by his NOAA superiors in what he describes as a ‘blatant attempt to intensify the impact’ of what became known as the Pausebuster paper.

snip

NOAA’s 2015 ‘Pausebuster’ paper was based on two new temperature sets of data – one containing measurements of temperatures at the planet’s surface on land, the other at the surface of the seas.

Both datasets were flawed. This newspaper has learnt that NOAA has now decided that the sea dataset will have to be replaced and substantially revised just 18 months after it was issued, because it used unreliable methods which overstated the speed of warming. The revised data will show both lower temperatures and a slower rate in the recent warming trend.

The land temperature dataset used by the study was afflicted by devastating bugs in its software that rendered its findings ‘unstable’.

The paper relied on a preliminary, ‘alpha’ version of the data which was never approved or verified.

A final, approved version has still not been issued. None of the data on which the paper was based was properly ‘archived’ – a mandatory requirement meant to ensure that raw data and the software used to process it is accessible to other scientists, so they can verify NOAA results.


Dr Bates retired from NOAA at the end of last year after a 40-year career in meteorology and climate science. As recently as 2014, the Obama administration awarded him a special gold medal for his work in setting new, supposedly binding standards ‘to produce and preserve climate data records’.
Yet when it came to the paper timed to influence the Paris conference, Dr Bates said, these standards were flagrantly ignored.

snip

The sea dataset used by Thomas Karl and his colleagues – known as Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperatures version 4, or ERSSTv4, tripled the warming trend over the sea during the years 2000 to 2014 from just 0.036C per decade – as stated in version 3 – to 0.099C per decade. Individual measurements in some parts of the globe had increased by about 0.1C and this resulted in the dramatic increase of the overall global trend published by the Pausebuster paper. But Dr Bates said this increase in temperatures was achieved by dubious means. Its key error was an upwards ‘adjustment’ of readings from fixed and floating buoys, which are generally reliable, to bring them into line with readings from a much more doubtful source – water taken in by ships. This, Dr Bates explained, has long been known to be questionable: ships are themselves sources of heat, readings will vary from ship to ship, and the depth of water intake will vary according to how heavily a ship is laden – so affecting temperature readings.

Dr Bates said: ‘They had good data from buoys. And they threw it out and “corrected” it by using the bad data from ships. You never change good data to agree with bad, but that’s what they did – so as to make it look as if the sea was warmer.’

ERSSTv4 ‘adjusted’ buoy readings up by 0.12C. It also ignored data from satellites that measure the temperature of the lower atmosphere, which are also considered reliable. Dr Bates said he gave the paper’s co-authors ‘a hard time’ about this, ‘and they never really justified what they were doing.’
Now, some of those same authors have produced the pending, revised new version of the sea dataset – ERSSTv5. A draft of a document that explains the methods used to generate version 5, and which has been seen by this newspaper, indicates the new version will reverse the flaws in version 4, changing the buoy adjustments and including some satellite data and measurements from a special high-tech floating buoy network known as Argo. As a result, it is certain to show reductions in both absolute temperatures and recent global warming.

The second dataset used by the Pausebuster paper was a new version of NOAA’s land records, known as the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN), an analysis over time of temperature readings from about 4,000 weather stations spread across the globe.

This new version found past temperatures had been cooler than previously thought, and recent ones higher – so that the warming trend looked steeper. For the period 2000 to 2014, the paper increased the rate of warming on land from 0.15C to 0.164C per decade.

In the weeks after the Pausebuster paper was published, Dr Bates conducted a one-man investigation into this. His findings were extraordinary. Not only had Mr Karl and his colleagues failed to follow any of the formal procedures required to approve and archive their data, they had used a ‘highly experimental early run’ of a programme that tried to combine two previously separate sets of records.

This had undergone the critical process known as ‘pairwise homogeneity adjustment’, a method of spotting ‘rogue’ readings from individual weather stations by comparing them with others nearby.

