Climate Junk Science At NCAR

I was at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder on Saturday, and took this picture there. There was close to a foot of snow on the ground.

Inside their fossil fuel powered building, they had this graph, which claimed to show their models exactly match the global temperature record.

The global temperature record they were referring to, shows warming prior to 1940, a flat period from 1940 to 1970, and rapid linear warming ever since.

NASA Global Land Only Temperature

One huge problem with NCAR’s claim is that the NASA graph looks nothing like NCAR’s own graph from 1974, which showed 1970 0.1C cooler than 1870, and a 0.4C drop in global temperature from 1940 to 1970.

14 Jul 1974, Page 1 – Lincoln Evening Journal

Overlaying the 1974 NCAR graph on the 2017 graph, it becomes clear that  the 1940 to 1970 cooling has been erased.

NCAR’s top scientists were pushing global cooling at the time.

12 Jun 1974, Page 20 – at

Scientists wanted to melt the polar ice cap to save the world from global cooling.


There was unanimous consensus among scientists that the Earth was cooling.

January 30, 1961 – NYTimes

TimesMachine: July 18, 1970 –

18 Jul 1963 – Glaciers Grow In Norway

Lawrence Journal-World – Google News Archive Search

It is clear that NCAR’s “actual temperature record” is actually fake data from 1940 to 1970, but what about the rest of the graph which shows steady warming since 1970? That is also fake. As of 2013, there was a pause in warming after the year 2000, which was central to the IPCC report.

Global warming pause ‘central’ to IPCC climate report – BBC News

Government agencies later erased the post-2000 hiatus, because Obama needed to push his scam climate treaty through. NCAR’s director knows perfectly well that the hiatus is real.

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.

  • Kevin Trenberth. NCAR Director 2009

Satellites show that the hiatus is real, and that the surface temperature record from NASA is fake.

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

The bottom line is the fake NCAR models have been parametrized to exactly match the fake NASA surface temperature record. Both the models and surface temperature record are utter junk science.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Climate Junk Science At NCAR

  1. Greg McCall says:

    Sunday, on my way to San Diego from Chicago, I flew right over Denver and snapped the attached picture. We were just South of the Denver airport the picture is looking toward Boulder. I knew you would be having a heyday with the storm passing through during the climate march.

  2. Greg McCall says:

    Sorry, that should be rotated 90 deg clockwise.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Thanks, rotated.

      • Robertv says:

        America from above divided in squares like a concentration camp easy to control.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Not really, just efficient town design.

          • Robertv says:

            America is now one big town ? Great for wildlife.

          • gator69 says:

            Most of America, is rural…

            The United States has many rural areas. Seventy-two percent of United States’ land area belongs to rural counties, but in 2014, just 46.2 million Americans (roughly 15% of the population of the country at the time) lived in these areas.


            What most folks who have not traveled around the US by motor vehicle do not comprehend, is how large this country is and how much open space we have. I live in a very rural county, and in this part of the country it is possible to drive for hours without seeing another vehicle on the road.

            It’s F’ing awesome.

          • AndyG55 says:

            US land area (not counting lakes and Alaska) = approx. 7.67 million km². Population 320 million

            Australia land area 7.69 million km²
            population 25 million.


          • gator69 says:

            Thanks for pointing out how much more desirable our land is, as compared to yours Andy. We’re not big on useless unproductive spaces up here. Besides, the view is always better on top. ;-)

          • AndyG55 says:

            “We’re not big on useless unproductive spaces up here. ”

            Let’s hope Trump can pull off a miracle , then.

          • gator69 says:

            “We’re not big on useless unproductive spaces up here. ”

            My bad, I should have said, “We’re not big on large unproductive spaces up here. ”

            Those small unproductive spaces between the ears of leftists are indeed rabidly sought after by progressives up here, and everywhere, but you won’t find many progressives in my county.

  3. czechlist says:

    Watched CSpan Washington Journal this AM
    Subject was Climate Change and the Trump Admin.
    Guest – Friends of the Earth Senior POLITICAL STRATEGIST
    Guess Bill Nye, Al Gore, Leo DiCaprio nor any REAL SCIENTISTs were available

  4. Arn says:

    Even in boulder they use red and orange color in their graphs
    to emphasize how “hot” it is getting :)

  5. Brad says:

    Completely off topic: do you ride your bike in such conditions?

  6. AndyG55 says:

    UAH is in

    Pretty much as expected

    NH down slightly , SH and tropics and globe up slightly

    I has been a rather nice April down here :-)

    2017… 03.. +0.19.. +0.30.. +0.07…. +0.03
    2017… 04.. +0.27.. +0.27.. +0.26…. +0.21

  7. Andy DC says:

    I compared weather records for many US cites during the 1920’s to same city records from the 1970’s. No comparison, the 1970’s were far colder and snowier. In fact Washington, DC’s normal January temperature dropped 1.6 degrees F during that approximte time frame.

