Category Archives: NASA

What warming goes up must come down

Well, my latest fun comes courtesy of NASA. Not due to anything that they have done wrong (they do good things, too!). Please take a look at their latest satellite image below of the Pacific Ocean that show’s the effect of the La Niña we’re now having.

Go ahead, take a look and note all the blue and white and also note there is very little brown. Remember we’ve been hearing a nearly constant global warming alarmist din about how hot the oceans are, how the coral is bleaching and how we have rising sea-levels and hell, we’re going to all drown and burn to up like crispy critters because of all that nasty old anthropogenic CO2 that causes about anything you care to name, good, bad, or indifferent.

So, look at the above map again and the key at the bottom.  The white is neutral (zero), neither higher or lower. The maximum low is -220 millimeters and the max high is +220 millimeters. If you’re in the USA where we’re more scared of the metric system than global warming, that is the equivalent of + or – 8.66141732 inches in each direction, or a maximum combined spread of 17.32283464 inches. Compared to the 15-20 feet some morons claim we will soon get, that’s a mere drop in the Pacific Ocean bucket.

To put it plain and simple look at how much white and blue there is and how little brown there is. It seems to me that Newton’s Law must apply to hot oceans and their heat-driven sea-level. If you remember Newton, he’s the dude who myth says got hit in the head by an apple and discovered gravity and his theory that what goes up, must come down. Not quite what happened but that’s the favored story.

I’d bet he would find that Newton’s Law is a very appropriate theory to apply to global warming. What temperatures the warmers scream about going up come back down, and what sea-level raise the warmers scream about goes back down, too. I’d term it climate yin and yang.

So remember whether it’s temperature, sea-level or gravity, what goes up must come down. At least Newton didn’t have CO2 Insanity.

You can use the below link to go to the site and see for yourself.

Source: NASA Earth Observatory

Comments Off on What warming goes up must come down

Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, NASA, Science, Weather

Leading US Physicist Labels Satellitegate Scandal a ‘Catastrophe’

Launching wasted tax dollars into space?

Leading US Physicist Labels Satellitegate Scandal a ‘Catastrophe’ By: John O’Sullivan

Respected American physicist, Dr Charles R. Anderson has waded into the escalating Satellitegate controversy publishing a damning analysis on his blog.

In a fresh week of revelations when NOAA calls in their lawyers to handle the fallout, Anderson adds further fuel to the fire and fumes against NOAA, one of the four agencies charged with responsiblity for collating global climate temperatures. NOAA is now fighting a reargaurd legal defense to hold onto some semblance of credibility with growing evidence of systemic global warming data flaws by government climatologists.

NOAA Systemically Excised Data with ‘Poor Interpolations’

Anderson, a successful Materials Physicist with his own laboratory, has looked closely at the evidence uncovered on NOAA. He has been astonished to discover, “Both higher altitudes and higher latitudes have been systematically removed from the measured temperature record with very poor and biased interpolated results taking their place.”

Like other esteemed scientists, Anderson has been quick to spot sinister flaws in official temperatures across northern Lake Michigan as revealed in my earlier articles.

I had proven that the website operated by the Michigan State University had published ridiculously high surface water temperatures widely distributed over the lake many indicating super-boiling conditions. The fear is that these anomalies have been fed across the entire satellite dataset. The satellite that first ignited the fury is NOAA-16. But as we have since learned there are now five key satellites that have become either degraded or seriously compromised.

In his post Satellite Temperature Record Now Unreliable Anderson’s findings corroborate my own that NOAA sought to cover up the “sensor degradation” on their satellite, NOAA-16. The U.S. physicist agrees there may now be thousands of temperatures in the range of 415-604 degrees Fahrenheit automatically fed into computer climate models and contaminating climate models with a substantial warming bias. This may have gone on for a far longer period than the five years originally identified.

Anderson continues, “One has to marvel at either the scientific incompetence this reveals or the completely unethical behavior of NOAA and its paid researchers that is laid open before us.”

