CPAC Panel On Climate Fake News

Steve Milloy, James Delingpole, John Fund and myself did a panel discussion on fake climate news at CPAC, sponsored by the CO2 Coalition. Well worth 90 minutes of your time.  You can watch it on Facebook here.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to CPAC Panel On Climate Fake News

  1. Steve Case says:

    Thank you for your very excellent slide show presentation. Going through those bullet point illustrations one by one hammers home what is going on.

    Like everyone else in the world I don’t have time to do everything, and your presentation is the only one I sat and watched all the way through. I wished it would have continued to cover all the other “Climate Change” issues that have been manipulated and propagandized over the last 30+ years.

  2. mat says:

    Can we not have to use Fakebook to view the vid?

  3. JPinBalt says:

    Tony,
    At CPAC (about 53 min into vid), you cite the change in average latitude going from 40 to 32 degrees for station data used because of dropped stations. You note that for every 1 degree latitude drop that it is 1 degree C warmer. If you do the rough adjustment, that is 8 degrees C claimed warmer due to average station latitude being more south. The claimed current anomaly by GISS is say about 1 degree C. That is a huge difference. A rough correction solely due to falling station latitude bias would mean we are currently colder than last ice age with the “anomaly” at -7 C.

    I will take the latitude temp spread as given, say 90 degrees C difference on average between equator and north pole, makes sense. Re-adjusting for an 8 degree latitude fall in average stations by adding 8 degrees C does not. I did not read the Guelph paper. Was that actual stations reporting not including fake nonexistent imputed stations (?later trending north?) to explain things? Care to elaborate on backing out the lower latitude station discrepancy?
    There are many cooks (?crooks?), ingredients, and recipes for temperature, altitude adjustment for Betty Crocker, but looking for how latitude station adjustment works in recipe before I subtract 8 degrees. (I prefer using RSS w/o adjustments.)
    http://www.bettycrocker.com/how-to/tipslibrary/baking-tips/baking-cooking-high-altitudes

    • AndyG55 says:

      “I prefer using RSS w/o adjustments.”

      Trouble is, it only exists from 1979.

      I also find that 1ºC for each degree a rather large delta, and would like to see the proof behind it.

      But even if it was say quarter of that, then an 8 degree shift in latitude is 2ºC ..

      …. which is still TWICE the warming in GISS since 1880

    • Gail Combs says:

      JPinBalt says…..

      You missed the other 1/2 of the equation.

      Once the REAL DATA is removed from the calculations, the prestidigitators can substitute ANY number they want.

      “If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts.” (Contains many of Tony’s graphs)

      …A large portion of these adjustments is due to NOAA simply making up data. If they are missing data at a particular station one month, they use a computer model to fabricate the temperature for that month. Since 1970, the percent of fabricated data has increased from 10% to almost half of the data. The US temperature record from NASA and NOAA is thus a completely meaningless fabrication, which bears no resemblance to the thermometer data it is derived from….

      Posted on July 20, 2014 Quick Summary Of NCDC Data Tampering Forensics

      …. here is a quick summary of things I can prove so far about the US temperature record.

      * Until 1999 NASA said the US was on a long term cooling trend

      * Until 1989 NOAA said there was no long term warming in the US

      * Sometime after 2000, NOAA made a large downwards shift in the absolute baseline temperature. This is probably why Nick and Zeke keep insisting on the use of anomalies, as it hides the shift.

      * Temperatures are being adjusted an average of about 1.5F relative to the 1930s

      * The raw data does not support the validity of a TOBS adjustment

      * NOAA is doing something in their conversion from daily data to monthly data to create a bias which selectively cools the past – which in turn creates the appearance that TOBS is valid.

      Since 1990, almost all warming is due to infilling of non-existent temperature data.

      And to top it all off, the UHI adjustment is much too small. The US is on a long term cooling trend for over 90 years, and used to be hotter. NCDC US temperature graphs do not even remotely resemble the actual US climate, and actually reverse the trend….

    • Gail Combs says:

      NOAA whose annual budget request exceeded $5.5 billion dollars in 2015, stuck Kent Clibze with a bill of $262,000 as the cost of complying with his FOIA. The FOIA was for the documents that record the ‘rationale, methodology and discussions’ relating to temperature adjustments carried out by NOAA.

