Making The Pause Disappear

“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 2009

In 2015, satellites showed that the world had cooled since the beginning of the century.

A Pattern Of Repeated Fraud By Climate Scientists | Real Climate Science

This didn’t suit the agenda, so government scientists declared the “pause” to be invalid.

US scientists: Global warming pause ‘no longer valid’ – BBC News

And Carl Mears at RSS complied by turning the cooling trend into a warming trend.

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

Rather than changing the data, Carl Mears changed the interpretation of the data. After 2016 he removed the blue error range and used the upper bounds of the error rather than midrange of the error.

Note that after 1998, the observations are likely to be below the simulated values, indicating that the simulation as a whole are predicting too much warming.

 

Climate Analysis | Remote Sensing Systems

He also changed the wording and misspelled satellite.

“Note that after 1998, the observations are likely to be in the lower part of the model distribution, indicating that there is a small discrepancy between the model predictions and the satelllite observations”

Remote Sensing Systems

I predicted this would happen on 

Look for the satellite data to be adjusted to bring it into compliance with the fully fraudulent surface temperatures. The Guardian is now working to discredit UAH, so it seems likely that RSS will soon be making big changes – to match the needs of the climate mafia. Bookmark this post.

RSSChanges

I made this prediction because Ted Cruz used an RSS graph in a Senate hearing in March of 2015. Carl Mears at RSS then came under intense pressure to make his data match the surface temperature data.

My particular dataset (RSS tropospheric temperatures from MSU/AMSU satellites) show less warming than would be expected when compared to the surface temperatures. All datasets contain errors. In this case, I would trust the surface data a little more because the difference between the long term trends in the various surface datasets (NOAA, NASA GISS, HADCRUT, Berkeley etc) are closer to each other than the long term trends from the different satellite datasets. This suggests that the satellite datasets contain more “structural uncertainty” than the surface dataset.

Ted Cruz says satellite data show the globe isn’t warming

Roy Spencer at UAH made the same prediction on January 9, 2017

“I expect there will soon be a revised TLT product from RSS which shows enhanced warming, too.

Here’s what I’m predicting:

1) neither John Christy nor I will be asked to review the paper

2) it will quickly sail through peer review (our UAH V6 paper is still not in print nearly 1 year after submission)

3) it will have many authors, including climate model people and the usual model pundits (e.g. Santer), which will supposedly lend legitimacy to the new data adjustments.

Let’s see how many of my 3 predictions come true.

-Roy”

January 2016 Version

2016 Data       2021 Data

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Making The Pause Disappear

  1. Steve Cooksey says:

    It seems like the right person(s) put money in their tip jar.

  2. The priests of Moloch must declare that their god is angry otherwise they can’t get the people to sacrifice their children. This is a ploy used by the priest caste to keep themselves in clover at everybody else’s expense, since the dawn of time. How is it so few can see through such an obvious scam? It isn’t as if we haven’t seen it before? Perhaps it is true that suckers do not deserve an even break.

    • Robert Rust says:

      There’s only one parasite in existence, all other Life is symbiotic. No species of Nature preys on itself, none expect one of their own to mislead. Species follow their crowd, instinctively, it’s how they secured their life on Earth, the way Nature works successfully. All follow their kind, achieving longevity for those that live correctly, and extinction for those that live incorrectly, maintaining purity of Nature.

      Shall a deer be called a sucker for following its herd, a lion a coward for following its pride, and a fish a fool for following its school?

      Within and feeding on humanity resides a parasite that remains protected by false sympathy, conditioned acceptance, and fear of discrimination, 10 to 15 million strong, the elite of the parasite cult clan, 30 million in number.

  3. D. Boss says:

    Yes, well here is another independent data source, which takes all surface station reports globally and produces an average:

    http://temperature.global/?fbclid=IwAR1mhZfsFG7WnZYOjTznx_Yvy-_MguXETmvV-cioDlJGGsEqNoWppwAMrUo

    Both land and ocean data is collected. The majority of the land data is from METARs, which are used to assure safe air travel, so that data cannot be fudged, else planes would crash with increasing frequency….