Indian Government Knew of Faults in 2004

I have further uncovered proof that the Indian government was long ago onto these faults, too. Researcher, Devendra Singh, tried and failed to draw attention to the increasing problems with the satellite as early as 2004 but his paper remained largely ignored outside of his native homeland.

Indian scientist, Singh reported that NOAA-16 started malfunctioning due to a scan motor problem that caused a ‘barcode’ appearance. Singh’s paper, ‘Performance of the NOAA-16 and AIRS temperature soundings over India’ exposed the satellite’s growing faults and identified three key errors that needed to be addressed.

Singh writes, “The first one is the instrument observation error. The second is caused by the differences in the observation time and location between the satellite and radiosonde. The third is sampling error due to atmospheric horizontal inhomogeneity of the field of view (FOV).” These from India thus endorse Dr. Anderson’s findings.

Photo of the barcode problem noted by Singh

NOAA Proven to have engaged in Long-term Cover Up

My investigations are increasingly proving that such data was flagged by non-NOAA agencies years ago, but NOAA declined to publish notice of the faults until the problem was publicized loudly and widely in my first ‘satellitegate’ article, US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced. Official explanations initially dismissed my findings. But then NOAA conceded my story was accurate in the face of the evidence.

My second article, shortly thereafter, exposed that a succession of record warm temperatures in recent years may be based on contaminated satellite readings. But NOAA spokesman, Program Coordinator, Chuck Pistis declined to clarify the extent of the satellite instrument problem or how long the fault might have gone undetected.

Thereafter, in my third article, Official: Satellite Failure Means Decade of Global Warming Data Doubtful we saw the smoking gun evidence of a cover up after examining the offending satellite’s AVHRR Subsystem Summary. The official summary shows no report of any ‘sensor degradation’ (NOAA’s admission) since its launch in September 2000.

Subsystem Summary Details Censored Between 2005-10

But even more sinister is the fact that the official online summary now only shows events recorded up to 2005. All subsequent notations, that was on NOAA’s web pages last week and showed entries inclusive to summer 2010, have now been removed. However, climatechangefraud.com is displaying a sample of the missing evidence copied before NOAA took down the revealing web pages after it entered into ‘damage limitation mode.’

As events have unfolded we are also learning that major systemic failures in the rest of the satellite global data-collecting network were also not reported. Such serious flaws affect up to five U.S satellites as reported in an excellent article by Susan Bohan here.

NOAA Tears Up its Own ‘ Data Transparency’ Policy

But rather than come clean NOAA has this week ordered their lawyers to circle the wagons.  Glenn Tallia, their Senior Counselor, wrote to advise me, “The data and associated website at issue are not NOAA’s but instead are those of the Michigan State Sea Grant program. Thus, we have referred your e-mail to the Michigan State Sea Grant program.”

Yes, Glenn, clearly the final data output was published by Michigan but the underlying fault is with your satellite!

With NOAA now hiding behind their attorneys we appear to see a contradiction of NOAA’s official pledge that “ The basic tenet of physical climate data management at NOAA is full and open data access” published in their document, NOAA/National Climatic Data Center Open Access to Physical Climate Data Policy December 2009.
Sadly, we may now be at the start of yet another protracted delay and concealment process that tarnished NASA’s and CRU’s reputations in Climategate. We saw in that scandal that for 3-7 years the US and the UK government agencies cynically and unlawfully stymied Freedom of Information requests (FOIA).

NASA’s disgrace was affirmed in March 2010 when they finally conceded that their data was in worse shape than the much-maligned Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the UK’s University of East Anglia. CRU’s Professor Phil Jones only escaped criminal prosecution by way of a technicality.
The attorney credited with successfully forcing NASA to come clean was Christopher Horner, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Horner is now advising me as to how best to pursue a possible FOIA of my own against NOAA if they continue their obfuscation.

American Physicist Pick Out Key Issues

Meanwhile, back on his blog Anderson points to the key issues that NOAA tries to cover up. He refers to how Charles Pistis, Program Coordinator of the Michigan Sea Grant project, tried to pass off the dodgy data as being an accidental product of the satellite’s malfunction sensors taking readings off the top of clouds rather than the surface temperatures.

