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 :


Homogenization of temperature data makes Capetown South Africa have a warmer climate record

Australia’s warmist agency BoM (Bureau of meteorology) removed the very warm temps of the late 1800’s and begins Australia’s temp record at 1910. This correlates with warm Cape Town (Southern Hemisphere) temp data, pre-1909, removed by NASA to maximise upward trend in temps, promoting the “man-made” global warming narrative.

BoM also smoothed out (removed) 1940-1970’s cooling in many regions of AUS, as seen in the Cape Town record, to create an overall warming trend.

“Man-Made” global warming, by pen and *not* CO2, indeed.

Watts Up With That?

Playing around with my hometown data, I was horrified when I found what NASA had done to it.  Even producing GISTEMP Ver 2 was counterfactual.

homogenize-definition

Guest essay by Philip Lloyd

The raw data that is fed to NASA in order to develop the global temperature series is subjected to “homogenization” to ensure that it does not suffer from such things as the changes in the method of measuring the mean temperature, or changes in readings because of changes in location. However, while the process is supposed to be supported by metadata – i.e. the homogenizers are supposed to provide the basis for any modification of the raw data.

For example, the raw data for my home city, Cape Town, goes back to 1880:

clip_image002

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/tmp/gistemp/STATIONS/tmp_141688160000_0_0/station.txt

The warmest years were in the 1930’s, as they were in many other parts of the globe. There was then a fairly steep decline into the…

View original post 191 more words


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


Great Barrier Reef Expert : Don’t Trust Climate Alarmists

Professor Ridd - Great Barrier Reef .png

“We have got to a point now where a large fraction of the science that we see cannot be relied upon.” Professor Ridd (Source – Sky News)

STRAIGHT-TALKING James Cook University marine geophysicist, Professor Peter Ridd has been an outspoken critic of the relentless tide of fear-mongering, misinformation and anti-science hysteria coming from climate change activists concerning the health of the Great Barrier Reef.

In June this year, Ridd made the headlines after suspecting something was wrong with photographs being used to highlight the apparent rapid decline of the Great Barrier Reef.

After attempting to blow the whistle on the bogus pictures, Ridd was censured by James Cook University and threatened with the sack…

After a formal investigation, Professor Ridd was found guilty of “failing to act in a collegial way and in the academic spirit of the institution”!

His crime was to encourage questioning of two of the nation’s leading reef institutions, the Centre of Excellence for Coral Studies and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, on whether they knew that photographs they had published and claimed to show long-term collapse of reef health could be misleading and wrong.” Graham Lloyd – The Australian – 11 June 2016

Similar totalitarian treatment was dished out by free-thinking James Cook University to the late and great Bob Carter, a former JCU adjunct Professor. Carter was a world renowned climate change expert and sceptic. His crime – speaking outside the permitted doctrine of global warming climate change.

JCU caves in to badgering and groupthink — blackballs “politically incorrect” Bob Carter « JoNova 

Don’t Trust Alarmist Scientists 

Speaking to Andrew Bolt on Sky News’ The Bolt Report, Professor Ridd says you can’t trust alarmist scientists who claim the Great Barrier Reef is dying, thanks to man-made warming.

Watch:

(Click picture to view video || 1m:19s length)

Ridd The Bolt Report Sky News.png

“When you go back over the science and check it, you find that about half the time the work is wrong.” – Professor Peter Ridd JCU

•••

Great Barrier Reef scare related :


German Professor : NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On ‘Unbelievable’ Scale

James-Hansen-Getty-640x480.png

CARL DE SOUZA/AFP/Getty Images

Brietbart’s James Delingpole confirming what sceptics have been observing with disgust for years and what thankfully the world is now becoming increasingly clear about – that NASA, under the directorship of climate change activist Gavin Schmidt and before him James Hansen (pictured) arrested 4 times for climate activism, is scandalously tampering with one of the four major global temperature data sets – GISS.

This is the same data set used by much of the climate science cabal, agenda-driven politicians and the alarmist mainstream media to claim the “Hottest Year Ever” meme.

See: Understanding The “Hottest Year Evah” | Climatism

•••

by JAMES DELINGPOLE24 Nov 2015

A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented “global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records.

Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a retired geologist and data computation expert. He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

According to Günter Ederer, the German journalist who has reported on Ewert’s findings:

From the publicly available data, Ewert made an unbelievable discovery: Between the years 2010 and 2012 the data measured since 1881 were altered so that they showed a significant warming, especially after 1950. […] A comparison of the data from 2010 with the data of 2012 shows that NASA-GISS had altered its own datasets so that especially after WWII a clear warming appears – although it never existed.

Apart from Australia, the planet has in fact been on a cooling trend:

Using the NASA data from 2010 the surface temperature globally from 1940 until today has fallen by 1.110°C, and since 2000 it has fallen 0.4223°C […]. The cooling has hit every continent except for Australia, which warmed by 0.6339°C since 2000. The figures for Europe: From 1940 to 2010, using the data from 2010, there was a cooling of 0.5465°C and a cooling of 0.3739°C since 2000.

But the activist scientists at NASA GISS – initially led by James Hansen (pictured above), later by Gavin Schmidt – wanted the records they are in charge of maintaining to show warming not cooling, so they began systematically adjusting the data for various spurious reasons using ten different methods.

The most commonly used ones were:

• Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
• Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
• Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
• Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
• Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
• With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.

Ewert’s findings echo that of US meteorologists Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts who examined 6,000 NASA weather stations and found a host of irregularities both with the way they were sited and how the raw data had been adjusted to reflect such influences as the Urban Heat Island effect.

Britain’s Paul Homewood is also on NASA GISS’s case. Here he shows the shocking extent of the adjustments they have made to a temperature record in Brazil which has been altered so that a cooling trend becomes a warming trend.

station_thumb8

Unadjusted temperature record: shows cooling trend.

station_thumb9

Adjusted temperature record: shows warming trend.

For still more evidence of NASA’s adjustments, check out Alterations to Climate Data at Tony Heller’s Real Climate Science.
Truly, these people have no shame.
•••
Climate Fraud Resource File :

See also :


Why CSIRO and BoM Cannot Be Trusted On Anything “Climate Change”

CSIRO.jpg

 

The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) is the federal government agency for scientific research in Australia. It was founded in 1926 originally as the Advisory Council of Science and Industry.

In the field of climate science, the CSIRO leans staunchly towards the alarmist side of the climate debate. One example shows the CSIRO using sea level rise figures far in excess of even the (warmist) IPCC.

The Australian reports:

In its 2012 report, State of the Climate, the CSIRO says that since 1993 sea levels have risen up to 10mm a year in the north and west. That means that somewhere has had a 19cm-rise in sea level since 1993. Where is this place? The European satellite says that sea levels have been constant for the past eight years.

In its latest 2016, State of the Climate report, the CSIRO indulges in a blatant cherry-picking exercise to further push their agenda that human emissions are causing the climate to change.

They fail, however, to inform you of their chronic list of failed predictions from previous SOC reports.

This is why scientific organisations like CSIRO and BoM have – tragically – become almost the last places to hear the truth about the global warming climate change. Too many reputations are now at stake.

Andrew Bolt, yet again, sets their record straight from their own records! …

•••

The CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology this week published their latest State of the Climate report:

Observations and climate modelling paint a consistent picture of ongoing, long-term climate change interacting with underlying natural variability.

Strangely, the report fails to explain why past predictions by the Bureau and the CSIRO of a permanent drought turned out so wrong.

Here is the Bureau, quoted in 2008:

IT MAY be time to stop describing south-eastern Australia as gripped by drought and instead accept the extreme dry as permanent, one of the nation’s most senior weather experts warned yesterday.

“Perhaps we should call it our new climate,” said the Bureau of Meteorology’s head of climate analysis, David Jones….