    They show a decline in temps for the past 6 years against a 30 year average…

    They processed almost 52,000 stations last hour.

    The recorded global temperature for previous years:
    2015 average: 0.98 °F (0.54 °C) below normal
    2016 average: 0.48 °F (0.27 °C) below normal
    2017 average: 0.47 °F (0.26 °C) below normal
    2018 average: 1.33 °F (0.74 °C) below normal
    2019 average: 0.65 °F (0.36 °C) below normal
    2020 average: 0.00 °F (0.00 °C) below normal

    Temperature.Global calculates the current global temperature of the Earth. It uses unadjusted surface temperatures. The current temperature is the 12M average mean surface temperature over the last 12 months compared against the 30 year mean. New observations are entered each minute and the site is updated accordingly. This site was created by professional meteorologists and climatologists with over 25 years experience in surface weather observations.

    Data Sources

    NOAA Global METARs
    NOAA One-Minute Observations (OMOs)
    NBDC Global Buoy Reports
    MADIS Mesonet Data

    • Ed Price says:

      Apologies for not being a scientist.
      How on earth can anyone measure the world’s temperature.
      What is it – the temperature for 24 hours for every day all around the world?
      Does it include the oceans as well?
      OK so you use estimates ending up with a guess estimate!
      Might be good but not reliable especially if anyone tampers with the underlying data.

      • Conrad Ziefle says:

        You only have what you have, which is a surrogate for the world temperature.

      • D. Boss says:

        Ed Price says: “How on earth can anyone measure the world’s temperature.
        What is it – the temperature for 24 hours for every day all around the world?
        Does it include the oceans as well?”

        What part of the following paragraph do you not understand?

        ” Temperature.Global calculates the current global temperature of the Earth. It uses unadjusted surface temperatures. The current temperature is the 12M average mean surface temperature over the last 12 months compared against the 30 year mean. New observations are entered each minute and the site is updated accordingly. This site was created by professional meteorologists and climatologists with over 25 years experience in surface weather observations.”

        In case you are mathematically challenged, a mean is the same as an average. An average is the sum of all the data for a given period, divided by the number of data points.

        I will grant you, mean or average temperature for a day, a week, a month or a year are rather meaningless except for comparison purposes. But if the average is based on real and unadjusted data, then it is a valid measure of the average, assuming you have enough data and cover enough area for any generalized analysis.

        Again from Temperature.Global, here are the data sources:

        “NOAA Global METARs
        NOAA One-Minute Observations (OMOs)
        NBDC Global Buoy Reports
        MADIS Mesonet Data”

        Here is the site for global METARs:
        https://madis.ncep.noaa.gov/madis_metar.shtml

        METARs are serious business and must follow accepted rules, and are reported once per hour at EVERY commercial airport and many smaller ones in the entire world! As I mentioned pilots rely on accurate METAR data to decide whether it is safe to fly through the weather on their planned routes. So no one can fudge these numbers, or air accident numbers would skyrocket.

        There’s about 10,000 global METAR stations.

        The NOAA OMO’s are also from METAR stations, but are produced on a one minute schedule, and not in the same strict format and reliability as the official METAR is and only covers CONUS. (CONntinental United States)

        NBDC buoys site is here:
        https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/

        From ocean buoys, numbering about 1,000 distributed globally as the map shows on the above website.

        MADIS description is here:
        https://www.image.ucar.edu/DAReS/DART/Lanai/observations/MADIS/MADIS.html

        MADIS consists of ACARS aircraft data (virtually all commercial passenger and cargo aircraft have constant data communication with a central ground facility, reporting aircraft operating data and temperatures and pressures and altitudes, winds aloft, etc)

        Currently there are 8,000 commercial aircraft in the air distributed as seen here:

        https://flightaware.com/

        MADIS also includes data from ships in the oceans, surface data, weather balloon data, etc.

        These are real temperature measurements not guesses or estimates.

        The data streams are available in near real time, and as such are unadjusted.