By contrast, Anderson cogently refutes this explanation showing that such bogus data was consistently of very high temperatures not associated with those detected from cloud tops. He advises it is fair to assume that NOAA were using this temperature anomaly to favorably hype a doomsaying agenda of ever-increasing temperatures that served the misinformation process of government propaganda.

As Pistis admitted, all such satellite data is fed automatically into records and apparently as long as it showed high enough temperatures to satisfy the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (AGW) advocates of those numbers were not going to make careful scrutiny for at least half a decade.

Anderson bemoans, “One has to marvel at either the scientific incompetence this reveals or the completely unethical behavior of NOAA and its paid researchers that is laid open before us.”

“Charles Pistis has evaded the repeated question of whether the temperature measurement data from such satellites has gone into the NOAA temperature record. This sure suggests this is an awkward question to answer.”

Now Satellites NOAA-17 and 18 Suffer Calamities

While NOAA’s Nero fiddles ‘Rome’ continues to burn and the satellite network just keeps on falling apart. After NOAA-16 bit the dust last week NOAA-17 became rated ‘poor’ due to ‘scan motor degradation” while NOAA-18’s gyro’s are regarded by many now as good as dead. However, these satellites that each cross the U.S. twice per day at twelve-hour intervals are still giving “direct readout”(HRPT or APT) or central processing to customers. So please, NOAA, tell us – is this GIGO still being fed into official climate models?

NOAA-17 appears in even worse condition. On February 12 and 19 2010 NOAA-17 concedes it has “ AVHRR Scan Motor Degradation” with “Product(s) or Data Impacted.”

Beleaguered NOAA customers have been told, “direct readout users are going to have to deal with the missing data gaps as best they can.”

On August 9, 2010, NOAA 17 was listed as on ‘poor’ with scan motor problems and rising motor currents. NOAA admits, “Constant rephase by the MIRP was causing data dropouts on all the HRPT stream and APT and GAC derivatives. Auto re-phase has now been disabled and the resulting AVHRR products are almost all unusable.”

NOAA continues with tests on ‘17’ with a view to finding a solution. On page 53 we find that NOAA-17 has an inoperable AMSU Instrument.  The status for August 17, 2010 was RED (not operational) and NOAA is undertaking “urgent gyro tests on NOAA 18.” For further details see here. More evidence proving NOAA is running a “degrading” satellite network can be read here.

Dr. Anderson sums up saying; “It is now perfectly clear that there are no reliable worldwide temperature records and that we have little more than anecdotal information on the temperature history of the Earth.”

3 Comments

Filed under Co2 Insanity, John O'Sullivan, Legal, NASA, NOAA, Sattelitegate, Science

Satellitegate: Scientists Speak

GOES-8 Satellite that will be missing 14 sensors it should have to see if we have global warming or not

From John O’Sullivan, via Canada Free Press, we get further information on Satellitegate. Satellitegate refers to problems that have been discovered with old satellites, satellite data, and even problems with satellites that have yet to be launched. This evidently has caused lots of action about this at NASA, NOAA, GISS and elsewhere.

In his article titled “Top Scientists Speak out on the Satellitegate Scandal” you can read about how this being exposed has affected things and some opinions of some scientists. It appears that one satellite has been shuttered and datasets may be disappearing.

US Government admits global warming satellite sensors “degraded” – temperatures may be out by 10-15 degrees. Now five satellites in controversy. Top scientists speak out.

In an escalating row dubbed ‘Satellitegate’ further evidence proves NOAA knew of these faults for years. World’s top climate scientists and even prior governmental reports cite underfunding and misallocation as the trigger for spiraling satellite data calamities. Key flaws with five satellites undermines global data.

Most disturbing of all is that it took publication of my article last week to persuade the authorities to withdraw the errant NOAA-16 satellite from service. But as Dr. John Christy indicates, the real Satellitegate is not about one satellite. The scandal is endemic with comparable flaws across the entire network; the scandal is also that it took a tip off from a member of the public and the widespread broadcast of my article before one of the offending junk boxes, NOAA-16, got taken down.