“There is a debate in the climate community, after … close to 12 years of drought, whether this is something permanent…”

Here is the Bureau’s Jones in 2007:

As Jones wrote to the University of East Anglia the year before: “Truth be know, climate change here is now running so rampant that we don’t need meteorological data to see it. Almost everyone of our cities is on the verge of running out of water and our largest irrigation system (the Murray Darling Basin is on the verge of collapse…”

Here is the CSIRO, quoted in 2009:

A three-year collaboration between the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO has confirmed what many scientists long suspected: that the 13-year drought is not just a natural dry stretch but a shift related to climate change…

”It’s reasonable to say that a lot of the current drought of the last 12 to 13 years is due to ongoing global warming,” said the bureau’s Bertrand Timbal. ‘

‘In the minds of a lot of people, the rainfall we had in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s was a benchmark. A lot of our [water and agriculture] planning was done during that time. But we are just not going to have that sort of good rain again as long as the system is warming up.”

Yet, with floods and rains and filling dams is so many states, an author of this latest report gets a very soft interview from the ABC’s Fran Kelly, who also fails to note an astonishing bit of cherry-picking that discredits the whole report.

The report’s authors present this alleged evidence of man-made climate change hurting us:

Observations also show that atmospheric circulation changes in the Southern Hemisphere have led to an average reduction in rainfall across parts of southern Australia.

In particular, May–July rainfall has reduced by around 19% since 1970 in the southwest of Australia. There has been a decline of around 11% since the mid-1990s in April–October rainfall in the continental southeast. Southeast Australia has had below-average rainfall in 16 of the April–October periods since 1997.

Note the strange decision, given our rainfall records go back more than a century, to pick apparently random and inconsistent dates – 1970 and 1997 and “mid 1990s” – as a base point from which to measure declines in rainfall. Note further that this decline is curiously only in patches of the country, and then only in – again – inconsistent periods, “May–July ” and “April–October”.

These are classic tell-tales of cherry picking – tricking to find some arbitrary period that can produce a statistical and scary decline which you can then present as troubling evidence that global warming is drying up our rains. (Even then, none of this comes even close to showing the “permanent” drought the agencies once claimed were leaving our cities desperately short of drinking water.)

This trickery becomes even clearer when you check the Bureau’s rainfall records for the whole past century or more. Amazingly, the impact of man-made warming becomes impossible to detect.

Here, again, is what the State of the Climate report says:

Observations also show that atmospheric circulation changes in the Southern Hemisphere have led to an average reduction in rainfall across parts of southern Australia.

But here is the Bureau’s own record of rainfall for southern Australia:

1.jpeg

Rain – southern Australia

Judged over the century, then, there is no evidence at all of rainfall decline.

Again, from the Bureau’s report:

In particular, May–July rainfall has reduced by around 19% since 1970 in the southwest of Australia.

Rainfall in the south-west is indeed declining, and has done for most of the past 120 years, the first half of which almost no scientist would blame on man’s emissions, which even the IPCC says only had a real effect after World War 11:

2.jpeg

Rain in south west

State of the Climate’s authors also claim that “Southeast Australia has had below-average rainfall in 16 of the April–October periods since 1997”.

But the longer record for the south-east again shows no historic change:

SA No historic change.jpeg

Rain in south east

Once again, a decline from the unusually wet 1970s, but little sign of change over more than a century.

And for the continent as a whole, more rain, not less – and certainly no permanent drought:

Aus rainfall.jpeg

Rain Australia

And as for the Murray Darling, that the Bureau once said was on “the verge of collapse”:

4.jpeg

Murray Darling

This is disgraceful. The Bureau and the CSIRO must explain why they have fed us such scares.

 

•••

CSIRO / BoM Related :

See Also :


NASA “Sea Level Rise” Fraud

nasa_fraud

‘Sea Level Rise’ is just one in a long line of propaganda metrics used by the climate crisis industry to promote the narrative that your CO2 emissions are causing unprecedented climate change.

What ‘sea-level rise’ alarmists won’t tell you is that seas have risen 400 feet (120m) over the past 20,000 years, since the end of the last Ice Age. And over the past 200 years have been rising at a steady rate of 1.7-1.8 mm/year according to NOAA.

Climate change and sea level rise over the past 20,000 years :

SLR Greenland Ice Core.jpg

Annotated graph via Tony Heller’s Real Science humorously notes the impact your SUV has had on sea-level rise versus Nature over the past 20,000 years :

SLR Man V Natural GODDARD2.png

Distinguishing Between Natural And Man-Made Sea Level Rise | Real Science

Sea Level Rise acceleration?

