NASA Caught in Climate Data Manipulation
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quick Question
Next: Foundations of operations management, second canadian edition 2e ritzman malhotra krajwsky solutions manual
From: Mike Jr on 18 Jan 2010 12:42 On Jan 18, 12:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 1/18/10 1:38 AM, Mike Jr wrote: > > > > > On Jan 17, 11:28 pm, Surfer<n...(a)spam.net> wrote: > >> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:34:13 -0800 (PST), Mike Jr > > >> <n00s...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >>> On Jan 17, 2:07 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On 1/17/10 11:07 AM, Marvin the Martian wrote: > > >>>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:20:31 +1030, Surfer wrote: > > >>>>> So, you're so ignorant of physics that you think that melting ice ALWAYS > >>>>> proves warming. > > >>>> Gee, Marvin, must have been all that extra salt! > > >>> Sam, > >>> NASA says that it was the winds blowing the ice south where it then > >>> melted. But both you and Surfer know this because I have stated it > >>> before and supplied the NASA link. > > >> From the link you gave:http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/quikscat-20071001.html > > >> ".....Nghiem said the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past > >> two years was caused by unusual winds. "Unusual atmospheric conditions > >> set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the > >> Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic," he > >> said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in > >> the warmer waters...." > > >> That is a reasonable explanation for the RECORD loss discussed at the > >> link for the two years concerned. > > >> But the STEADY long decline could only be due to temperature, as I > >> havn't seen a steady long term increase in winds and currents > >> reported. > > > Steady long decline? As in monotonic? The data says otherwise. > > >http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm > > > 2007 was the worst, 2008 better, 2009 back to normal. > > > --Mike Jr. > > Thirty-year averages, Mike... not year by year. > > Learn the Difference Between Weather and Climate! I believe that I do know the difference between weather and climate. The satellite data goes back to 2002. The question was about winds blowing the ice out to warmer waters in 2007. That has stopped in 2009. > > The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather > is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, > and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods > of time (at least 30 years). > > In various parts of the world, some people have even noticed that > springtime comes earlier now than it did 30 years ago. An earlier > springtime is indicative of a possible change in the climate. How much ice was at the north pole in the winter of 1958-9? Hint: the nuclear submarine in all that open water. --Mike Jr.
From: Mike Jr on 18 Jan 2010 12:45 On Jan 18, 12:00 pm, "erschroedin...(a)gmail.com" <erschroedin...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 16, 6:47 am, Mike Jr <n00s...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 16, 1:02 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 1/15/10 6:16 PM, Mike Jr wrote: > > > > > On Jan 15, 1:27 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 1/15/10 8:04 AM, Mike Jr wrote: > > > > >>> "Climategate: Leaked Emails Inspired Data Analyses Show Claimed > > > >>> Warming Greatly Exaggerated and NOAA not CRU is Ground Zero > > > > [snip] > > > > > While the effort was inspired by the debacle at UAE, the analysis did > > > > not depend on UAE e-mails. Rather an analysis was performed on the > > > > Global Historic Climate Network (GHCN) itself. See what they > > > > uncovered. The detailed analyses are collected here (see links): > > > >http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/ghcn-the-global-analysis/ > > > > > "NOAA appears to play a key role as a data gatherer/gatekeeper for the > > > > global data centers at NASA and CRU. Programmer E.M. Smiths analysis > > > > of NOAAs GHCN found they systematically eliminated 75% of the worlds > > > > stations with a clear bias towards removing higher latitude, high > > > > altitude and rural locations, all of which had a tendency to be > > > > cooler. The thermometers in a sense marched towards the tropics, the > > > > sea and to airport tarmacs." > > > > >http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf > > > > > --Mike Jr. > > > > What does it all mean, Mike? > > > That Hansen and company have manipulated the surface temperature data > > in several ways to exaggerate the recent warming trend and to > > eliminate past warming trends such as the 1940's "warm blip". > > You, sir, are a liar. > > > > > Anthony Watts started his surface stations project (http://www.surfacestations.org/) where he and his network of volunteers set > > out to survey "every one of the 1221 USHCN weather stations in the USA > > which are used as a high quality network to determine near surface > > temperature trends in the USA." What they found, with over 82% of the > > network surveyed, was appalling; 91% of the stations had siting issues > > that resulted in elevated temperature readings, 87% were poor or very > > poor; examples, on roofs, next to air conditioner heat exchanges, on > > asphalt. > > No independent group has ever verified this. > > > Not to worry we were told, GISS and NOAA took steps to adjust the data > > to account for