If you want to read about the whole big and getting bigger all the time scandal here are the links to the other articles and posts about Satellitegate.

  • You can read the whole article at Canada Free Press here.
  • This link is to my post about John O’Sullivan’s article on thr 10-15 degree warming added by NOAA-16.
  • This link is to my first post about the article titled “Dimmer View of Earth” in the Contra Costa Times, by Susan Bohan.
  • This link is to John O’Sullivan’s original article at Climate Change Fraud.
  • This link is to my post about John O’Sullivan’s article about the 600+ degree city of Egg Harbor, Wisconsin.

Sources: John O’Sullivan, Canada Free Press, Climate Change Fraud

6 Comments

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, GISS, John O'Sullivan, NASA, NOAA, Sattelitegate, Science

The Arctic is not melting

The “warmers’ are such an amazing propaganda machine. Joseph Goebbels, the king of Nazi propaganda, surely would feel like a proud papa were he to return from his well deserved visit to Hell. At least the “warmers” haven’t sent us “skeptics” to concentration camps, yet. Though I’d wager some would love to. Words like honesty, truth, accuracy, and reality are apparently not in their vocabulary.  People such as Adolf Hitler, Vladimir Lenin and William James (father of modern psychology) have all made statements to the effect of “tell a lie often enough and people will believe it, ” which kind of sounds like the “warmer” mantra.

Speaking of Hell, the “warmers” want you to think it’s hotter than Hell in the Arctic this year. But is it? Or, is this just another case of mass propaganda put out by the “warmers” to be foisted upon the public by a mainstream media who are either clueless, in cahoots with them, or both.

If you read any previous posts on here you’re aware of some “funny” things going on with how data is collected by NOAA, GISS, NASA, etc. We’ve had

  • 612 degree temperatures in Egg Harbor, Wisconsin.
  • Satellite-gate about how the Landsat 7 satellite doesn’t work all that well, and how new, yet to be launched satellites, will be missing a lot of sensors they should have aboard.
  • Satellite-gate 10-15 About how the  NOAA data is 10-15 degrees high due to satellite data being incorrect.

We have some wacky people and government agencies providing some very wacky data, that, as evidenced by the deletion of satellite sensor arrays from those new satellites, leads me to surmise that something is rotten.

I did find some  more information which leads me to the conclusion that the data they use is perpetuating a fraud upon the general public. Many “eat” the “alarmist” newspaper articles, TV shows and “alarmist” website BS up like candy. Remember, newspapers are a hurting industry, they’re in business to sell papers and they need sensationalism to sell papers. You can say the same about TV and internet.

An article titled “No problem in the Arctic – Plenty of Sea-Ice – No global warming – you can relax now” isn’t going to sell many papers. An article titled “Sea-Ice Melting! No Arctic Ice by 2030! We’re all gonna die!” will certainly get the general public’s attention. Toss in some Photoshopped pictures of polar bears sitting on mini-icebergs, and the  “alarmist” BS about the iceberg that just broke off a glacier in Greenland (here), and you’re going to sell lots of news.

This morning I found an article at Pajamas Media about how NOAA and GISS are obtaining their alleged Arctic temperatures. They then use this faux data to make claims that it’s really hot up there, the ice is melting, the polar bears are dying, and you’ll be able to sail the Queen Mary though the new Northwest Passage in a couple of decades because due to global warming the polar cap will melt. Below is one snippet.

In the case of the Arctic that one thermometer and the few that are on the fringe of the Arctic are used to calculate the average temperature of everything north of eighty degrees. When one uses a 250-degree smoothing factor for the data from GISS, the truth is suddenly and shockingly revealed: they don’t have any thermometers north of eighty degrees and very few north of sixty degrees. The 1,200 kilometer smoothing floods the Arctic with assumed temperature readings that don’t actually exist.