However, this process requires extensive, careful checking which was only just beginning, so that the data was not ready for operational use. Now, more than two years after the Pausebuster paper was submitted to Science, the new version of GHCN is still undergoing testing.


Moreover, the GHCN software was afflicted by serious bugs. They caused it to become so ‘unstable’ that every time the raw temperature readings were run through the computer, it gave different results. The new, bug-free version of GHCN has still not been approved and issued. It is, Dr Bates said, ‘significantly different’ from that used by Mr Karl and his co-authors.

Dr Bates revealed that the failure to archive and make available fully documented data not only violated NOAA rules, but also those set down by Science. Before he retired last year, he continued to raise the issue internally. Then came the final bombshell. Dr Bates said: ‘I learned that the computer used to process the software had suffered a complete failure.’

The reason for the failure is unknown, but it means the Pausebuster paper can never be replicated or verified by other scientists.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ming-data.html
__________________
"Now, mark my words. So long as we are a young and virtuous people, this instrument will bind us together in mutual interests, mutual welfare, and mutual happiness. But when we become old and corrupt, it will bind us no longer" - Alexander Hamilton about the US Constitution.
Exodia is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Exodia For This Useful Post:
Cactus Az (02-13-2017), dharma (02-09-2017), rb. (02-09-2017), Sonny (02-13-2017), Wojapi (02-09-2017)
Old 02-09-2017, 11:42 AM   #2
Ross
Lifetime Member
 
Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 14,985
Thanks: 5,766
Thanked 6,143 Times in 2,759 Posts
Thanks .

I have been watching the latest revelations and am pessimistic that anything
will change unless Trump organizes a formal investigation , including
an investigation in to whether they have been receiving corrupt payments.

This outrageous situation has of course persisted for decades and
simultaneously invalidates other global datasets because they incorporate
data supplied by NOAA/ GHCN .

Doubtless all the true believers in alarmist global warming will continue as before ,
with eyes firmly closed .

..


..
__________________
All paper is a short position on gold . “Gold is money. Everything else is credit.”

“If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” ( Noam Chomsky )

‘you can judge a man’s spirit by the amount of truth he can tolerate.’ .... Nietzsche

Last edited by Ross; 02-09-2017 at 11:49 AM.
Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2017, 02:16 PM   #3
Auburn Boy
Denizen of the Gold Fields
 
Auburn Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,422
Thanks: 2,318
Thanked 1,110 Times in 653 Posts
So we are to believe:

Quote:
A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report,
And refute all the prior work?

From the DAILY MAIL??? Is that like trusting the National Enquirer?
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help her gain world domination
Can't leave the Siwwy Wabbit behind!!
Auburn Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2017, 02:34 PM   #4
rb.
Climate Change is FAKE NEWS
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 14,444
Thanks: 2,726
Thanked 3,986 Times in 1,877 Posts
AB, here ya go. Not Daily Mail or the Enquirer. More ignoring of news by MSM that doesn't fit their agenda.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ation-climate/
rb. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2017, 04:09 PM   #5
Exodia
Khan of the Golden Horde
 
Exodia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southeast PA
Posts: 11,341
Thanks: 2,657
Thanked 4,935 Times in 2,209 Posts
From rb's link:

Quote:
The whistleblower, John Bates, who retired in December as principal scientist of the National Climatic Data Center...
This is one of THEIR guys, who wrote the protocol on how to handle the data. Not some crackpot with a youtube account.

Quote:
And refute all the prior work?
If this is the way that data was handled in the prior work (and previous scandals - ClimateGate - would suggest it has been), then, yes.