the urban heat island effect. John Coleman, founder of > > the Weather channel, didn't take them, as gentlemen, at their word. > > His only degree is in journalism. > > > What John and his team found was that the stations dropped were the > > ones showing no warming. Instead, these sites had their values > > interpolated using values from sites that are further south, at lower > > elevations, and more urbanized. > > John is a fool. As are those who believe him. > > > > > > > As far as adjustments, what John found was: > > "The data centers then performed some final adjustments to the > > gathered data before final analysis. These adjustments are in some > > cases frequent and undocumented. Examining raw data versus processed > > final data shows numerous examples where the adjusted data shows a > > warming trend where the raw data had little change. > > In many cases this is accomplished through a cooling of early data in > > the records, sometimes even those designated as unadjusted as in the > > case of Central Park. Central Park for example was inexplicably cooled > > up to 3F in the early records but with no recent changes resulting > > in almost double the claimed urban warming (4.5F vs 2.5F).." > > > Satellite data disagrees with the GISS temperature data: > > "Satellite data centers will also release their assessments of monthly > > and global temperature. For reasons we will discuss their results will > > be less remarkable. This has been the trend in recent years. For > > instance NOAA announced that for the globe June 2009 [] was the second > > warmest June in 130 years falling just short of 2005. In sharp > > contrast to this NASA, The University of Alabama Huntsville, UAH and > > MSU satellite assessments had June virtually at the long term average > > (+0.001C or 15th coldest in 31 years) and Remote Sensing Systems, with > > RSS 14th coldest" > > > So what does it mean? > > "The NOAA, NASA and the Hadley Center press releases should be > > ignored. > > Idiot. > > >The reason which is expanded on with case studies in the full > > report is that the surface based data sets have become seriously > > flawed and can no longer be trusted for climate trend or model > > forecast assessment in decision making by congress or the EPA." > > > It also means that our historical baseline for the 20th century is > > untrustworthy. !@#$%^&* > > > --Mike Jr. > > No, it just means you are stupid. Don't forget to stamp your foot! BTW, don't let the door slam your rear end on the way out. --Mike Jr.
From: Mike Jr on 18 Jan 2010 12:54 On Jan 18, 12:42 pm, Mike Jr <n00s...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Jan 18, 12:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 1/18/10 1:38 AM, Mike Jr wrote: > > > > On Jan 17, 11:28 pm, Surfer<n...(a)spam.net> wrote: > > >> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:34:13 -0800 (PST), Mike Jr > > > >> <n00s...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >>> On Jan 17, 2:07 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> On 1/17/10 11:07 AM, Marvin the Martian wrote: > > > >>>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:20:31 +1030, Surfer wrote: > > > >>>>> So, you're so ignorant of physics that you think that melting ice ALWAYS > > >>>>> proves warming. > > > >>>> Gee, Marvin, must have been all that extra salt! > > > >>> Sam, > > >>> NASA says that it was the winds blowing the ice south where it then > > >>> melted. But both you and Surfer know this because I have stated it > > >>> before and supplied the NASA link. > > > >> From the link you gave:http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/quikscat-20071001.html > > > >> ".....Nghiem said the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past > > >> two years was caused by unusual winds. "Unusual atmospheric conditions > > >> set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the > > >> Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic," he > > >> said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in > > >> the warmer waters...." > > > >> That is a reasonable explanation for the RECORD loss discussed at the > > >> link for the two years concerned. > > > >> But the STEADY long decline could only be due to temperature, as I > > >> havn't seen a steady long term increase in winds and currents > > >> reported. > > > > Steady long decline? As in monotonic? The data says otherwise. > > > >http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm > > > > 2007 was the worst, 2008 better, 2009 back to normal. > > > > --Mike Jr. > > > Thirty-year averages, Mike... not year by year. > > > Learn the Difference Between Weather and Climate! > > I believe that I do know the difference between weather and climate. > The satellite data goes back to 2002. The question was about winds > blowing the ice out to warmer waters in 2007. That has stopped in > 2009. > > > > > The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather > > is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, > > and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods > > of time (at least 30 years). > > > In various parts of the world, some people have even noticed that > > springtime comes earlier now than it did 30 years ago. An earlier > > springtime is indicative of a possible change in the climate. > > How much ice was at the north pole in the winter of 1958-9? > > Hint: the nuclear submarine in all that open water. In case you can't find the link: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/ > > --Mike Jr.
