Global Data Change – Vital Signs Of NASA Climate Corruption

In 1982, NASA showed about 10 mm of sea level rise from 1955 to 1980. Now they show almost 40 mm of sea level rise during that same period. They quadrupled recent sea level rise by altering the data, or perhaps went back in time and took some new readings.

screen-shot-2016-10-03-at-11-25-43-pm

NASA 1982    NASA 2016

But quadrupling sea level rise wasn’t enough for NASA experts, so in 1993 they switched over to satellite measurements, which immediately doubled their already quadrupled sea level rise. Satellite orbits decay over time, and it doesn’t require a lot of decay to bring them 1.7 mm closer to earth over the period of a year.

screen-shot-2016-10-04-at-7-20-53-am

NASA is the same agency which ignores satellite temperature data, because it doesn’t suit their global warming agenda. Satellites are only used when supportive of their agenda, and only for measurements which are most subject to decay errors.

screen-shot-2016-10-01-at-6-15-48-am

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

The net effect of their data tampering is an 800% increase in sea level rise. Ninety percent of NOAA tide gauges are below NASA’s claimed 3.4 mm/year, and the average of all tide gauges is only about one mm/year.

screen-shot-2016-10-04-at-7-59-13-am

Sea Level Trends – MSL global stations trends table

The 1990 IPCC report said sea level rise rates did not accelerate during the 20th century.

screen-shot-2016-10-04-at-8-08-51-am

ipcc_far_wg_I_chapter_09.pdf

NOAA says sea level is rising half as fast as NASA claims.

screen-shot-2016-10-04-at-8-16-10-am

absolute global sea level rise is believed to be 1.7-1.8 millimeters/year

Sea Level Trends – Global Regional Trends

NASA’s claims about sea level rise don’t stand up to any scrutiny, but they generate revenue for the climate community – so they breeze through peer review.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Global Data Change – Vital Signs Of NASA Climate Corruption

  1. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    NASA, NSF, EPA, DOE, etc. use public research funds to pay pseudo-scientists to shield world leaders from public knowledge of their total ineptness.

    A simple mathematical error in the Weizsacker-Bethe definition of nuclear binding energy successfully hide the source of energy that powers the Sun from the public for eighty years (1936-2016) ago. See sloping baseline used to calculate nuclear binding energy across top of Figure 2:

    http://www.journalijar.com/article/11650/neutron-repulsion–social-costs-from-overlooking-this-power/

    Any competent scientist or mathematician can easily see the error, but any who publicly proclaim – The Emperor is stark naked!” – will soon be without public research funds.

  2. LexingtonGreen says:

    Great post! Thank you!

  3. annieoakley says:

    Why is Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel so high?

  4. Andy DC says:

    A couple of weeks ago, the NY Times had a one page article about horrific sea level rise that was shown as being very rapid and very dangerous. Using the fraudulent doctored charts provided to them by NASA.

    There was a time when newspapers tried to delve into the truth. No longer true, they are simply propaganda mouth pieces, nothing better than Pravda used to be in the Soviet Union. I wonder if there is any way to sue them for putting out such blatant lies.

    • DD More says:

      Gail ,
      Pew poll on Americans Don’t Believe in ‘Scientific Consensus’ on Climate Change

      What are the questions? And what are the beliefs?

      agree that “almost all” climate scientists say that human behavior is mostly responsible for climate change

      said that climate scientists understand “very well” or “fairly well” or “not too well” or “not at all.”

      trust in climate scientists’ solutions to climate change.

      Do people really know what these guys/gals ‘Say’, ‘Understand’ or ‘the Solutions’.

      Pew answered already – ” few Americans – only 11 percent – follow news about climate change “very closely.”

    • Steve Case says:

      It all depends on the events of Tuesday 8 November 2016

  5. Billy Liar says:

    NASA’s best satellite for bizarre results is GRACE.

  6. delete skout says:

    Bring It! New England needs a huge storm! Terrible drought right now. We need 16-32 inches of rain. It would be nice if it stalled and just sat over the area for a few days.

  7. Pingback: Global Data Change – Vital Signs Of NASA Climate Corruption - Principia Scientific International

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.