It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The scandal of fiddled global warming data

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 07:58 PM

But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data. In several posts headed “Data tampering at USHCN/GISS”, Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time. These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on “fabricated” data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century.

The whole fabricated data thing has been around since the first computer model was ran. Never mind the models have never been right.. It is little wonder when trash and made up numbers are used in the first place for their models, No?

Maybe the global disruption crowd should just buy a copy of the farmers Almanac and forget it. Oh, can't do that they have to justify their existence somehow and figure out how to put the western industrial nations into a third world electrical power status.

It does appear China gets a free pass for to many profitable companies have moved there.. Do not confuse pollution with global warming they are not the same..

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 08:08 PM
a reply to: 727Sky

Agree.The AGW proponents have painted themselves into a very dark corner and one of the more deleterious effects will be a major distrust of science in general.Alas,they have made their bed,let them lie in it.

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 08:26 PM
a reply to: 727Sky

Thought this was already posted.

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 08:47 PM

originally posted by: Antipathy17
a reply to: 727Sky

Thought this was already posted.

There have been several threads about made up numbers that have been used to predict earth's climate and what the climate future holds for all living things of planet earth. If this article has already been posted some mod can delete. IMO with all the propaganda being pushed these articles should be a reoccurring thread on ATS......

B.S. in and B.S. out yet fortunes will be spent and jobs lost all based on corrupted data and some esoteric agenda..

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 09:38 PM

originally posted by: 727Sky

originally posted by: Antipathy17
a reply to: 727Sky

Thought this was already posted.

There have been several threads about made up numbers that have been used to predict earth's climate and what the climate future holds for all living things of planet earth. If this article has already been posted some mod can delete. IMO with all the propaganda being pushed these articles should be a reoccurring thread on ATS......

B.S. in and B.S. out yet fortunes will be spent and jobs lost all based on corrupted data and some esoteric agenda..

The esoteric agenda was to try and preserve the wildlife of the USA. That's why they are trying to seize all that land and fence it off, then drive out manufacturing industry. Unfortunately, many species are dependent on human activity to maintain fields, streams, rivers and waterways, so that plan doesn't work.

I never understood the obsession with temperature. It was enough to point out that cities create their own heat islands, consume water, and the underground aquifers were being drained empty.

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 09:47 PM
a reply to: 727Sky

Here's some background on your guru:


So what are his qualifications to post on climate issues? Who has/does he work for? How credible should he be taken?

According to a question asked in one of his own postings Mr Goddard says;
“I have a Bachelor of Science in Geology and a Masters In Electrical Engineering”
So academically he is about as qualified as myself and about as qualified as my cat to post his own analysis’s climate change. Also from various comments and posts it seems that he likes soccer and follows the English Premiership and enjoys cycling.

If you do a search for "Steven Goddard" on Google, it doesn't really show up much and this man seems very elusive, almost invisible. There are no photographs and no biography to the point that ‘Steven Goddard’ may even be a pseudonym. The cynic in me might suggest the name picked as a method of generating search hits on “Goddard” + “climate”.

He has had some articles published in The Register a British technology news and opinion website. Searching his name at The Reg gives links to just 5 opinion pieces all from about four years ago.
One of his pieces posted on Friday 15th August 2008 called ‘ “Arctic ice refuses to melt as ordered: There’s something rotten north of Denmark” he attacked the National Snow and Ice Data Center.

But after being contacted by Dr. Walt Meier at NSIDC he was forced to issue a retraction;

Steven Goddard writes: “Dr. Walt Meier at NSIDC has convinced me this week that their ice extent numbers are solid…. It is clear that the NSIDC graph is correct, and that 2008 Arctic ice is barely 10% above last year – just as NSIDC had stated.”

Unfortunately, this original error raced around the world on the the blogosphere and in many cases remains uncorrected. More information on this retraction can be found here.

Mr Goddard has previously popped up with numerous and inventive “sea ice updates” at Anthony Watts’ WTFUWT blog. This should be a clear warning to any WATTS followers as to the awful standard permissible for posting there, and some embarrassing back tracking has also happened as this post shows; “Arctic Ice Graphing LessonIncreasing Bt 50,000 km2 per year”.

Goddard’s ignorance on sea ice has also made him a topic at Skeptical Science.

