Posted on 02/05/2017 8:53:18 AM PST by markomalley
A whistleblower says the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) rushed a landmark study claiming the planet was warming much faster than expected in order to influence international climate negotiations.
Dr. John Bates, the former principal scientist at the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., told the Daily Mail NOAA’s 2015 study was meant “to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy.”
Bates said NOAA scientists made a “blatant attempt to intensify the impact” of global warming to eliminate the “pause” in temperature rise since 1998. The Daily Mail claims Bates showed it “irrefutable” evidence NOAA’s study relied on “unverified” data.
Bates’ objections to the paper were ignored by his superiors, who let scientists make “decisions and scientific choices that maximised warming and minimised documentation” in advance of a major United Nations climate summit in Paris, France.
His statement to The Daily Mail comes amid an investigation into the NOAA study by House Republicans on the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. Texas Rep. Lamar Smith, the committee’s chairman, subpoenaed NOAA in late 2015 for records related to the so-called “Karl study” that adjusted global sea surface temperature upwards, eliminating the “pause” in global warming since 1998.
Smith was heavily ridiculed for subpoenaing NOAA scientists, and the agency refused to hand over any internal deliberations of the “Karl study.” The study’s lead author, Tom Karl, has since left NOAA.
“Dr. Bates’ revelations and NOAA’s obstruction certainly lend credence to what I’ve expected all along – that the Karl study used flawed data, was rushed to publication in an effort to support the president’s climate change agenda, and ignored NOAA’s own standards for scientific study,” Smith said in a statement on The Daily Mail’s story.
“The Committee thanks Dr. Bates, a Department of Commerce Gold Medal winner for creating and implementing a standard to produce and preserve climate data, for exposing the previous administration’s efforts to push their costly climate agenda at the expense of scientific integrity,” Smith said.
Scientists have been debating over the so-called “pause” in global warming since at least 2013, referring to the period from 1998 to 2014 without any significant rise in global average temperature.
The Karl study made changes to historical sea surface temperature records, effectively doubling the warming trend of that period to 0.086 degrees Celsius per decade from 0.039 degrees per decade.
Karl’s study was welcomed by some scientists and environmentalists who see man-made global warming as the biggest threat to humanity; it was criticized by others in the scientific community.
Climate scientist Judith Curry, formerly of Georgia Tech, wrote at the time that NOAA excluded extremely accurate sea buoy data in order to erase the hiatus in warming.
Curry wrote that it “seems rather ironic, since this is the period where there is the greatest coverage of data with the highest quality of measurements — ARGO buoys and satellites don’t show a warming trend.”
But the Karl study may have had deeper problems.
It was based on two “flawed” temperature datasets, Bates told The Daily Mail.
NOAA has now “decided that the sea dataset will have to be replaced and substantially revised just 18 months after it was issued, because it used unreliable methods which overstated the speed of warming,” The Daily Mail learned.
NOAA’s revised data will show “lower temperatures and a slower rate in the recent warming trend.”
The “land temperature dataset used by the study was afflicted by devastating bugs in its software that rendered its findings ‘unstable,’” and based on an “alpha” version that was never verified. It still hasn’t been approved.
“None of the data on which the paper was based was properly ‘archived’ – a mandatory requirement meant to ensure that raw data and the software used to process it is accessible to other scientists, so they can verify NOAA results,” The Daily Mail reported.
I’m shocked! </sarc>
IIRC, isn’t NOAA the same agency that refused to give the Trump transition team the names and titles of those in the agency involved in climate research?
AFAIC, he can gut the whole damn agency.
The headline presupposes that global warming was bad to begin with. I’ll pass.
do I really have to say it???
Won’t make a difference to the Warming Globalists.
A great book on the fraud perpetrated by the environazis is “State of Fear” by Michael Crichton.
It’s OK, NOAA has a special exemption to Falsify Government Records, Destroy Government Records, Fraud, Money Laundering...
Crichton was SO ahead of the curve on so many things, wasn’t he? I sure do miss him!
In, ‘State of Fear’ my favorite part is when the character (who, in my mind is played with great pomposity by Alec Baldwin), gets his face bit off.
I know. I’m mean that way. ;)
Drain the NOAA Swamp.
Who would have thunk that temperature station construction requirements have implications for the results?
Fake news
Fake science
Fake academic freedom
Fake outrage
Alinsky’s roots have burrowed deep into American society and it will take Trump every waking moment for the next 8 years just to put a dent into that monstrosity.
Your original picture was 1600 pixels wide: perhaps a bit much for many peoples' browsers.
But if you were to shrink it down to 640 pixels, it would work a whole lot better.
You can see the original width in your post above.
Here's what happens when you shrink it to 640px:
<IMG WIDTH="640" SRC="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-w4fv3SCjk_0/VR7CDoZH_FI/AAAAAAAAAjU/zi-W9zRijUA/s1600/stevenson_screens_latex_whitewash_bare.jpg">
The boys who cried wolf are finally getting their due
These federal “worker” criminals are anti-scientists. They have no integrity and embarrass the scientific method. Fire them. Fine them. Take away all benefits from these pathetic liars.
Get this- it was either NOAH or NASA who manipulated satellite data because the data showed no warming for 20 years- They claimed that a satellite had ‘moved out of position’ and so to correct it, they threw out the re4adfings from the satellite, and invented new numbers so that now they can say “See? We told tyou there was warming” Which is exactly what they did say- The papers were bragging about how the trump card of the ‘climate deniers’ was ‘dealt a death blow’ by the ‘new findings’
Fake Science is in a hurry. Can’t be waiting around for real data and stuff.
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.