Real Climate Science

Gavin quietly says that there is a 62% chance that 2014 was not the warmest year on record, but he had to give his boss a talking point for the State of the Union address this week.

So Gavin simply fabricated warm temperatures across huge areas like Greenland, where he had no actual thermometer data in December.

Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

Gavin showed much of  western Greenland 1-2C above normal, when it was actually 2C below normal. It doesn’t take a lot of that sort of cheating to get temperatures up 0.02 globally.

ch_tlt_2014_12_anom_v03_3.png (730×450)

There is only one chance in 27 million that there is a smidgen of truth to the hottest year ever claim.

“There is less than a 1-in-27 million chance that Earth’s record hot streak is natural”

I am completely in agreement. The “record hot streak” is undoubtedly Mann-made – by the people who work at NCDC, CRU and GISS. Each of the animations below show how the past has been cooled and the present warmed in official government graphs, as time progresses.

Essentially all global warming since 1940 is due to data tampering by a small handful of Climategate personalities.

Changes to GISS surface temperature from 2003 to 2014

Changes to GISS surface temperature between 1981 and 1991, and between 1981 and 2014

Changes to Northern Hemisphere surface temperature between the 1975 National Academy of Sciences Report, and current CRUTEM

Changes to GISS US temperatures between 1999 and 2014

Changes to NCDC US temperatures from 1991 to 2014

Changes to GISS Iceland temperatures between V2 and V3

Changes to GISS Alice Springs temperature between V2 and V3

If you want to be a bona-fide Guardian moron, write about record heat just as Britain is about to get pummeled by record cold, and throw in a picture of Illinois – which just had their coldest year on record

My understanding is that Sun is always hot, and it has nothing to do with CO2.

Gavin says it is the hottest ever, and Gaia responds with the coldest ever forecast.

 2014 Breaks Heat Record, Challenging Global Warming Skeptics – NYTimes.com

The New York Times “challenges skeptics” with a wildly fraudulent article – and then doesn’t give any skeptics the opportunity to respond.

Just how slimy can a newspaper get?

Birthers are evil people who say that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. The first birther was almost certainly Barack Obama.

From 1991 to 2007, his literary agents promoted him as being born in Kenya. The only plausible place they could have gotten his bio from is from Barack Obama himself. There was no Internet in 1991. When someone wants a bio, they say “write a short paragraph about yourself.” It is implausible that his bio came from anyone else, or that his agents would have wasted time trying to pull together information about some recently graduated college kid’s birthplace and background.

Miriam Goderich of Acton & Dystel says that she didn’t do adequate fact checking, but she never said whose facts it was she was checking.

So why would Obama lie about his birthplace? If you ask that question, progressives call you a birther. (Queue in the usual progressive scumbags.)

1991

Born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii’

2004

Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate

2007

http://web.archive.org/web/20070403190001

After telling us for years that the global warming pause was caused by heat going to the deep oceans, now they say that the lack of warming in the troposphere isn’t important, because “no one lives there.”

Eric Steig, a professor at the University of Washington, told Mashablethat satellite data’s main flaw is that it doesn’t tell us much about the changing climate where we live — that is, at the surface.

Apparently climate scientists live in the deep ocean, rather than in the troposphere like the rest of us.

They also told us that massive temperature adjustments are necessary because the surface data is crap.  Now they say the surface data is golden. Unbelievable.

“We live on the surface, and the surface temperature records are the most global and longest term record we have,” he said. “The satellite records measure something different — not the surface, where we live but averages over a substantial vertical part of the atmosphere. The records are short, and subject to greater uncertainties than the surface temperature data.”

There is less than a 1-in-27 million chance that Earth’s record hot streak is natural

Apparently it is much easier to make millions of station adjustments, rather than one satellite adjustment.

Gavin is playing his usual game, trying to cover his ass with “uncertainty” that wasn’t mentioned in the NASA press release.

They get the propaganda out there for the White House and major news outlets, then try to generate implausible deniability through back channels like twitter. None of this was mentioned in the NASA press release.

NASA, NOAA Find 2014 Warmest Year in Modern Record | NASA

GISS uses an insidious trick to hide their data tampering. They cool pre-1963 years, and warm post-1963 years. This makes their data tampering look much less severe than it actually is. A better visualization is to normalize the graphs to the most recent common data, and show the total magnitude of the tampering. The animation below shows that.

2003 version

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data/update/gistemp/graphs/Fig.Anew.ps

2014 version

 

Fig.A.gif (656×446)

[Update : comment from Eric Steig]

Eric Steig says:

April 13, 2015 at 1:17 pm

For the record, I never said anything of the sort. It’s best to avoid publishing quotes, unless you have first hand evidence that the quote is correctly attributed. I agree with you that such claims about there being “a 1-in-27 million chance” that Earth’s record hot streak is natural are stupid. I’d appreciate your correcting or deleting this blog post of yours, seeing as there is a 100% chance you are misquoting me!

—————————————————————————

There is less than a 1-in-27 million chance that Earth’s record hot streak is natural

Eric Steig, a professor at the University of Washington, told Mashable that satellite data’s main flaw is that it doesn’t tell us much about the changing climate where we live — that is, at the surface.

“We live on the surface, and the surface temperature records are the most global and longest term record we have,” he said. “The satellite records measure something different — not the surface, where we live but averages over a substantial vertical part of the atmosphere. The records are short, and subject to greater uncertainties than the surface temperature data.”

There is less than a 1-in-27 million chance that Earth’s record hot streak is natural

Steig says that surface temperatures are reliable, yet GISS has massively altered them over the past decade. In fact, GISS has nearly doubled reported 1880 to 2000 warming since their 2003 version. They have altered the data so much, they had to stretch the scale at both ends to fit their alterations on to the graph. This is not “reliable” data.

2003: http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data/update/gistemp/graphs/Fig.Anew.ps

2014: Fig.A.gif (656×446)

It defies explanation how any scientist could report this as reliable data. But it is much worse than it seems. The tampering above sits on top of a huge amount of earlier tampering.

But it gets even worse. Why would you choose surface temperatures over satellite temperatures to measure global warming? The whole point of global warming is that it warms the troposphere, not the asphalt five feet from the thermometer.

Science doesn’t get any worse than this, Eric Steig. Making such a bold claim based on completely unsupportable data. You have completely reversed reality and misled the public and policy makers.