Texas temperatures peaked between 1900 and 1930, but NOAA tampers with the data to turn a long term cooling trend into a warming trend. Two thirds of the data they use in their “final adjusted” dataset is now fake.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Robertvd on “Why Do You Resist?”
- arn on “Why Do You Resist?”
- Gamecock on “Why Do You Resist?”
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Gordon Vigurs on Climate Attribution Model
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- John Francis on “Why Do You Resist?”
Tony, you’re on a roll! 😀
if Trump wins, and that’s no lock with all the potential for cheating, he needs to clean house… just like Elon Musk did with Twitter. send the fraudsters packing. They can always learn to code
DEVASTATING COMBINATION: Tony’s data tampering insights & https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/08/18/the-quest-for-climates-golden-fleece/
Scan down to the paragraph just above Fig. 10. Atmospheric CO2’s apparent effect on global temperatures implies a climate sensitivity of 1.25 degrees as the concentration doubles from 280 ppm to 560 ppm. In contrast, almost half of the climate models shown on Fig. 8 assume climate sensitivities EXCEEDING 4.5 degrees.
Not only is 4.5+ degrees a multiple of lived experience, 4.5+ degrees exceeds the hot end of the range of climate sensitivity estimates shown in Fig. 7.
The nail in the coffin is: The inferred 1.25 degree sensitivity almost certainly OVERSTATES the actual. First, it assumes, presumably for simplicity’s sake, that rising atmospheric CO2 caused all the global temperature change since 1976. Second, as Tony has shown, data tampering caused much of the increase in adjusted temperature series since 1976. If one removes the tampering, the inferred sensitivity is LESS than 1.0 degree–and that reflects ALL feedbacks.
I think that what you say is in line with what all real, not-government-controlled, intelligent scientists say.