New Video : Climate Ministry Of Truth – Erasing The Satellite Data

My most important video to date. Please share it.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to New Video : Climate Ministry Of Truth – Erasing The Satellite Data

  1. gator69 says:

    Excellent work Tony. A truly devastating blow to the Newtemp crowd.

  2. Steve Case says:

    It’s been up for two hours and there are over 200 views (-:

  3. GW Smith says:

    Great info, Tony! You just keep rolling it out and I keep passing it on! I’m glad you show where the data comes from which shoots holes through the alarmists skepticism and ad hominems. Keep it up!

  4. Michael Riordan says:

    Excellent – keep up the good work.

  5. frederik wisse says:

    Climate maffia = US deep state .

  6. CheshireRed says:

    So NASA’s 2000 data doesn’t match NASA’s 2016 data….because they’ve manipulated it to tell the world what they want it to say. Incredible. ‘Settled science’ my eye. Complete bollocks more like.

    President Trumps advisors….are you guys paying attention here or what because it appears you got some rather serious ‘in-house’ issues with your own data. Again. The whole world can see your prime space agency and climate researchers are allegedly cooking their own books. If true it’s an utterly damning allegation. What’ya gonna do about it?

    Seriously, how do you think this makes America appear in the eyes of the world? A select few ‘scientists’ (activists, more like) appear to be taking the world (and America) for a ride, in the process wrecking the previously great name and reputation of one of the world’s leading research and development institutions. Can they really be allowed to just treat NASA as their own personal fiefdom where they do what they want and be damned? Are you just going to sit there and do nothing? Tony Heller has provided an amazing public service here, not by merely asserting his views but by repeatedly posting hugely incriminating evidence. It doesn’t get any cleaner or more honest than that. C’mon guys, sort this out.

  7. AndyG55 says:

    The difference RSSv4.0 – RSSv3.3

    Almost linear, just like the GISS “adjustments™”

    • AndyG55 says:

      Berkley Inc. are PAID climate operatives.

      ALL donations from far-left globalist operators

      1/4 million dollar donation from “anonymous”

      Zeke horsefather works for Berkley Inc.

      One half of the “dodgy bros” (with mosh)

    • AndyG55 says:

      Interestingly, Even after their shenanigans, there is STILL a zero trend from 2001.4 – 2015 Maybe it was “designed” to be just less than 15 years. ;-)

  8. Michel Lafontaine says:

    Real science

    Since May 2015, I have been calculating the trend in RSS temperature data using the following rules:
    1- Since I don’t know whether the initial month (January 1979) was abnormally cold or abnormally hot or “normal”, I calculate the trend for 252 monthly periods (21 years) i.e. between January 1979 up to December 1999 and the last month of data available. For example, using RSS data for the month of May 2017, and using the Slope function in Excel I was able to obtain the following trends for temperature increases in degrees celsius for latitudes -70.0 to +82.5; century trends are presented as well as a simple extrapolation for the year 2099 (82.7 years remaining).

    Period Century Trend At the end of 2099
    Dec83 to May17 Max 1.57257 1.29999
    Dec97 to May17 Min 0.50052 0.41376
    Jan79 to May17 Median 1.36253 1.12636
    Jan79 to May17 Average 1.24234 1.02700
    Dec99 to May17 Last data 1.00295 0.82911
    Jan79 to May17 All data 1.35545 1.12051

    Std Deviation 0.28581

    Assuming that we, naughty humans, have already caused a 0.75 degree increase in temperatures and that the objective is to keep warming below 2.0 degrees by the end of this century, the worst case scenario would likely be 2.05 degrees (1.3 + 0.75). Let’s all stop destroying the economic system and let’s call this “Miller Time”.

    Since there are 2 other zones of the planet that are of interest to me, I also calculate the same trend values for the +60.0 to +82.5 (let’s call it “polar region”) and the “Continental USA” (for a Canadian living in Montreal it’s the next best thing). Using again version 3.3 data, here are the results:

    +60.0 to +82.5 zone

    Period Century Trend
    Apr92 to May17 Max 4.71047
    Dec99 to May17 Min 3.31388
    Jan79 to May17 Median 4.10405
    Jan79 to May17 Average 4.05861
    Dec99 to May17 Last data 3.31388
    Jan79 to May17 All data 3.47344

    These results show that, whatever the causes, the northern zone of the planet seems to be warming much faster than the planet as a whole: thus an interesting area for further research.

