Massive NOAA Data Tampering In Texas

Four years ago, NOAA showed Texas winters cooling slightly from 1895 to 2011.

screenhunter_177-aug-25-13-42 (1)

Now they show Texas winters warming rapidly during that same time period.

2016-05-06075533

Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

This graph shows how NOAA has linearly cooled Texas’ past since they published the 2011 graph.

2016-05-06080718

This is standard operating procedure for agencies reporting to Barack Obama. They alter data to support his agenda. It has nothing to do with science.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Massive NOAA Data Tampering In Texas

  1. Charles Higley says:

    If you compare the more recent years, it is also clear that they warmed the present as well as cooled the past.

  2. Rud Istvan says:

    Top figure is Drd964x (2013 state by state) . Next figure is nClimDiv (2014 version state by state. What you show for Texas happened to all but 8 states. Essay When Data Isn’t in ebook Blowing Smoke illustrates California, Michigan, and Maine. Same thing. The net CONUS change is from 0.088F/decade to 0.135F/decade. NOAA said of the shift to nClimDiv, “updated and upgraded…to maintain the strengths of its predecessor while providing more robust estimates…” Citation in essay.

  3. Myron Mesecke says:

    As a native Texan, and having lived all of my 54 years in the same Texas city, this kind of crap really pisses me off.

    I hope I live long enough to get back to the parts of the 65-70 year cycle we had in late 60s and 70s. Deeper snows (though still rare) in central Texas and common dust storms in central Texas. Not that I want dust storms but it will help prove it is all a cycle.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      We appreciate you are willing to take one for science, Myron. :)

      • Myron Mesecke says:

        I just think that so much of the alarmism regarding the climate is the fact that society is so mobile compared to even just a few decades ago. As fewer and fewer people stay in one place, as they constantly relocate, they experience differences in weather that appears to them to be more severe or more unusual. But it isn’t the weather that is changing as much as they are changing where they are experiencing weather. So they become confused. Someone that moves from New York to Texas is going to have hotter summers. But the summers in Texas are no different than they were before that person moved here. And if they move back to New York, after being away for 10 years the New York winters would probably feel colder than they remember. Again, unlikely the winters actually changed much.

        • Pinroot says:

          Don’t forget the fact that many never even experience weather. They live in a climate controlled home, travel to their climate controlled jobs in climate controlled conveyences, and are in the outdoors for only a few minutes a day. They have no personal connection with the weather or the climate and so it’s easy to convince them how terrible it is.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            This is at least the experience of some climate controlled reality but the actual situation is much worse.

            When smart phones became prevalent I ran an experiment and asked multiple people about the weather outside. Many of them responded by checking the weather info in the built-in app of their phone. I asked them where the underlying measurements and weather forecast came from and they gave me blank looks every single time.

            From their phone, they said, what do I mean?

            Not only do they not check the real weather. They look at some iconized and tabulated screen that is an abstraction from measurements and forecasts made who knows where based on data collected yet elsewhere.

            It reminded me of Neal Stephenson following a man watching the entire tour of a small town replica at Disney World’s Magic Kingdom on the screen viewfinder of his running camcorder (In the Beginning … was the Command Line).

            The degrees of separation from reality *) are staggering but many people seem very comfortable with it.
            No wonder so many believe anything shown to them.

            ———-
            *) It’s already dubious to consider our brains’ processing of our sensory input “reality” but I don’t want to talk about that right now.

        • Daniel Joyce says:

          Those of us who work outdoors (in my case, school bus driving; it’s mandatory to inspect the vehicle thoroughly each day) have no trouble whatever sensing what is going on.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            True, and the gap is increasing between those who keep their connection and those who don’t. Real weather is hard to ignore if it directly affects your work and safety.

  4. RAH says:

    Yes everyone knows that Texas is such a terrible place to live with constant droughts or floods or terrible heat due to climate change. That’s why so far in this century it’s population has grown faster than any of the other 48 states due to domestic immigration!

    http://osd.texas.gov/Resources/Publications/2016/2016_04-13_DomesticMigration.pdf

  5. RAH says:

    (lower 48 that is)

  6. Andy DC says:

    I hope President Trump will houseclean big time when he takes over. Perhaps you should serve as his climate adviser.

    Climate change was barely mentioned among the Republican candidates during the primaries. It will no doubt be a much bigger issue during the general election. If Trump is well prepared, he should be able to wipe the floor with Hillary regarding that issue.

    • Not for nothin’, dude, but Trump is just saying stuff to make headlines & get free advertising. When/If he gets in office he’ll do exactly two things about the silly climate séance stuff: jack + shit.