So what does this all mean in miles? To get into further detail than the PJ article, each degree of latitude is approximately 69 miles. From 80 degrees north, where their highest (if I read the article right theres’ only 1)sensor is, it is about 690 miles to the North Pole (90 degrees north), (10 degrees x 69 miles = 690 miles). For an equivalent it’s like having a sensor in Salt Lake City, Utah and claiming the temperature there is the temperature in San Francisco, California.  You can see approximate degrees latitude and approximate distances on the below map.

From 60 degrees north, the line where most sensors cease to exist, it’s approximately 2,070 miles (30 degrees x 69 miles =2,070 miles). That’s like having a sensor in San Francisco, California and using it to ascertain the temperature in St. Louis, Missouri. Again, an extremely long distance to be claiming one temperature is the same as the other.

The 1,2oo kilometer smoothing basically means that they will take one sensor and use it as data for the whole area in a 1,200 kilometer 360 degree radius. What’s 1,200 kilometers? It is the equivalent of 745 miles. The approximate distance from San Francisco, California to Phoenix, Arizona. To give you an idea of what kind of temperature disparity this kind of “smoothing” can cause, as I write, it’s 56 degrees in San Francisco. In Phoenix it’s 99 degrees. Get the point? It’s called how to warm things up for the general public, many of who read these things without understanding them or bothering to do any research on whether the article, website, or TV show is being realistic or “alarmist.”

As en example, using their method, I could create a chart now showing that it’s 99 degrees in San Francisco when it’s really 43 degrees cooler because I’m using that 1200 km “smoothing” that allows me to effectively cheat and claim the temperatures are the same in both cities, regardless how preposterous the claim is. This is one way you get all the claimed global warming. Toss in that satellite data that is 10-15 degrees higher and you have voilà, the “hottest June,” “the hottest 6 months,” “the hottest year,” Hopefully you get the point that it’s tantamount to a lot of “hot air” and as far as reality is concerned, it’s not much scientific value, unless you’re into science fiction stories.

Now let’s get to the sea-ice extent in the Arctic and what’s really happening at the north and south poles vs. what the “warmers” would like you to believe. As far as the “warmers” are concerned that Arctic sea-ice is melting at record rates. It’s yet more proof of global warming and designed to foster the false belief that we’ll soon all think we’re roasting in Hell with Joseph Goebbels, unless we start worshipping at the Church of Global Warming and put lots of money in that basket when it’s passed around. What I call “Alarmism” at its best.

The website Watts Up with That has a nice sea-ice page with all the latest charts on what the sea-ice extent is doing. They’re regularly updated, too, which is good because you’re not looking at old or faux data, it’s right from the source in real-time. Per his “Sea Ice News 18” summer is over in the Arctic. The ice shouldn’t be melting anymore, it should start building now that it’s getting colder. Per the chart below you can see  for yourself that the temperature has peaked and is now dropping.

Per the next chart below, you can plainly see (the red line) that it’s not as bad as the “alarmist” have made it out to be. It’s better than 2oo7 (purple line) and 2008 (green line) and actually seems to be on course, so far, with 2009 (blue line). Please note that 2009 was better (more ice) than 2007, which is the year the “warmers” tout as proof we’re melting like the Wicked Witch of the North in the Wizard of Oz.

You’ll see there is one small period where 2010 drops slightly below 2007, which has also been flying around the MSM as proof that the ice is melting. The only problem is this only lasted a matter of days before it changed back. Notice you didn’t hear anything about that in the MSM, did you? They don’t want you to know that it was only a blip on the radar. They’ll take any tidbit they can find and use it to preach global warming.

You should check out Watts Up with that here as they have more charts and explanations about what’s happening in the Arctic and the Antarctic.

By the way the Antarctic isn’t melting away either. You can plainly see per the below chart that 2010 (red line) is probably going to set a record as the sea-ice extent is significantly higher than 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and even 2009. Something else you don’t hear from the MSM.

