NOAA Turning Cooling Into Warming In Texas

I captured this NOAA Texas temperature graph in 2011.

Aggie Joke : Dessler Forecasts Texas Weather For The Next 90 Years | Real Science

NOAA has since tampered with the Texas temperature data to turn a slight cooling trend from 1895-2010 into a warming trend, and erase the record hot year of 1921.

Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to NOAA Turning Cooling Into Warming In Texas

  1. Eli the Pit Bulldog says:

    I send these to my local National Weather Service office. 😂

  2. Steve Case says:

    Here’s NOAA’s graphs for Los Angeles Max Temp May-October Captured December 2017 and February 2020:

  3. Henry Ruby says:

    Here is some official alarmist info that I do not agree with from Howard Diamond at the NOAA:

    NOAA has no desire to control anything in society; we are not here to do so; we are here to study and report what is going on with the science. There is a pervasive myth out there (even today) of a global cooling scientific consensus in the 1970s; this is based on scores of popular media articles that talked about global cooling, but not one of them is a peer reviewed paper. The most well-cited of this global cooling stuff was based on one or two not very well done articles in Time magazine in 1974, and Newsweek magazine in 1975 (we do not do science via popular news magazines), and since then, the author of the Newsweek article has essentially retracted what he wrote and regrets the confusion it caused. In fact in a formal scientific review of climate science papers done during that period (see Peterson et al 2008 paper at – which is too large for me to attach here) found that during the period from 1965 through 1979, there were 7 papers on cooling, 20 that were neutral, and 44 warming-related papers, and found no 1970s “consensus” about a future global cooling/ice age. The science behind the warming of the planet as a result of CO2 is nearly 200 years old and is quite consistent and well studied and pretty much follows the first chart here which shows how it works – basically carbon dioxide (CO2) works to keep outgoing longwave radiation (heat) from escaping the from the surface of the planet, therefore building up more heat at the surface of the planet and thus, global warming.

    As for what is known as Climategate from back in 2009, which has been used by people to claim that data has been falsely manipulated, this has been thoroughly debunked but continues to live in the blogosphere as a made up scandal involving stolen e-mails from a server in the UK. A number of independent investigations (9) from different countries, universities and government bodies have investigated the stolen emails and found no evidence of wrong doing. Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming. In March 2010, the UK government’s House of Commons Science and Technology Committee published a report finding that the criticisms of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) were misplaced and that CRU’s “Professor Jones’s actions were in line with common practice in the climate science community”. That UK Government report can be found at As for NOAA’s involvement with this, in February 2011, the U.S. Department of Commerce Inspector General (the Department of Commerce is NOAA’s parent agency, and Inspector General reports don’t pull any punches) conducted an independent review of the emails and found “no evidence in the CRU emails that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data”, and you can find that Inspector General exonerating report attached. Finally, in August 2011, the U.S. National Science Foundation concluded “Finding no research misconduct or other matter raised by the various regulations and laws discussed above, this case is closed”, and that report is also attached.

    So if attacking us because we do not meet your political expectations, then so be it; but simply making such assertions and mingling it with nonsense about this affecting liberty does not change the science. So, if you want to go with the various blog postings that meet your political outlook, please feel free; but rest assured that climate change science is real and the deleterious effects of climate change are happening and are not part of some political cult; and is being documented by scientists with no political point of view, but if it makes you happy to say so, then please do as you wish. Ultimately, societies and governments are going to have to make decisions on how to deal with the climate change going on, but again, we are not some keepers of a religion or cult; we have, as climate scientists, been studying this problem for nearly 200 years, and our role is to report on what is happening and how things might be able to be either mitigated or adapted to. If you disagree with those findings, you are of course at liberty to do so, but simply denying the scientific truth and questioning our integrity and motives does not make you right.

    Human civilization did not exist at those previous time of high levels of CO2; it is built on a world with far less CO2; so we will warm to those prehistoric levels by returning all the CO2 back. Increases in CO2 and the resultant increases in global temperature are going to be creating trends in environmental conditions that human civilization has not ever seen; civilization has essentially been built on a relatively stable climate (yes, there are extremes at the poles and tropical latitudes) but these coming changes (we’re seeing them now) are going to have big impacts on sea level rise where some low-lying island states like Kiribati in the Pacific and the Maldives in the Indian Ocean to lose territory and perhaps their entire nations; people in the tropics (20 degrees South to 20 degrees North) are going to be in areas that will become unlivable; areas of the world with drought will find extended droughts and areas with precipitation are going to get even heavier rain and/or snowfall. The other day, someone indicated to me that the recent record snows in the Sierra Mountains of California disproved climate change; on the contrary, since warmer air holds more water vapor than cooler air, then more snow is quite likely and as I indicated to them, it snows at -5º C as well as at -5ºC , and so rising temperatures do not preclude snow. This is not to mention the impacts to ecosystems from ocean acidification by the conversion of CO2 in the oceans to a weak carbonic acid; even a decrease of pH level by 0.1 can be devastating to organisms that depend of calcium for their shells (e.g., mollusks, crustaceans, and corals). The US Department of Defense, not exactly some wild-eyed liberal organization, is also concerned about sea level rise as a result of climate change as outlined in two reports from them in 2019 and 2021 from the standpoint of facilities like harbors, ports, and naval facilities, where they view the threat to be quite real. Unfortunately, sea level rise is quite real and again, is a huge concern to the people of Kiribati in the Pacific Ocean, the Maldives in the Indian Ocean can attest to as sea level begins to take land away, or the people of New York and New Jersey who have suffered from a combination of increased storm inundation from rising seas coupled with heavier precipitation from a warmer atmosphere which holds considerably more water vapor. Finally, a report just released a month or so ago at provides a number of reasons for concern and some summary highlights can be found at

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.