Did Media Or NASA Withhold Climate History Data Changes From The Public?

Newsbusters ^ | 8/9/2007 | Noel Sheppard

[P-40]

They have gone after Lomborg viciously

Did you see Lomborg testify after Al Gore at the House Hearing on Global Warming? That guy had some of the best responses and it is no wonder the Democrats walked out on him. It is still up at C-SPAN if you want to watch it.

[6ppc]

But wait, it is August 9th in Texas and we have YET to have a single day reach 100°F.
That date usually hits last week of June or first week of July. Sometimes. 1980 saw almost two months above 100°F.
This has been the coolest summer with the most rain EVER.

Alabama and Texas flip-flopped this year. It was 103 in Birmingham yesterday and it's been dry as a bone for months!

[bobsatwork]

Congratulations, thanks, and KEEP DIGGING. Some of us noticed in 2001 that NASA tweaked the ENTIRE US temperature database (see: http://www.john-daly.com/press/press-01c.htm#past-usa). Dozens of small changes were made and EACH and EVERY ONE OF THEM helped to reinforce the “hockey stick”. Breathtaking. Again, thanks and congratulations!

[Molly Pitcher]

Thanks for the extra background info...

It seems like enough counter info is accumulating that scientists are going to become more and more careful about jumping on the GW/climate change bandwagon. Of ocurse that will probably only encourage more hysterics from the hot and bothered side...

[lepton]

Possibly Steve McIntyre could comment on whether or when he thinks the Y2K error would have been discovered if these photos had not been taken.

He has said he likely would not have. For that matter, he also credits Rabbets defense of Hansens adjustments as well.

Watts picture-taking project began in May when he took the St. Marys firehouse pictures, and he's been getting people together to perform systematic surveys of the 1200 USHCN sites. He and volunteers have managed to get about 260 surveys so far.

Part of how this discovery came about was with the open release of data under the critical view of adverserial argument...which is what the Climate Science field is very often lacking. Rabbet made some silly arguments in defense of Hansen, but he and his allies also pointed out that the biggest rise in temperature did not coincide with the air-conditioner move...and, this acknowledged, McIntyre dug about and discovered what did - a programming shift to a different dataset.

[lepton]

1) Hansen has long been a true believer...even in the abscence of warming.

2) his chosen gas driving the warming is not CO2, it’s methane.

[lepton]

1) Hansen has long been a true believer...even in the abscence of warming.

2) his chosen gas driving the warming is not CO2, it’s methane.

3) Note that he considered AGW “settled science” in the 80s.

[P-40]

Note that he considered AGW “settled science” in the 80s.

I'm trying to remember when I first heard the term “settled science” used. In my opinion, that is a political term...and not a scientific one. Whenever I have asked a scientist a question about something in their field, the answer always starts out with something like 'based on our current understanding....' or something to that effect.

Scientists seem to have open minds; politicians seem to have closed minds. To say that something is “settled science” seems very closed-minded.

[Ragnar54]

As part of NASA, isn’t GISS subject to the FOIA? It seems that Hansen can be compelled to reveal his secret sauce.

[lepton]

Though it can reasonably be taken that way, I didn’t mean to suggest that that was a quote from him. More appropriately, I should have noted that back in the 80s he was making statements as to the certainty of AGW that correspond with the current usage of “settled science”.

[P-40]

A friend of mine has access to Lexus/Nexus so next time I talk to him I am going to see if he can find just when the term “settled science” came into the popular lexicon. That term may be the one thing we can say with 100% certainty was caused by global warming. :)

[Badeye]

Explains Algore refusing to debate these days, doesn’t it?

[cogitator]

So NOAA has the same problem with algorithms and data as Hansen? And the CRU at East Anglia?

Global temperature record

Wake me up when the story actually changes. NASA didn't fire Dr. Roy Spencer when it turned out that he couldn't distinguish a + from a - (which had substantially influenced the tale told by the MLS lower tropospheric data set, a data set widely touted by skeptics until it suddenly reversed course and showed significant warming, just like it was supposed to), so a slight and necessary revision to the warmth in the 1930s compared to now is supposed to be a major deal?

But thanks for the note, anyway.

[mimaw]

So President Bush has reduced Global Warming.

[SuziQ]

Folks messing with Statistics. Who’da thunk it?

[SuziQ]

From the Discover Magazine story: "... But there are no oil companies funding my work, not at all. It sounds funny, but the Danish Carlsberg Foundation—you know, the one who makes beer—they have been of real support to me. They have a big foundation; in Denmark it’s one of the biggest resources for science. It’s because the founder of Carlsberg wanted to use scientific methods to make the best beer. It’s probably the best beer in the world, because of science."

*snort* Can't you just see the headline in the Old Grey Lady. "Climate skeptics' research fueled by alchoholic beverages!"

[cogitator]

A little perspective on the U.S. and global temperature records

[SunkenCiv]

Since a bag of coal is involved, he’s just smarting over the bags of coal he’s accumulated one lump at a time from Santa. ;’)

[SunkenCiv]

Popular Science changed editors and it appeared to be a change for the better -- then the last issue was cover-to-cover global warming demagoguery. I think that may be one subscription I can do without.

[brytlea]

LOL
susie