      The article also shows how data records are kept… Photos of climate data archives at Mozambique, El Salvador, Paraguay and Saudi Arabia
      https://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2015/03/21/climate-money-and-adjustments-keeping-things-in-perspective/

      So what the heck is NOAA spending the money on? It certainly isn’t on well sited and maintained weather stations!!!
      http://www.surfacestations.org/

      USA citizens are not the only ones having problems extracting the data from government ClimAstrologists.
      From http://joannenova.com.au/2014/03/dennis-jensen-mp-calls-for-audit-on-the-bom-and-csiro-data/#comments

      “Dr Darko Butina
      March 28, 2014 at 1:52 am · Reply
      The institutions that really need audit are those that are responsible for looking after the global thermometer-based data, like NOAA and NASA. During the writing of my latest paper on the Arctic temperature patterns based on thermometer (and not this theoretical monster called ‘global temperature’ which needs killing without prejudice!) I came across the latest version update of GHCN which not only updated temperatures for the Arctic region between 2003 and 2013, but consistently changed historical data between 1890′s to 2003 as well!!!! Please check http://www.l4patterns.com/Data_and_Knowledge.html and the brief report there “Constant and systematic abuse of the historical thermometer-based data by the curators of those datasets: NASA, NOAA and GHCN”. It is an example of the scientific fraud of the greatest proportions. If any of you have datasets accessed via KNMI software do check your datasets before March 1 2014 and the same datasets since.

      Dr Darko Butina”

      AND these clowns want us to believe they can accurately determine the temperature of the earth to hundredths of a degree Celsius?

  4. JPinBalt says:

    Oops, meant subtracting 8 degrees C, not adding, for average station latitude readjustment.

  5. Steven Fraser says:

    I enjoyed your presentation. Direct, no fluff, and easy to follow. Congrats!

  6. CheshireRed says:

    Tony, another strong presentation! Have you considered getting each of these points covered in a short video? Slide presentations are ok but are a bit limited and don’t engage with an internet-savvy audience these days anywhere near as well as video.

    Example; your evidence for data tampering / adjustments is utterly compelling (so much so that NOAA, GISS et al’s failure to launch any sort of legal challenge is a deafening and imo incriminating silence.) But how much more compelling would it be if instead of slides – which require an often ill-informed public to actually look at them and draw their own conclusions – it was packaged in a short (60-90 sec) video, with a narrated voiceover saying exactly what YOU want to be said? Don’t forget people are also LAZY so can’t be arsed trawling through stuff, reading it and actually working it out for themselves. They really DO need spoon feeding.

    Your videos would also be posted globally on many more media sites than you get exposure to at present as it’s far more engaging content, so you’d get your message across to far more people and most of all you wouldn’t be reliant on your audience to join the dots themselves. You’d spell it out, telling and showing along the way exactly on your terms. There’d be no room for misinterpreting anything.

    This can be done for relatively peanuts these days, and I’m sure you could strike a deal with a production co. for sensible rates, especially given the exposure of their productions would get their name onto many a global platform. You could trial one to see how it looks. Personally I think you could send your message to millions like this. Just a thought.

    • Gail Combs says:

      THEY LIE!

      It is ALL the Left has — LIES.

      If people understood what the left was really about — A World Totalitarian dictatorship enforced with blood baths — they would run screaming so they HAVE TO LIE.
      See the leftist bloodbaths of the 20th century — DEMOCIDE: Death by Government

      The Democrats were the party of the slave holders before and during the Civil War. They were the party of Jim Crow Laws after. However that is no longer acceptable so they shed that skin and draped it over the Republicans AND THEY LIED.
      See Hillary’s America by Dineh D’Suisa or History of Democrat Racism — Maggie’s Notebook

      They are NOT classical Liberals, concerned about the freedom OF THE INDIVIDUAL but who cares, they stole the title of ‘Liberal’ to hid their nasty stinking corrupt selves.

      ‘Environmentalism’ is just another label with good emotional connections that they stole just like they stole ‘science’ Again the theft is to hide their true selves and advance their agenda of universal serfdom/slavery for all but the Anointed.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      How is it that the left has a reputation for protecting the environment?

      Because Arctic.

  7. Winnipegboy says:

    “Systems that are dying are rigid, mal-adapted, resistant to change, obsessed with obscuring their failure and retaining their grip on cronyist privilege and power. Big Pharma: dying. Banking: dying. Governance, a.k.a. political processes: dying. Enforced consensus: dying.”

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-27/those-systems-arent-busy-being-born-are-busy-dying

  8. AndyOz says:

    Expect to hear very soon from the CA DWR about spilling of San Luis

    This permanent drought in California is just amazing.
    Katherine Hayhoe and Bill McKibben must be ecstatic that it is officially over.
    Pair of numpties.

    reservoir.http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/resapp/resDetailOrig.action?resid=SNL

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.