Former Obama Official: Bureaucrats Manipulate Climate Stats To Influence Policy

Surprise, surprise again…

“Press officers work with scientists within agencies like the National Oceanic Administration (NOAA) and NASA and are responsible for crafting misleading press releases on climate, he added.”

Watts Up With That?

by Chris White

A former member of the Obama administration claims Washington D.C. often uses “misleading” news releases about climate data to influence public opinion.

Former Energy Department Undersecretary Steven Koonin told The Wall Street Journal Monday that bureaucrats within former President Barack Obama’s administration spun scientific data to manipulate public opinion.

“What you saw coming out of the press releases about climate data, climate analysis, was, I’d say, misleading, sometimes just wrong,” Koonin said, referring to elements within the Obama administration he said were responsible for manipulating climate data.

He pointed to a National Climate Assessment in 2014 showing hurricane activity has increased from 1980 as an illustration of how federal agencies fudged climate data. Koonin said the NCA’s assessment was technically incorrect.

“What they forgot to tell you, and you don’t know until you read all the way into the fine print is that it actually decreased in…

View original post 244 more words


Bad Weather Proves Climate Change, Says WMO

Top post. Nice work Paul.
WMO, up to their ears in man-made “Global Warming” hysteria and alarmism since they teamed up with climate criminal Maurice Strong’s UNEP in the 1970’s, later implementing the eco-political UN IPCC.

Maurice Strong, “The Creator, Fabricator And Proponent Of Global Warming” hysteria.

https://climatism.wordpress.com/2013/09/17/the-creator-fabricator-and-proponent-of-global-warming-maurice-strong/

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

image

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-real-extreme-weather-wmo-world-meteorological-organization-global-warming-a7640376.html

From the “A bit of bad weather proves climate change “ Dept.

An unbelievably crass piece from the failed Independent (and doubtlessly the BBC and the rest of the dismal MSM):

There is “no room for doubt”. The astonishing weather experienced by the world last year and advances in climate science demonstrate conclusively that fossil fuel emissions are causing global warming – and something must be done about it.

That was the reaction from scientist after scientist to a new report by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), which documented record-breaking droughts, heatwaves, rainfall, melting of sea ice and a host of tangible signs observed in 2016 that the Earth’s climate has changed.

View original post 1,282 more words


Aussie CSIRO Predicts the End of Wheat Yield Gains

Yet again, “Climate Change” fingered as the great demon that causes unending planetary horror.

However, it appears its evil byproducts – modelled heat and CO2 – are in fact increasing, not decreasing wheat crop yields in Australia…

“Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences tips record national crop” (Sep 2016)

http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/australian-bureau-of-agricultural-and-resource-economics-and-sciences-tips-record-national-crop/news-story/ba6d21901a8db0369abcca5b37dd20f2

And their prediction was spot on:

“Australia’s winter grain crop officially a record at 59 million tonnes.” (Feb 2017)

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-14/nrn-record-winter-crop/8268564?pfmredir=sm

What planet do the CSIRO climate-obsessed, doomsday scenario “scientists” live on?

Sounds to me that they live on the ever-forgiving and lucrative planet of horror-scenario computer models providing endless government (taxpayer funded) “climate” research grants…

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to the Australian CSIRO, “The lines will cross” in 20 years, heralding the end of biotechnology’s ability to improve wheat yields.

Climate change to blame for flatlining wheat yield gains: CSIRO

By Anna Vidot

Updated Thu at 11:59am

Australia’s wheat productivity has flatlined as a direct result of climate change, according to CSIRO research.

While 2016 set a new national wheat harvest record, the national science organisation’s findings indicate that result masks a more troubling long-term trend.

While Australian wheat yields tripled between 1900 and 1990, growth stagnated over the following 25 years.

Zvi Hochman, a senior research scientist with CSIRO Agriculture and Food said the team considered whether other factors could have shared the blame, such as investment in research and development (R&D), changing patterns of land use, and soil fertility.