Mr Goddard has also contributed to to the Science and Public Policy Institute‘s never-ending stream of climate denier propaganda joining the ranks of the truly potty with Viscount Christopher Monckton of Brenchley now as a peer. A good over view of his standard of scientific rigour at SPPI can be found at sciblogs;

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 09:49 PM
There is massive, unquestionable evidence of climate change or "dispruption", whatever you want to call it. Regardless of what temperature models are used, it is very obvious we are screwing up our planet.

Spring could arrive five weeks earlier by 2100

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 09:54 PM
a reply to: FyreByrd

Goddard even embrasses other climate change deniers:

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 10:42 PM
Sounds like global warming data and Unemployment data have the same kind of problems. They adjust the numbers to make them look what they want them to look like.

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 06:13 AM
a reply to: rickymouse

Anyone with the recorded temperatures of planet earth can look at the data and see where the numbers were changed..and it does not take a PHD or even an accounting degree to catch the fallacy of the manufactured numbers. Again there have been several articles about how the base line numbers were moved down so the current numbers would ring bells of alarm as a larger spread would be indicated.

A recent article published online by THE HOCKEY SCHTICK states:

Thursday, June 12, 2014

New paper finds sunshine "highly correlated" to temperature anomalies over past 50 years

A paper published today in the International Journal of Climatology finds sunshine at the Earth's surface was "highly correlated" to temperature anomalies over the past 50 years in the Carpathian Region of Europe.

According to the authors,

"we highlight that in the Carpathian Region positive and negative sunshine duration anomalies are highly correlated to the corresponding temperature anomalies during the global dimming (1960s and 1970s) and brightening (1990s and 2000s) periods."

The paper joins many others documenting the "global dimming" of the 1960's and 1970's was associated with global cooling and the ice age scare of the 1970's, followed by "global brightening" of the 1980's-2000's associated with global warming.

The paper also finds a decreasing trend in relative humidity over the past 50 years in spring, summer, and winter, which is contrary to climate model assumptions of constant relative humidity/increasing specific humidity in a warming climate, and supportive of the Miskolczi theory of a saturated greenhouse effect. Cloud cover was also found to have a decreasing trend, which increases solar insolation and warming.

Once again the computer numbers do not match actual field work.. There are countless articles on wrong doing and bad science. The believers continue to believe while the deniers are demonized.

Jun 20, 2014
The global warming hiatus? Climate models all wrongly predicted warming.
By Dr. Ross McKitrick

While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) still uses the iconic word “unequivocal” to describe warming of the climate system over the past century, a new word has slipped into its lexicon: the “hiatus.” They have begun referring, with a bit of hesitant throat-clearing, to “the warming hiatus since 1998.”

Cracked-beakerBoth satellites and surface records show that sometime around 2000, temperature data ceased its upward path and leveled off. Over the past 100 years there is a statistically significant upward trend in the data amounting to about 0.7 C per century. If one looks only at the past 15 years though, there is no trend.

It will by 2017 be impossible to reconcile climate models with reality

0.7 degrees per century run for the hills ! alas no good, it is over for poor planet earth.. Just turn out the lights baby before you run.
is a score board on computer model forecast and what has been actually observed.. No where close to a match

Is the weather changing yes.. it does every day week to week and year to year.. The trend has been static with regards to temps for the last 15 or so years.

Remember the Polar Bear scare ? All
Farmer's Almanac nailed last winter.. computer models nada

Like many have said and are still saying there appears to be to much agenda and not enough science......... to run off half cocked and destroy what has taken a century to build.

WH Climate Report: Sea Level Could Rise 8 Inches, 11 Inches, 4 Feet, or 6.6 Feet

originally posted by: dieseldyk
This is a joke right?
There is a 50% chance that the sea may rise 8 or 11 inches in the next 100 years. You know on average the sea has been rising 12 inches per 100 years since the end of the last ice age. That's why the ancient city of Dwarka is now 140 feet under water. So, this report is saying that there is a 50% chance that sea level rise will be less this century than it was last century.

The other point is that the graph they use is only a partial graph. The full graph is here

You should note one very important thing from that graph, that is that the correlation between CO2 and temperature has broken. This belies the point that the CO2 correlation is opposite of what is portrayed by the IPCC and MSM. CO2 is an effect of temperature and temperature is the cause of CO2. CO2 actually lags temperature change. And now that correlation has been broken and this puts all the models, all the assumptions, all the lies out there for everyone to see.