This is how they get you sucked into believing in global warming. They use data with missing chunks, incorrect data, skewed data, non-existent data, manufactured data, and do nice little “scientific” things like 1,200 km smoothing, which allows one to use a higher temperature from half a continent away as the data you want to claim is in an area that you want to show is warming,

Don’t believe me? Here’s a quote attributed to Dr. James Hansen, Director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).

The 12-month running mean global temperature in the GISS analysis has reached a new record in 2010. The main factor is our estimated temperature change for the Arctic region.

Hell, who needs reality? Let’s just estimate what we want the public to hear! Will this type of CO Insanity ever go away? I”m not holding my breath.

Sources: Pajamas Media, Watts Up With That

11 Comments

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Glaciers, Global Warming, Government, John O'Sullivan, NASA, NOAA, Science, Sea-Ice, Weather

Satellite-gate

I periodically read about how wonderful and accurate the satellite data we get is compared to any other data.  I get the impression that many both sides of the global warming fence like the satellite data a lot. After reading this morning’s paper, I have to question that thought.

The photo is today’s headline from the front page of my local Sunday newspaper the Valley Times. Per the article, it seems we have problems with data coming from current satellites in orbit and we’ll have more problems with ones we haven’t even launched yet. Someone’s made a giant faux pas to say the least. Talk about “Houston, we have a problem” this is it.

These new satellites, if allowed to go “as is,” are tremendously handicapped. Sending them up in this condition could be likened to sending Ray Charles, or Stevie Wonder or Helen Keller into outer space to see what’s going on . To quote someone it’s called “read my lips, ain’t gonna happen.”

I about spit my coffee out when I opened up the paper and saw that this morning. Absolute astonishment is to say the least what my reaction was.

This is an extremely good article coming from a local newspaper and kudos to the author. This article is what I’d refer to as a “doozy.”

You can read the whole article by Susan Bohan here. I’d strongly suggest you do regardless if you’re a “warmer” or a “skeptic.” It is one of those very few things that both sides should agree is appalling. Why?

The way these satellites are being handicapped greatly reduces the ability to either side to prove or disprove global warming. This could be the bonifides required to end the argument one way or the other so we can all get on with our business of worrying about what to do to  or not about global warming. If disproved it would allow us to get on about the business, such as reducing pollution, providing more potable water and sanitary facilities for 3rd world countries, etc.

To summarize what left me with my mouth hanging open…..

  • The NPOESS (National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite)will not have any sensors that measure the sun’s energy output on the 2nd and 4th satellites.
  • The GOES-R (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R Series) has had 14 sensors cancelled. No data for cloud base height, ozone layer, ocean color, ocean turbidity and cloud imagery, snow cover, etc. Effectively neutered.
  • Landsat 7 (currently in orbit) is broken leaving data gaps. Scientists do not get all the information they should.
  • No sensor for movement of greenhouse gases and pollutants.
  • No sensor to monitor temperature changes on Earth over time.
  • They’re blaming who else but George W. Bush.
  • But per the article NOAA and DOD failed to try to get the funding to keep the eliminated sensors.
  • The sensor to measure how Earth’s temperature reacts to changes in Solar energy was cancelled by the Obama Administration at the end of June 2011.

Not having these satellites fully armed to collect all the proper data to help us understand what is happening with Earth’s weather, environment and the effect the Sun has on it, is what I would at a minimum, term gross negligence.

Regardless whether you believe in global warming or not, we should in this day and age be able to have the proper equipment orbiting the Earth. But no, we spend billions on handicapped satellites, which makes no sense whatsoever.

That the United Nations, most governments of the world, and all those involved in carbon trading schemes are salivating at the thought of taxing the snot out of all of us, redistributing wealth from rich to poor countries, making billions on carbon trading schemes, and having a one-world order fired up where we’ll all do the United Nations bidding just makes me more suspicious about sending up one-armed satellites.

That, in turn, makes me wonder if this was done as claimed for budgetary reasons? Is it pure stupidity? Or, is this a deliberate attempt to keep a shroud of secrecy around the fact that there isn’t any anthropogenic global warming?