But those could all be ruled out: investment in grains R&D…

View original post 329 more words


Georgia Tech Climatologist Quits Over “Craziness” In Field Of Climate Science

Curry Senate2.jpg

A MUST SEE interview on Tucker Carlson Tonight, featuring Professor Judith Curry who has recently quit her position as the chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Her reasoning is simple yet so very damaging and dangerous, not only to “climate science” but to the fate of all “sciences”. Her resignation is to do with, not only being vilified by colleagues for having a sceptical (scientific) view of “climate change”, but importantly the ongoing ‘monopolistic’ funding of research into the science of man-made global warming, versus the non-existent resources directed toward the study of natural climate change.

This imbalance of government funding skews and distorts the science that is output, and as Joanne Nova notes, a “lack of funding for alternatives leaves a vacuum and creates a systemic failure. The force of monopolistic funding works like a ratchet mechanism on science. Results can move in both directions, but the funding means that only results from one side of the equation get “traction.”

The systemic failure self-perpetuates :

  • Where’s the motivation in proving anthropogenic global warming wrong?
  • How serious are they about getting the data right? Or are they only serious about getting the “right” data?
  • “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” – Upton Sinclair, 1935

The oneway-traffic flow of government funding leads not only to an unhealthy distortion of science, but also to an unhealthy bias in the scientific and media reporting we receive on climate change.

MUST SEE interview between Tucker Carlson and Dr. Curry here:

•••

Related :


NOAA’s Tornado Fraud

NOAA TORNADO LIES: Another solid example of why government climate agencies like NOAA, NASA, CSIRO, BoM, MetOffice – run by a handful of activist administrators, are the last places to hear or read the truth on “global warming” aka “climate change”.

“The bottom line is that the NOAA headline graph is grossly dishonest. Indeed, if a company published something like that in their Annual Accounts, they would probably end up in jail!

NOAA themselves know all of this full well.
Which raises the question – why are they perpetuating this fraud?”

Read all of the excellent deconstruction of yet more NOAA fraud via Paul Homewood here…

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/tornadoes/201613

According to NOAA, the number of tornadoes has been steadily growing since the 1950s, despite a drop in numbers in the last five years.

They show the above chart prominently in their Tornadoes – Annual 2016 Report.

However, they know full well that it is meaningless to compare current data with the past, as they explain themselves in the section Historical Records and Trends, which is hidden away on their own website:

One of the main difficulties with tornado records is that a tornado, or evidence of a tornado must have been observed. Unlike rainfall or temperature, which may be measured by a fixed instrument, tornadoes are short-lived and very unpredictable. If a tornado occurs in a place with few or no people, it is not likely to be documented. Many significant tornadoes may not make it into the historical record since Tornado Alley was…

View original post 592 more words


China won’t classify CO2 as a pollutant in new environment law

102_2_co2-logo.png

Umm, perhaps because China is pragmatic and still ‘scientific’ enough not to yield to the radical environmentalist con that the colourless, odorlesss, trace gas and plant food carbon dioxide (CO2) is a “pollutant”.

The big lie of climate alarmist’s is to conflate real ‘carbon’ pollution (soot) with CO2. China sees this a mile away and isn’t influenced by ‘carbon’ propaganda and western eco-political correctness.

Yet again – smart China, dumb West.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

View original post


Homogenization of Temperature Data By the Bureau of Meteorology

“None of these organizations will say or explain what they are doing or are being vague when asked. Raw data is being removed from public scrutiny and no one knows if it is actually being destroyed. Officially they are providing no scientific basis for making these adjustments.”

“Once you start introducing reasons to make adjustments then it becomes too easy to use them as an excuse to adjust everything to suit a purpose. It becomes easy to allow for political interference. Political interference should be impossible.”

Welcome to the political, pseudoscientific world “man-made” global warming…

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Brendan Godwin

Background

I worked for Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology – BOM for 2 years from 1973 to 1975. I was trained in weather observation and general meteorology. I spent 1 year observing Australia’s weather and 1 year observing the weather at Australia’s Antarctic station at Mawson.

As part of it’s Antarctic program, Australia drills ice cores at Law Dome near it’s Casey station. On our return journey in 1975 we repatriated a large number of ice cores for scientific analysis. The globe’s weather and climate records are stored in these ice cores for the past 1 million years approximately.

Australia’s Antarctic program went by the name of Australian National Antarctic Research Expedition or ANARE for short. This is now known as Australian Antarctic Division or AAD. Returned expeditions formed a club called the ANARE Club of which I have been a member since 1975. Members have…

View original post 2,046 more words