Don't believe me, watch suspicious observers

Thanks SO

edit on 24-6-2014 by 727Sky because: ...

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 06:28 AM
a reply to: 727Sky

Well lots of what is shown in your post may be true. I do not need science to see that something is changing.

The climate is changing and I am positive that we are contributing to the change. We may not be causing all of the change, just enough to tip the scales. We have to quit dumping excessive amounts of chemistry into the air, seas, and on the land. We need to reduce our negative effect on the earth.

People are getting irrational at larger numbers. Lots of people are flying compared to thirty years ago. People travel more than they did forty years ago when the average person put on less than five thousand miles a year on each vehicle. The gas mileage is better on new cars but people drive twice as much now.

People's perception is all messed up. They will pay a lot for an eco friendly car and drive it twice as much because it pollutes half as much.

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 07:17 AM
a reply to: rickymouse

They will pay a lot for an eco friendly car and drive it twice as much because it pollutes half as much.

Yep they think it is cheaper until they have to pay for the batteries to be replaced... Then they scream never again!

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 09:07 AM
a reply to: 727Sky

The electricity to run those cars is not eco-friendly to create. The mines that mine the raw material for the nuclear fuel destroy vast areas with unknown consequences in the future. The fact that we just shuffle off the fixing of the spent fuel to future generations is not good either.

It would be better to not drive if you do not have to drive, combine trips, and put more small stores in communities so people can walk to the market. Big chain stores are not a good thing in the long run for communities, they take the profit out of the community and it does not recirulate. Buying locally produced foods is best and the most eco friendly.

The worst Eco-friendly scam there was was when Obama decided to give a 4500 dollar tax rebate to people buying cars when he took over. A lot of the cars that were scrapped were decent cars, I saw some of them.

posted on Jun, 25 2014 @ 01:54 AM
a reply to: FyreByrd

Thanks for that info both sides seem to have people who have a problem with facts.
China’s growing use of coal power plants and the gap in power plant environmental safeguards between the United States and China to me means “all the windmills in the world won’t deliver our children a climate they can depend on” without a substantial change in Chinese policy.

China built more than 500 new coal power plants between 2005 and 2009 which is the equivalent of the entire U.S. coal-fired fleet of coal-fired power plants. Between 2010 and 2013, China added half the coal generation of the entire of the entire U.S. again are the numbers I have seen.

With the new restrictions being planned or executed the U.S. electricity prices will be higher, much higher in most cases.. Which will motivate energy-intensive industries to move to nations like China where power plants are much more polluting.

Reuters reported this spring that only 70 percent of Chinese coal power plants have basic pollution reduction scrubbers that are required on all U.S. coal power plants. Moreover, according to Reuters, many of the Chinese power plants with the scrubbers don’t use them because they substantially raise electricity production costs.

What is the answer ? So what if 300 million Chinese live in horrible pollution and their children can not even go outside to play without some kind of breathing mask on.. What I am trying to say is... The west is but a drop in the bucket compared to other places... Lead by example does not seem to work with the Chinese and their desire to become a first world power house.

But with a myopic view of the planet we all can watch China become stronger and richer while many in the west go without jobs, then housing and finally have to survive on government subsistence.... if even that is available.

We have the technology to make coal fired powered plants clean and safer yet the Chinese seem to not think it is necessary..
Nuclear I personally hope is a n-experts-speak-out-over-failure-of-govt-to-conduct-proper-investi.

TV: 8 times more babies than usual born without brain near U.S. nuclear site; Much higher rate than anywhere else in country — “It’s scary the cause is such a mystery” — CNN: Experts speak out over failure of officials to conduct proper investigation — “The lamest excuse I’ve ever heard”

Two years later or 6 years total still no answers for the parents of these babies. It is getting so that it is hard to believe any official especially if there is money involved.. Power plants in Fukushima, don't worry be happy as more children are being reported sick from all kinds of maladies.
I was going to add more but I have an errand to run with the wife..

posted on Jun, 25 2014 @ 01:59 AM
Before anyone jumps to the conlusions they want to jump to on the basis of nothing more than a dubious blog .....

new topics

top topics


log in