  8. Louis Hooffstetter says:

    How ironically appropriate would it would be if the modeled temperatures were produced by NCAR’s Single Column Model (SCAM).

    Seriously, no joke:

  9. Jeffk says:

    The particulate dust from WW II bombs and post-war factories could explain the 1940-70 pause or cooling. Then the coal plants and factories in China stirred up more pause particles last 20 years. We only seem to warm during recessions or times of peace.

  10. Colorado Wellington says:

    The tripod moved today in the Nenana Ice Classic:

    The Tanana River Ice Officially Broke Up and Went Out at 12 Noon May 1st, 2017!

    And the trend line of the annual breakup dates for the last 30 years of global warming is still flat.

    • Glacierman says:

      Yep. Took as long to break up as it did 100 years ago in 1917 – May 1.

      That is really scary./sarc.

      • Colorado Wellington says:

        Yep. Actually it took a day longer for the ice to rot away than in the year of the glorious 1917 “October” Revolution. The ice broke at 11:30am on April 30, 1917 (per NSIDC).

        • John Niclasen says:

          My version of this data. I have turned the y-axis upside down, so cold is down, warm up.

          I see a warm top around the year 1940, then a cooling trend for a few decades, then a warming for a few. The warming stopped at the end of the 90’ies, and then we have a plateau … or maybe a slightly falling trend up until today.

          Just like so many real scientific datasets.

      • Colorado Wellington says:

        In other climate news related to 1917, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin is still dead, embalmed and rotting away in his climate-controlled mausoleum.

        Of course, nothing will stop the Progressives from trying to bring him back to life in 2017. They are a tenacious bunch.

      • Colorado Wellington says:


        The Nenana Ice Classic 2017 Jackpot is $267,444.

        They Alaska railroad engineers had the right idea with betting on the breakup. We should set up a gambling site where Progressives could bet on the exact time Lenin will rise from the dead. There is a leftist sucker born every minute and this should be bigger than Powerball.

  11. AndyG55 says:

    Very interesting point about the Holocene.

    Makes an absolute MOCKERY of the AGW scam.

    The WARMEST part, Holocene Optimum, of the Holocene was 9000-6000 year ago, when CO2 was at its LOWEST !!!

    The COOLEST part (last 1000 years or so), is when CO2 was at its HIGHEST.

    Someone has made a VERY BIG OOPS !!!

    • AndyG55 says:

      ps, I might have time at the weekend to graph the CO2 from Epica against the GISP temperature data.

      If someone gets there first.. it would be appreciated.


      • John Niclasen says:

        Blue is CO2 from EPICA Dome C, red is d18O from GISP2.

        Zero on x-axis, “Present”, is 1950.

      • John Niclasen says:

        Ole Humlum did almost same comparison in Fig. 3 here:

      • John Niclasen says:

        Maybe it would be better to compare CO2 against actual temperatures, measured with very precise thermometers down the bore holes. The ice ‘remember’, how cold or warm it was, when the snow fell. Such data is available from e.g. GRIP in Greenland and Law Dome in Antarctica.

        3000 years ago, both hemispheres started to cool at the same time.

      • AndyG55 says:

        here’s what I meant.

        • Latitude says:

          Now that’s a graph!…..

          You know, those stair steps of temps going down to the present….are pretty dang equal…

        • John Niclasen says:

          I agree, it is a good argument.

          I need to get information, how precise the CO2 values are for these ice cores, and it could be nice to include CO2 from several different ice cores, both from Greenland and Antarctica. I guess, they would/should be much the same, as gasses are well mixed in the atmosphere.

  12. Advocatus Diaboli says:

    Looking at the NCAR chart, I notice that they are careful to mark volcanic eruptions at the start of some dips in the temperature levels.

    But not others.

  13. dave1billion says:

    Interesting. Their hindcasted models seem to do a VERY good job of matching the temperatures shown on their chart.

    Given that they can accurately predict the past, we can obviously trust the same models to predict the future. That’s seems to be what great Science is about nowadays.

    I propose that they use their modeling methodology to create a model for World Series Winners for the last 100 years or so and then wager all of their grant money predicting the winners of the next 5 World Series from, say, the week after the model is complete.

    Or they could use this hindcasting methodology to create a stock market model based on the period from, let’s say, post World War II to today and invest their own money based on the model. Then they wouldn’t even need any grant money.

    They’re willing to wager trillions of dollars (of other people’s money) and untold millions of (other people’s) lives on their models. Let them put their own interests at risk and we’ll see how confident they are of their models.

    • Latitude says: theory is their hindcast is making the models exactly reflect the adjusted temps

      If you tune a model on fake data…you get the fake results they get

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.