What better way to keep those who genuflect at the altar of the Church of Global Warming continuing to “believe” in the gospel of the “Goracle” and permit them to levy carbon taxes. It’s classic religion! No one gets to see what’s on the other side, no factual information is put forth, we’re just supposed to believe and have faith that those running the Church of Global Warming say. Sorry Al, but you don’t even be close to being up on the pedestal with GOD, the Pope, Jesus, Buddha, Allah, et al.

It might be that someone is very afraid that if we start getting real accurate satellite data that it’s going to bust the AGW religious business and carbon trading schemes worldwide. I can’t see any other reason for eliminating the ability of these satellites to collect certain forms of data. If they believe global warming is true, one would think that they’d ensure these satellites would have every sensor known to man, plus a few more, so they could prove their point beyond a shadow of a doubt.

To add to my suspicions, it appears no one’s put up much of a fuss about this space  travesty either. Where’s Al Gore, James Hansen, Pachauri, et al? They seem stunningly silent about this, especially for such a group of true believers who are constantly contributing to the AGW din. It also seems interesting that Obama just recently eliminated one sensor they seem to have forgotten about with a seeming wave of the hand. Suspicious too, isn’t it?

A mere case of government stupidity? Budget problems? Or, a conspiracy? If the latter, I’d doubt anyone would be able to prove anything unless someone of enormous stature and involvement decided to blow the whistle or some evidence on the order of climategate is found. What’s going on sure makes me wonder about it though.

Either way it’s more CO2 Insanity.

Source: Valley Times/Contra Costa Times/Bay Area News Group

26 Comments

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Government, NASA, NOAA, Obama, Science, Weather

Global warming ‘unmistakable?’

Ahhhh the good old MET office is at it again. These dipsticks can’t predict the weather, yet they expect everyone to belive their latest report that “global warming evidence is ‘unmistakable.'” This one about had me fall out of my chair I was laughing so hard when I read the headline.

To fully appreciate their record of inaccuracy one has to go back in time a little. These are the morons who…..

  • Predicted the 2009-2010 UK winter would be the warmest ever, then had to eat those words when it turned out to be the coldest in 30 years.
  • Screwed-over the airline industry in Europe because their computer model predicting ash from the volcanic eruption in Iceland was wacky.  Only cost a billion or so, what the hell.
  • Screwed up their climate change data.
  • The BBC considered dropping them due to bad forecasting
  • Get blasted by the UK newspaper the Daily Mail because they only get one out of 4 forecasts correct.
  • Blew a wad of money on the UK’s most powerful super-computer but admit they still can’t get the weather forecast right
  • Screw up meteorological maps
  • Forecast a BBQ Summer, which never appeared

OK, so you really want to believe their statement that “global warming evidence is ‘unmistakable?'” I sure as hell don’t. So, where do we get all this “unmistakable” information from? What are they basing this baseless conclusion upon? According to the Telegraph article found here…..

Usually scientists rely on the temperature over land, taken from weather stations around the world for the last 150 years, to show global warming.

But climate change sceptics questioned the evidence, especially in the wake of recent scandals like “climategate”.

The ten indicators of climate change include measurements of sea level rise taken from ships, the temperature of the upper atmosphere taken from weather balloons and field surveys of melting glaciers.
You almost have to laugh at the “alarmism” when you find out how much they claim the temperature has risen, too.

And he said ‘greenhouse gases are the glaringly obvious explanation’ for 0.56C (1F) warming over the last 50 years.

Yep, a whopping .56C over the last 50 years. Let’s see that is a whole gigantic 0.0112C per year. Where are my Speedos, I feel so hot, must be due to this gigantic temperature rise we’ve supposedly had.

They then proceed to contradict themselves with this statement. Remember at the noted “Usually scientists rely on the temperature over land, taken from weather stations around the world for the last 150 years, to show global warming.”

Understanding climate change requires looking at the longer-term record. When we follow decade-to-decade trends using different data sets and independent analyses from around the world, we see clear and unmistakable signs of a warming world.”