    • Frank K. says:

      I agree with Andy. One of Trump’s virtues, in my opinion, will be his ability to fire government workers without blinking…

      • gator69 says:

        Apparently you have never tried to fire a government worker.

        A CBS News investigation looks at how hard it is for the U.S. government to discipline or fire employees who behave badly. With examples ranging from extravagant to explicit, civil service rules meant to protect public workers from political pressure may be backfiring, and costing you big, reports CBS News correspondent Don Dahler.

        At the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), red tape is preventing the removal of a top level employee accused of viewing porn two to six hours a day while at work, since 2010. Even though investigators found 7,000 pornographic files on his computer and even caught him watching porn, he remains on the payroll.

        At a Congressional hearing, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy was asked why she hadn’t fired the employee and said, “I actually have to work through the administrative process, as you know.”

        The administrative process meant to prevent against politically motivated firings is the civil servant protection system. The rules give employees the right to appeal a termination, a process that can take up two years.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Andy & Frank, I wish you knew how much I want you to be right and me wrong …

      • RAH says:

        Trump has already started changing positions moving more toward the “center” because he has to in order to have a chance in the general election. I do not view this as significant because it is what they all do. We won’t know what Trump really is unless he gets elected.

        • David A says:

          Rah, it will be interesting if he is elected. “We won’t know what Trump really is unless he gets elected.”, Sad, as this is a bit like Pelosi’s comment about O-care, “We have to pass it to know what’s in it.”

          I would vote for the man in the moon, before Hillary.
          It is difficult to get to know a public figure from the outside. I understand Bush 2 was unfailingly polite and respectful to his entire staff, and I have heard that Trump is very similar in this regard, not the public persona he displays. The stories about Srillary on the other hand are not so kind.

          Policy wise, will hopefully he would truly facilitate or ease the heavy regulations stifling business, stop Muslim immigration, heavily cut federal bureaucracies such as the departments of education and energy, kill the CAGW scam through policy and public education, pursue legal action against the abuses of the O admin including the former SOS, and fire every single Obama appointee and open US land to energy development as needed.

  7. Daniel Joyce says:

    Those who work outdoors have noticed the continuation of cold weather (in my case school bus driving – the vehicle must be inspected thoroughly every day). There are still those who will want to be convinced otherwise, though, such be the power of political propaganda.

    CLIMATEGATE – the revelation that the pseudoscientists at East Anglia University know just as much about the atmosphere as Harvard law professors know about the Constitution

  8. AndyG55 says:

    TH…

    Do you have any temperature data for Fort McMurray back before 1944?

    Is that data in your “Pulling back the Curtain” app?

    Can’t find it.

    Cheers.

  9. Nicholas Schroeder, BSME, PE says:

    1) Per IPCC AR5 Figure 6.1 prior to year 1750 CO2 represented about 1.26% of the total biosphere carbon balance (589/46,713). After mankind’s contributions, 67 % fossil fuel and cement – 33% land use changes, atmospheric CO2 increased to about 1.77% of the total biosphere carbon balance (829/46,713). This represents a shift of 0.51% from all the collected stores, ocean outgassing, carbonates, carbohydrates, etc. not just mankind, to the atmosphere. A 0.51% rearrangement of 46,713 Gt of stores and 100s of Gt annual fluxes doesn’t impress me as measurable let alone actionable, attributable, or significant.

    2) Figure 10 in the Trenberth paper (Atmospheric Moisture Transports…), in addition to substantial differences of opinion, i.e. uncertainties, 7 of the 8 balances showed more energy leaving ToA than entering, i.e. cooling.

    3) Even IPCC AR5 expresses serious doubts about the value of their AOGCMs.

    Three simple points seek three simple rebuttals. All the rest, sea levels, ice caps, polar bears, SST/LTT/ST trends, data tampering, etc. don’t matter, nothing but sound and fury.

  10. David A says:

    ”Figure 10 in the Trenberth paper (Atmospheric Moisture Transports…), in addition to substantial differences of opinion, i.e. uncertainties, 7 of the 8 balances showed more energy leaving ToA than entering, i.e. cooling.”
    =====================
    Do you have a copy of this? Is it in graphic form?

    • Nicholas Schroeder, BSME, PE says:

      I found the graphic by hovering over Bing images of global heat balances, “TrenberthEtal2011” You can ask Trenberth for a .pdf copy of the report like I did.

      trenbert@ucar.edu

      “Atmospheric Moisture Transports from Ocean to Land and Global Energy Flows
      in Reanalyses”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.