I don't think that you and I will ever agree on this, so I'm not sure debating back in forth will go anywhere, but I'll try this analogy. It's like throwing darts at a blank board and then drawing circles around them to get the scores they want. They are obviously hunting for the data and trends they want to prove their hypothesis, and when something doesn't fit, you massage it or explain it away.
__________________
"Now, mark my words. So long as we are a young and virtuous people, this instrument will bind us together in mutual interests, mutual welfare, and mutual happiness. But when we become old and corrupt, it will bind us no longer" - Alexander Hamilton about the US Constitution.
Exodia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2017, 07:05 PM   #6
rb.
Climate Change is FAKE NEWS
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 14,444
Thanks: 2,726
Thanked 3,986 Times in 1,877 Posts
Ex, you mean prove their FUNDING.
rb. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2017, 08:22 PM   #7
Ross
Lifetime Member
 
Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 14,985
Thanks: 5,766
Thanked 6,143 Times in 2,759 Posts
NOAA investigating themselves .... what a joke .

Beyond farcical .

..
__________________
All paper is a short position on gold . “Gold is money. Everything else is credit.”

“If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” ( Noam Chomsky )

‘you can judge a man’s spirit by the amount of truth he can tolerate.’ .... Nietzsche
Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 12:39 PM   #8
Exodia
Khan of the Golden Horde
 
Exodia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southeast PA
Posts: 11,341
Thanks: 2,657
Thanked 4,935 Times in 2,209 Posts
When you play these kinds of games, it's hard to maintain credibility.

Some updates:

Quote:
It has even triggered an inquiry by Congress. Lamar Smith, the Texas Republican who chairs the House of Representatives’ science committee, is renewing demands for documents about the controversial paper, which was produced by America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the world’s leading source of climate data.
In his view, the whistleblower had shown that ‘NOAA cheated and got caught’. No wonder Smith and many others are concerned: the revelations go to the very heart of the climate change industry and the scientific claims we are told we can trust.

snip

Then there is the matter of timing. Documents obtained by this newspaper show that NOAA, ignoring protests by Dr Bates, held back publication of the version 4 sea dataset several months after it was ready – to intensify the impact of the Pausebuster paper. It also meant more sceptical voices had no chance to examine the figures.

snip

Our revelations showed there was another problem with the Pausebuster paper – it used an untested experimental version of the dataset recording temperatures on land, which had not been properly archived and made accessible to other scientists.

This was a fundamental breach of mandatory rules under NOAA’s Climate Data Records programme, which Bates had devised.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...#ixzz4YaGecMp9
__________________
"Now, mark my words. So long as we are a young and virtuous people, this instrument will bind us together in mutual interests, mutual welfare, and mutual happiness. But when we become old and corrupt, it will bind us no longer" - Alexander Hamilton about the US Constitution.
Exodia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 03:04 PM   #9
Dietrich
Niche player
 
Dietrich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,168
Thanks: 408
Thanked 883 Times in 492 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exodia View Post
When you play these kinds of games, it's hard to maintain credibility.
In a normal intellectual debate, sure. But this is a religious battle, on both sides but especially so on the believers-in-global warming side. There are few people open to evidence or news.
Dietrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 05:47 PM   #10
Ross
Lifetime Member
 
Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 14,985
Thanks: 5,766
Thanked 6,143 Times in 2,759 Posts
I am worried that skeptics/deniers are being set up , or at least
that was the original intention of this possibly ''created'' story .

A few weeks or months ago social researchers claimed to have
discovered a ''vaccine'' for skeptics which involved releasing fake
skeptical stories but with deliberately weakened evidence . The intent being to
weaken skepticism .

Part of this original story would fit neatly in to such a plot . For
example the chart comparing 2 graph lines , both of which are
fiddled data ( rather than just one ) .

Fortunately the discussion has ( in some circles anyway ) moved
beyond the original story to a discussion of the NOAA leaderships
role in fiddling a wide array of temperature records .

...
__________________
All paper is a short position on gold . “Gold is money. Everything else is credit.”

“If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” ( Noam Chomsky )

‘you can judge a man’s spirit by the amount of truth he can tolerate.’ .... Nietzsche
Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
agreement, data, junk, noaa, paris, pushed

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.