They say “require looking at the longer term record” yet they base their claim of “unmistakable signs of a warming world” on a mere 50 years of dubious data. Do they really expect anyone with an IQ above 29 to belive this?

I won’t even get into the data they got from NOAA. But if you want to read about how “reliable” and how “accurate” their stuff is you can go here, or here, or here, or here.

All I can say is I don’t believe a word they say and I think I’m perfectly justified being skeptical.

Sources: Telegraph

2 Comments

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Government, NASA, NOAA, Science

So,where’s all the hurricanes?

The Atlantic hurricane season began June 1, 2010 and runs until November 30, 2010. We’re 54 days into the season with not much happening.

Thus far, according to the National Hurricane Center we’ve had one hurricane (Alex), one named tropical storm  (Bonnie, which just fizzled out and apparently hasn’t caused any big problems for the Gulf oil spill like the media have been screaming), and one unnamed tropical depression (Tropical Depression Two).

This prompts my question “So, where’s all the hurricanes?” Normally I don’t think I would care all that much about how many hurricanes but for the predictions made earlier this year by Colorado State University and NOAA. Since we’ve had all the wild predictions about global warming causing more hurricanes, I’ve become interested.

From Colorado State University we got…..

They predict that 15 named tropical storms will form in the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico this year, of which 8 will become hurricanes. And of those eight, four are expected to be major hurricanes — Categories 3, 4 or 5 — with maximum wind speeds of 111 mph or greater.

From NOAA we got…..

The federal National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrationcalled for an “active” to “extremely active” hurricane season this year. They predict anywhere from 14 to 23 named storms will form in the Atlantic Basin. Of those named storms, eight to 14 should become hurricanes, including three to seven “major” hurricanes with wind speeds above 111 mph.

They’ve never predicted a more prolific Atlantic hurricane season. So far their predictions don’t seem to be coming true.  I know we have awhile until hurricane season is over and things could change, but we’re certainly not off to a very good start prediction-wise.

Let’s see how CSU’s record stands for the 2009 Atlantic hurricane season.

As of June, 2009 they predicted 11 named storms, 5 hurricanes, and 2 major hurricanes  as you can see from the below originating with this PDF from CSU.

What we actually had in 2009, per NOAA here,  was 2 tropical depressions, 6 tropical storms and 3 hurricanes, you can see the storm track chart below.

So what did NOAA predict for the 20o9 Atlantic hurricane season?  You can see the below from their website here.

You can see for yourself their record for 2009 and make your own judgement.

I’m not going to predict anything, as I fail to see how you can do more than make an educated guess, regardless if you’re a scientist or not.  I remember most of my life complaining that being a weatherman was one of the few, if only professions where you can screw-up with regularity and still get your paycheck every week. Most of my life weather accuracy hasn’t been that important to me.

The shrill forecasts of global warming causing increased and larger hurricanes has stepped up the importance of their accuracy to me.  I now watch and wonder if they’re forecasts will be correct or not.

I do suppose that no matter what happens this Atlantic hurricane season, the “warmers” will be saying it’s caused by global warming.  Everything is, you know.

Sources: USA Today, NOAA, Colorado State University, CNN

Comments Off on So,where’s all the hurricanes?

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Editor, Government, NASA, Science, Weather

NASA Balloon Crash

OK, first we had “Balloon Boy” who wasn’t in the balloon after all, but it did get off the ground and go for quite a distance before coming back to Earth. I don’t know what they spent on their balloon but it couldn’t have been much.

Then we had this guy who spent a whopping $750 on a used camera, weather balloons and duct tape and got some fantastic photos from the edge of space. Yes his balloon worked, too!

Now we get NASA, screwing up again and blowing $2 million tax payer dollars because they can’t figure out how to launch a balloon, something it appears people with way less money and manpower seem to accomplish quite well. Here’s more info from Yahoo News.

This from the people who brought you the global warming data that was so bad they ended up using the CRU’s data, which wasn’t all that either.

More CO2 Insanity.

Source: Yahoo News

5 Comments

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Comedy Relief, Financial, NASA, Science