Posted on 01/26/2010 8:32:36 PM PST by I got the rope
SUMMARY FOR POLICYMAKERS
1. Instrumental temperature data for the pre-satellite era (1850-1980) have been so widely, systematically, and unidirectionally tampered with that it cannot be credibly asserted there has been any significant “global warming” in the 20th century.
2. All terrestrial surface-temperature databases exhibit very serious problems that render them useless for determining accurate long-term temperature trends.
3. All of the problems have skewed the data so as greatly to overstate observed warming both regionally and globally.
4. Global terrestrial temperature data are gravely compromised because more than three-quarters of the 6,000 stations that once existed are no longer reporting.
5. There has been a severe bias towards removing higher-altitude, higher-latitude, and rural stations, leading to a further serious overstatement of warming.
6. Contamination by urbanization, changes in land use, improper siting, and inadequately-calibrated instrument upgrades further overstates warming.
7. Numerous peer-reviewed papers in recent years have shown the overstatement of observed longer term warming is 30-50% from heat-island contamination alone.
8. Cherry-picking of observing sites combined with interpolation to vacant data grids may make heat-island bias greater than 50% of 20th-century warming.
9. In the oceans, data are missing and uncertainties are substantial. Comprehensive coverage has only been available since 2003, and shows no warming.
10. Satellite temperature monitoring has provided an alternative to terrestrial stations in compiling the global lower-troposphere temperature record. Their findings are increasingly diverging from the station-based constructions in a manner consistent with evidence of a warm bias in the surface temperature record.
(Excerpt) Read more at scienceandpublicpolicy.org ...
Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $250,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of “racketeering activity.” RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages.
Anyone have more info or chart re #10?
Just wait until you see the sondes. The weather balloon temperature data shows high-altitude cooling of the Earth’s climate.
climate data ping
Hence, the policywonks have anticipated that surface and balloon data would be ‘compromised’, and co-opted CIA satellites for AGW data measurements.
Perhsps the Data from such measurements can be protected under the guise of “National Security.”
They will then attempt to write their own undeniable conclusions.
This confirms my suspicions. The weather data has been so tampered with that no one knows what the truth is anymore. People should be in jail. Let’s start with the ring leader Al Gore.
WOW! I spent the last 2 hours reading this 111 page paper.
This is an extremely well documented case for tampering with temperature data.
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
Do not know how to progress forward from this point. Entire institutions have become corrupted. In fact, we probably would have ended up in a better situation, if they had not existed at all. Our current situation of course being that we have wasted billions trying to mitigate warming that had stop occurring.
D’Aleo has some good stuff on his ICECAP page...look at Jan 26, 2010
A Question of Global Temperatures - SPPI Special Report
They should have set a standardized way to measure heat content a long time ago. Don't know how anyone could ever claim that this science was settled. It has not even been done, from what I can see.
It’s worse than that. If you take a bunch of temperature readings and average them what does that really tell you?
Answer: Nothing
It just gives you the average of the readings from thermometers.
You have to be measuring the temperature of something for it to have meaning. In this case...air...which has mass. So where is the rest of the data. Where is the humidity and barometric pressure data to go along with the temperature data?
Air mass has to be normalized if you want to calculate a global “average” temperature of some air mass.
I realized that a few months ago. The lower atmosphere over oceans is more dense then the lower atmosphere over large continents. Ocean air masses are the dominant factor by far for determining atmospheric heat content. You are going to get more noise in the data if you just measure the terrestrial temperatures. IMHO - Ocean water heat content is the long term trend, ocean atmosphere heat content is the medium range trend and terrestrial atmosphere heat content is the short term trend. Right now the medium range trend is cooling with the long range trend tending towards cooling. The short term trend is very noisy with sporadic regional cooling blasts.
61% of currently evaluated temperature stations were off by more than 2 Degrees Celsius, 3.6 Degrees Fahrenheit.
22% of currently evaluated temperature stations were off by more than 1 Degree Celsius, 1.8 Degrees Fahrenheit.
8% of currently evaluated temperature stations were off by more than 5 Degrees Celsius, 9 Degrees Fahrenheit.
I would trust an astrologer or an alchemist before I’d trust a “climate scientist”.
"Never let a good crisis go to waste by not using it to raid and rob all the villages."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