        The fudging and adjusting Tony always shows, is done after these data are received and processed by various gov and institutions who are part of the Climate Catastrophe Cult.

    • Steen Højrup says:

      The link does not work

  4. Ron Corbyn says:

    They are such liars. Everything must align with their goal of an all-powerful World Government as making all of our problems much easier to solve.

  5. G W Smith says:

    If there is no crisis they are out of a job. All the generals go home to wives who don’t salute. Can’t have that. Must be ever vigilant in search of a new crisis, and when you find one, don’t let it go.

  6. Thomas Fowler says:

    This isn’t really surprising. The progressives don’t believe in truth so any lies are OK if they advance the agenda. Problem is that reality has a way of raising its head at inconvenient times, so the pattern of lies has to be expanded and opponents silenced. Lots of other examples, e.g., the “1619 project”, fully refuted by many excellent sources but still pushed everywhere.

  7. Mary-Anne Sillamaa says:

    Thanks for your patient and persistent efforts to keep the facts in view!

  8. Ron says:

    I remember WikiLeaks hacking some scientist’s emails and the scientists were altering the data to support their global warming beliefs. The news shows snow in a few days where I live. I’m curious how long it will be for summer to show up, it’s been a little later each year. The solar minimum.

    • David G says:

      Yes Ron, you are probably thinking of “Climategate”. And Wikipaedia played it down as a discussion among low level, unimportant players. It included Drs Mann and Jones, however, the main figures in the AGW! Worth Googling certainly.

    • Conrad Ziefle says:

      Well the problem is too many people are too lazy to learn how to think let alone learn basic principles of science. So they accept whatever the TV tells them to accept. Mental zombies.

  9. Allan Shelton says:

    It really is mind boggling to me, that these “scientists” can be so blatantly dishonest.
    Trenberth and Mears have totally disgraced the field of science.
    How can they live with themselves??

    • GreyGeek says:

      For the same reason their mentor, Lysenko, distorted biological science in the USSR. He gained fame and wealth by lying for political reasons. He matched biological theory to political theory, thus “validating” the Marxist theory that man can manipulate the environment and thus create genetic changes. Lots of honest scientists who knew Lysenko was a crackpot and didn’t bend to the State lost their jobs and some their lives. It set back biological science in the USSR for 40 years, for which we can be thankful to Lysenko. Meanwhile, Mann and his gang is setting back climate science while honest scientists continue to report the facts as their data reveals them, and they publish their data as well.

      China is showing just how much trust they put into Mann’s papers and claims — they are going forward with the building of 70 COAL fired power plants with impunity, and thanks to Gore’s “Carbon Credits”, western investors are paying for those plants.

  10. Daniel Smeal says:

    It has always bothered me how the presenters of these temperature vs. time relationships do not show the statistical coefficients of determination (r2) on their graphical representations. This r2 value indicates the statistical significance of the ‘linear’ fit line. If this value is less than 0.50 (which it appears is probably the case in most of the graphs I’ve seen), the ‘linear’ relation is not statistically significant and therefore doesn’t mean much in predicting future outcomes. It’s all hogwash.

  11. Gamecock says:

    In other words, it’s 287.87K vs 287.73K.

    OH NOES !!!

    ‘Anomalies’ are not your friend. Demand actual values.

  12. GreyGeek says:

    Temperature records here in Lincoln, NE, and the eastern part of the state, show that the 11 lowest temperatures have occur-ed during the last 11 years.

    https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/NE/Lincoln/extreme-annual-lincoln-low-temperature.php

  13. Bill says:

    I’ve been discussing this with a cousin who’s skeptical of us skeptics. Can someone please link to those two versions of the same chart? I don’t see them in the BBC article. Even better, is there a link to the “climate authority” explanation for changing the data behind the first to the second?

  14. Conrad Ziefle says:

    Even with Mears single line for the actual readings, it would be correct to say that actual temperature readings were in the lower portion of the forecast band in the near term, and the long term trend remained flat, and mainly below the model’s forecasted temperature increase.

Leave a Reply

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