    Continental USA

    Period Century Trend
    Jun92 to May17 Max 2.10951
    May98 to May17 Min -0.37040
    Jan79 to May17 Median 1.42420
    Jan79 to May17 Average 1.26630
    Dec99 to May17 Last data 0.81414
    Jan79 to May17 All data 1.86499

    I am (almost) sure that some of the readers will be surprised to learn that even after a strong El Nino, the Continental USA are still in “hiatus mode” after 229 months since May 1998 or more than 19 years.

    2- Correlation between temperature trends and CO2

    Using monthly NOAA-ESRL data I have also been calculating the correlation between CO2 measurements at Mauna Loa and the RSS version 3.3 data in the same fashion as above. The results are as follows:

    Period Correlation
    May81 to May17 Max 0.65105
    Dec97 to May17 Min 0.17653
    Jan79 to May17 Median 0.52703
    Jan79 to May17 Average 0.48608
    Dec99 to May17 Last data 0.30461
    Jan79 to May17 All data 0.64973

    Not terribly impressive in terms of correlation and the worst part (for global warming enthusiasts at least) is that, as evidenced by the Dec99 to May17 period, the correlation seems to be weakening over time.

    3- The impact of RSS version 4.0 data

    Using the recently released 4.0 data for the month of May 2017 I have recalculated the data as described above and I have also calculated the differences with version 3.3 data; please note that the entire planet coverage is slightly different in version 4.0 (-82.5 to +82.5 instead of -70.0 to 82.5).

    Period Version 4.0 Diff with 3.3 % change
    Oct91 to May17 Max 2.14852 0.57594 36.6%
    Dec97 to May17 Min 1.25248 0.75196 150.2%
    Jan79 to May17 Median 1.93850 0.57597 42.3%
    Jan79 to May17 Average 1.86551 0.62317 50.2%
    Dec99 to May17 Last data 1.83400 0.83105 82.9%
    Jan79 to May17 All data 1.78898 0.43353 32.0%

    Std Deviation 0.21423

    The magnitude of the changes obviously cannot go unnoticed but what is most striking (to me at least) is the especially large increase in warming in the “hiatus” period (December 1997 and / or December 1999 to now). In addition the maximum warming trend occurs much later (from October 1991 instead of December 1983): a clear indication that version 4.0 produces much more warming in the recent past than in the distant past.

    Polar region

    Period Version 4.0 Diff with 3.3 % change
    Apr92 to May17 Max 4.04542 -0.66505 -14.1%
    Apr98 to May17 Min 1.66955 -1.64433 -49.6%
    Jan79 to May17 Median 3.23269 -0.87136 -21.2%
    Jan79 to May17 Average 3.10961 -0.94900 -23.4%
    Dec99 to May17 Last data 1.93269 -1.38119 -41.7%
    Jan79 to May17 All data 2.75496 -0.71848 -20.7%

    This time the magnitude of the changes goes in the other direction. I am now happy to announce that the “polar region” (+60.0 to +82.5) has cooled considerably, that the warming trends who worried me the most are not as bad as I thought. As a proud Canadian I would like to request the right to inform the Inuits and the polar bears about this.

    Continental USA

    Period Version 4.0 Diff with 3.3 % change
    Jan82 to May17 Max 2.63540 0.52589 2 4.9%
    May98 to May17 Min 0.60893 0.97933 -264.4%
    Jan79 to May17 Median 2.19104 0.76684 53.8%
    Jan79 to May17 Average 2.04737 0.78107 61.7%
    Dec99 to May17 Last data 1.94909 1.13495 139.4%
    Jan79 to May17 All data 2.53337 0.66838 35.8%

    The numbers speak for themselves (no more hiatus period) and I think it would be appropriate to let Mr. Heller comment about this if he wishes to do so.

    Correlation with CO2

    Period Version 4.0 Diff with 3.3 % change
    Nov80 to May17 Max 0.71316 0.06211 9.5%
    Dec97 to May17 Min 0.32967 0.15314 86.7%
    Jan79 to May17 Median 0.62702 0.09998 19.0%
    Jan79 to May17 Average 0.58599 0.09991 20.6%
    Dec99 to May17 Last data 0.43463 0.13002 42.7%
    Jan79 to May17 All data 0.71093 0.06119 9.4%

    Although the correlation between temperature and CO2 increases somewhat, at 0.71 the correlation is not very strong; and again much of the improvement in the correlation results from the rise in temperatures that has presumably occurred in the recent past.


    1- I look forward to what Mr. Mears from RSS has to say about this.
    2- I would also be greatly interested in hearing what a “real” statistician such as Mr. Steve McIntyre has to say.

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.