From: Mike Jr on 18 Jan 2010 12:57 On Jan 18, 12:42 pm, Mike Jr <n00s...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Jan 18, 12:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 1/18/10 1:38 AM, Mike Jr wrote: > > > > On Jan 17, 11:28 pm, Surfer<n...(a)spam.net> wrote: > > >> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:34:13 -0800 (PST), Mike Jr > > > >> <n00s...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >>> On Jan 17, 2:07 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> On 1/17/10 11:07 AM, Marvin the Martian wrote: > > > >>>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:20:31 +1030, Surfer wrote: > > > >>>>> So, you're so ignorant of physics that you think that melting ice ALWAYS > > >>>>> proves warming. > > > >>>> Gee, Marvin, must have been all that extra salt! > > > >>> Sam, > > >>> NASA says that it was the winds blowing the ice south where it then > > >>> melted. But both you and Surfer know this because I have stated it > > >>> before and supplied the NASA link. > > > >> From the link you gave:http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/quikscat-20071001.html > > > >> ".....Nghiem said the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past > > >> two years was caused by unusual winds. "Unusual atmospheric conditions > > >> set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the > > >> Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic," he > > >> said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in > > >> the warmer waters...." > > > >> That is a reasonable explanation for the RECORD loss discussed at the > > >> link for the two years concerned. > > > >> But the STEADY long decline could only be due to temperature, as I > > >> havn't seen a steady long term increase in winds and currents > > >> reported. > > > > Steady long decline? As in monotonic? The data says otherwise. > > > >http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm > > > > 2007 was the worst, 2008 better, 2009 back to normal. > > > > --Mike Jr. > > > Thirty-year averages, Mike... not year by year. > > > Learn the Difference Between Weather and Climate! > > I believe that I do know the difference between weather and climate. > The satellite data goes back to 2002. The question was about winds > blowing the ice out to warmer waters in 2007. That has stopped in > 2009. > > > > > The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather > > is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, > > and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods > > of time (at least 30 years). > > > In various parts of the world, some people have even noticed that > > springtime comes earlier now than it did 30 years ago. An earlier > > springtime is indicative of a possible change in the climate. > How much ice was at the north pole in the winter of 1958-9? Oops, I meant March of 1958, not winter. > > Hint: the nuclear submarine in all that open water. > > --Mike Jr.
From: Sam Wormley on 18 Jan 2010 13:42
On 1/18/10 11:42 AM, Mike Jr wrote: > On Jan 18, 12:01 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 1/18/10 1:38 AM, Mike Jr wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Jan 17, 11:28 pm, Surfer<n...(a)spam.net> wrote: >>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:34:13 -0800 (PST), Mike Jr >> >>>> <n00s...(a)comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> On Jan 17, 2:07 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 1/17/10 11:07 AM, Marvin the Martian wrote: >> >>>>>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:20:31 +1030, Surfer wrote: >> >>>>>>> So, you're so ignorant of physics that you think that melting ice ALWAYS >>>>>>> proves warming. >> >>>>>> Gee, Marvin, must have been all that extra salt! >> >>>>> Sam, >>>>> NASA says that it was the winds blowing the ice south where it then >>>>> melted. But both you and Surfer know this because I have stated it >>>>> before and supplied the NASA link. >> >>>> From the link you gave:http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/quikscat-20071001.html >> >>>> ".....Nghiem said the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past >>>> two years was caused by unusual winds. "Unusual atmospheric conditions >>>> set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the >>>> Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic," he >>>> said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in >>>> the warmer waters...." >> >>>> That is a reasonable explanation for the RECORD loss discussed at the >>>> link for the two years concerned. >> >>>> But the STEADY long decline could only be due to temperature, as I >>>> havn't seen a steady long term increase in winds and currents >>>> reported. >> >>> Steady long decline? As in monotonic? The data says otherwise. >> >>> http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm >> >>> 2007 was the worst, 2008 better, 2009 back to normal. >> >>> --Mike Jr. >> >> Thirty-year averages, Mike... not year by year. >> >> Learn the Difference Between Weather and Climate! > I believe that I do know the difference between weather and climate. > The satellite data goes back to 2002. The question was about winds > blowing the ice out to warmer waters in 2007. That has stopped in > 2009. >> >> The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather >> is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, >> and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods >> of time (at least 30 years). >> >> In various parts of the world, some people have even noticed that >> springtime comes earlier now than it did 30 years ago. An earlier >> springtime is indicative of a possible change in the climate. > > How much ice was at the north pole in the winter of 1958-9? > > Hint: the nuclear submarine in all that open water. > > --Mike Jr. > What is the 30 year pattern? |