|
.. |
|
|
The head chefs at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), working from a slightly different recipe, reveal a 2009 that was not as well done as NASA’s, ranking only the fifth-warmest since 1880. There is a major problem with the NASA and NOAA numbers, according to skeptical researchers who have dissected the data: They are inaccurate, the result of cherry-picking, computer manipulation and “best guess” interpretation. Veteran meteorologist Joe D’Aleo – a long-time critic of official global-warming statistics – says NASA and NOAA are manipulating the data, calling their actions the U.S. version of last year’s Climategate scandal. “NOAA and NASA are complicit in the misrepresentation or manipulation of data to support the supposed [global warming] consensus,” says D’Aleo, who also heads ICECAP, the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project. What warming? According to D’Aleo: “Global temperatures peaked in late 1990s, leveled off, and have been declining since 2001. All four official databases – NOAA’s NCDC, Hadley CRU, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAH), and Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – confirm the decline.” Satellite data and land-ocean data sets are diverging. Last year, NOAA announced that June global temperatures ranked the second-warmest in 130 years, while the two satellite data sources -- UAH and RSS -- ranked the month's temperatures the 15th and 14th coldest, respectively, in 31 years of record-keeping. In 2009, all regions of the United States were normal or below normal except for the Southwest and Florida, according to the NCDC. The annual temperature in 2008 was the coolest since 1997, according to NOAA. Thirty-eight of 50 states set their all-time record temperatures in the decades prior to 1960. According to the NCDC, 1936 experienced the hottest overall summer on record in the continental United States. In fact, out of 50 states, 22 recorded their all-time high temperature during the 1930s. According to the Danish Meteorological Institute, arctic temperatures are currently below minus 31.27 degrees, more than five degrees below normal and the lowest since 2004. Last year...October was the third coldest and December the 14th coldest in the United States in 115 years.
Global warming and cooling are cyclical. Not a single official computer model predicted the recent decline (since 2001) in global temperatures. Yet extended projections from the same models are referenced by eco-alarmists demanding draconian CO2-emission controls and the imposition of carbon taxes and cap-and-trade restrictions. The NASA/NOAA recipe To cook temperature data and warm the earth artificially, NASA and NOAA have whipped up a nifty recipe. Here are the not-so-secret ingredients for global warming: 1) Reduce temperature reporting stations across the globe from nearly 6,000 in 1970 to 1,500 or less today. 2) Drop out reporting stations in higher latitudes (colder), higher elevations (colder) and mainly rural locations (colder). 3) Cool early temperature records through data “adjustments” to create the impression of a current warming trend. 4) Fail to compensate or under-compensate for urban growth and land-use changes that can produce localized warming known as the urban heat island (UHI) effect. 5) Cherry-pick thermometers from reporting stations sited at busy airports and other warm locales (e.g. near the coast or at lower elevations). 6) Fill gaps in the shrunk-down thermometer network by estimating temperatures using a system of global grid boxes. Then “populate” the grids with thermometers stationed at lower latitudes and altitudes, or near the coast and in other warm spots. 7) If there are no temperature stations inside the grid box, use the closest station in a nearby box (for example, at the bottom of a mountain plateau or on the coast). 8) Adjust the final temperature dataset using “homogenization,” a blending process that effectively spreads a warm bias to all surrounding stations. 9) Voila, global warming made easy! Another bumper cherry-picking season For example: NOAA collects data from only 35 sites in Canada, down from 600 in the 1970s. After 1990, NOAA tripled the number of Canadian reporting stations at lower elevations while reducing by half the number at elevations above 300 feet. According to D'Aleo, “High-elevation stations have disappeared from the database. Stations in the Andes and Bolivia have vanished. Only 25 percent of (Russia's) reporting stations were included in the (Hadley CRU's) global temperature calculations. (The same pruned dataset was used by NOAA.). The temperature stations that were removed often show no substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century. Anthony Watts of SurfaceStation.org says the U.S. temperature record can't be trusted. Michael Smith, a California-based software engineer, who was instrumental, along with D'Aleo, in crunching the NOAA/NASA data and exposing the temperature tampering, says the historical climate data used by both agencies is obsolete by 20 years and is a mess. “The ongoing maintenance of the data has been botched,” he says. “The warming isn’t global and isn’t from CO2. An extraordinary hatred of mountains and other cold locations shows up in the data.” Global warming claims not credible In their just-published research paper, “Surface Temperature Records: Policy Driven Deception,” authors D’Aleo and Watts claim that surface-temperature data has been so widely tampered with “that it cannot be credibly asserted there has been a significant ‘global warming’ in the 20th Century.”
“The global databases are seriously flawed and can no longer be trusted
to assess climate trends or rankings or validate model forecasts. And,
consequently, such data should be ignored for decision-making,” they
conclude.
|