There has been no acceleration of sea-level rise since industrialisation. And critically, something other than evil plant food “Carbon Dioxide” caused seas to rise around 1790.

Important to note that 85% of man-made CO2 was emitted after 1945 :

jevrejeva-sea-levels-1700-1800-1900-2000-global-2

It wasn’t CO2: Global sea levels started rising before 1800 « JoNova

 

What we know about rising seas :

  • Seas have been rising for the past 20,000 years, since the end of the last Ice Age.
  • Something other than CO2 caused the current steady rise around 1790.
  • No acceleration since 1790.

•••

With that hard science and peer-reviewed data in the vault, enter the climate fiddlers from the ‘Ministry of Truth’ – NASA…

 

 

Tony Heller of Real Climate Science has spent thousands upon thousands of hours of unpaid work exposing the relentless fraudulent adjustments and data tampering pushed out of government (taxpayer funded) climate institutions – NASA, NOAA, NSIDC, NCDC, CSIRO, BoM, UN IPCC to name a few.

The fraudulent data is then fed to the sycophant, global warming alarmist mainstream media, published as gospel, and voilà – the “Climate Change Crisis” is born!

This recent post via Real Climate Science on NASA tampering of Sea-level rise highlights the blatant malfeasance that these government funded institutions will undertake in order to push the man-made global warming climate change agenda, and keep the “Greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud in history” rolling and the billions upon billions of taxpayer funds flowing…

•••

NASA Shows How Science Fraud Is Done

 

In 1982, NASA showed that sea level rise dropped off sharply after 1950.

screen-shot-2016-10-25-at-6-56-02-am

NASA said that there was a high correlation with global surface temperature (i.e. global warming occurred from 1880 to 1940 and slowed considerably after 1950.)

screen-shot-2016-10-25-at-7-13-56-am-down

1982_Gornitz_go05100g.pdf

In 1990, the IPCC said there was no convincing evidence of an acceleration in sea level rise during the 20th century.

screen-shot-2016-10-23-at-6-03-54-am-down

ipcc_far_wg_I_chapter_09.pdf

The 1995 IPCC report showed no warming from the 1950’s to the 1990’s.

screen-shot-2016-10-24-at-5-25-32-am-down

ipcc_sar_wg_I_full_report.pdf

The NASA/IPCC data wrecked two essential parts of the global warming scam – post-1950 warming and post-1950 sea level rise. So they found people who were willing to change the data to match the models. The current NASA sea level data is based on this confirmation bias fishing expedition.

This acceleration is an important confirmation of climate change simulations

Screen-Shot-2016-10-25-at-6.51.40-AM-768x499.gif

Church J, White N.. A 20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise. Geophys Res Lett 33: L01602

The overlay below shows how they changed the post-1950 data to match the theory.

screen-shot-2016-10-25-at-7-04-05-am

Church and White discovered a mysterious break in sea level in the year 1926, when sea level rise rates suddenly increased by almost 250% to 1,94 mm/year.

screen-shot-2016-10-25-at-6-53-06-am

Data

I can’t find one single tide gauge anywhere on the planet which shows this post-1926 acceleration. The Church and White study is utter nonsense.

8724580-2-3050-141-2-1024x390-28518750-5-1

But the NASA fraud gets worse. Their tide gauge data says 1.94 mm/year, but their web site shows 3.4 mm/year.

screen-shot-2016-10-25-at-7-39-27-am-down

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Sea Level

Only 10% of NOAA tide gauges show that much sea level rise, and all of those are in places where the land is rapidly sinking.

Screen-Shot-2016-10-04-at-7.59.13-AM-1024x580.gif

Sea Level Trends – MSL global stations trends table

NOAA says sea level is rising half as fast as NASA’s claims.

screen-shot-2016-10-04-at-8-16-10-am

absolute global sea level rise is believed to be 1.7-1.8 millimeters/year

Sea Level Trends – Global Regional Trends

NASA sea level claims are blatant fraud – being done right in front of our faces.

•••

NASA Global Temperature Fraud Related :

Sea Level Rise Fraud Related :

Mainstream Media Sea Level Rise Alarmism :