Posted on 03/11/2010 7:42:55 AM PST by jpl
Email messages obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute via a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that the climate dataset of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was considered — by the top climate scientists within NASA itself — to be inferior to the data maintained by the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU).
The NASA scientists also felt that NASA GISS data was inferior to the National Climate Data Center Global Historical Climate Network (NCDC GHCN) database.
These emails, obtained by Christopher Horner, also show that the NASA GISS dataset was not independent of CRU data.
Further, all of this information regarding the accuracy and independence of NASA GISS data was directly communicated to a reporter from USA Today in August 2007.
The reporter never published it.
—————————————
There are only four climate datasets available. All global warming study, such as the reports from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), must be based on these four.
They are: the NASA GISS dataset, the NCDC GHCN dataset, the CRU dataset, and the Japan Meteorological Agency dataset.
Following Climategate, when it became known that raw temperature data for CRU’s “HADCRU3″ climate dataset had been destroyed, Phil Jones, CRU’s former director, said the data loss was not important — because there were other independent climate datasets available.
But the emails reveal that at least three of the four datasets were not independent, that NASA GISS was not considered to be accurate, and that these quality issues were known to both top climate scientists and to the mainstream press.
In a response to reporter Doyle Rice of USA Today, Dr. Reto Ruedy — a senior scientist at NASA — recommended the following:
Continue using NCDC’s data for the U.S. means and Phil Jones’ [HADCRU3] data for the global means. …
We are basically a modeling group and were forced into rudimentary analysis of global observed data in the 70s and early 80s. …
Now we happily combine NCDC’s and Hadley Center data to … evaluate our model results.
This response was extended later the same day by Dr. James Hansen — the head of NASA GISS:
[For] example, we extrapolate station measurements as much as 1200 km. This allows us to include results for the full Arctic. In 2005 this turned out to be important, as the Arctic had a large positive temperature anomaly. We thus found 2005 to be the warmest year in the record, while the British did not and initially NOAA also did not. …
It should be noted that the different groups have cooperated in a very friendly way to try to understand different conclusions when they arise.
Two implications of these emails: The data to which Phil Jones referred to as “independent” was not — it was being “corrected” and reused among various climate science groups, and the independence of the results was no longer assured; and the NASA GISS data was of lower quality than Jones’ embattled CRU data.
The NCDC GHCN dataset mentioned in the Ruedy email has also been called into question by Joe D’Aleo and Anthony Watts. D’Aleo and Watts showed in a January 2010 report that changes in available measurement sites and the selection criteria involved in “homogenizing” the GHCN climate data raised serious questions about the usefulness of that dataset as well.
These three datasets — from NASA GISS, NCDC GHCN, and CRU — are the basis of essentially all climate study supporting anthropogenic global warming.
NASA sickens me. They have disgraced the names of brave astronauts like Gus Grissom. Shut NASA down.
The nature of deception and fraud are such that it continues, and escalates, until it’s exposed. When they were able to fudge on a couple temperature readings and nothing happened then the practice spread. And it continued to spread from area to area until the whole was contaminated.
NASA hasn’t done ANYTHING worthwhile since Apollo. The Space “Shuttle” has locked this country into Low Earth orbit for the better part of 20 years. The ISS is NOTHING but a boondoogle!
Maybe someone should ask Barbara Boxer about her reliance on NASA data when she was confronted about the East Anglia snafu?
“Shut NASA down.”
No. Just move NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies weather division over to NOAA. Let NASA focus on space related projects.
NASA hasn’t had a “vision” for many decades, and they were smart enough to see the writing on the wall a few years ago regarding budget constraints related to space travel.
I am sure there was a concerted effort by the bureaucrats at NASA to seize upon global warming research as their next cash cow.
bump
“For] example, we extrapolate station measurements as much as 1200 km.”
1200 km is over 700 miles. That’s like assuming the weather conditions in NY are the same as in Tennessee.
ISS has been a scam to employ lots of Russians and Teamsters. I was shocked at how many Teamsters were in NASA. My guess is Von Braun never allowed that union scum to work on space craft.
I was reading the transcripts of the Apollo 11 landing yesterday. Armstrong and Aldrin were so damn smart. Aldrin was off the charts and Neil was smart plus a great pilot. America’s best and brightest. Neil’s incredible cool under pressure landing the LEM. Just amazing.
Don’t condemn all of NASA because of one nutcase (albeit one with powerful friends in high places).
I would bet that Hansen now has absolutely nothing to do with what we, the public, think of NASA, i.e. “Space Exploration”, although his early work was computer modeling of the atmosphere of Venus.
From Wikipedia:
“The NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), at Columbia University in New York City, is a component laboratory of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center Earth-Sun Exploration Division and a unit of The Earth Institute at Columbia University. Current research at GISS emphasizes a broad study of global climate change.”
“A key objective of GISS research is prediction of atmospheric and climate changes in the 21st century. “
Hansen is just another one of those far left, radical kooks from Columbia University... ;-)
Ditto. Shut NASA down.
This whole Country has gone to hell. Every legislation that gets passed is hurting this once great nation. They are destroying everything that people work for and make it impossible for anyone to get ahead. Why?
Plans to take over all water ways.
Make sports fishing illegal.
Banning all off shore drilling.
Making people get National ID cards.
Micro managing our health care.
Making it illegal to farm and sell your produce without Gov. consent.
Making it possible to be held against your will without being able to contact a lawyer.
The list goes on...
It feels like they are getting their ducks in a row to bring the citizens of this once fine nation to there knees.
Why?
End of rant.
which if you extrapolate means that the Bush Administration was fully aware of this and chose to do nothing
Yep, NASA has become nothing more than a political arm of the Democrat party and the global socialist movement. The first thing the GOP needs to dois rename it and place it under full control of the military. Make it a black budget item for all I care. Thanks to cretins like Hansen, the NASA we grew up with is dead.
And now we understand why Odumboi needs a ‘new and improved’ climate ‘truth’ center. The old ones are polluted with lies.
You think the Supreme Court wants a do over?
I'm beginning to think that most long-term programs and organizations, government or not, wind up like this. Those who are most politically motivated and often least creative or knowledgeable wind up climbing up into the leadership, and the whole enterprise then is diminished over time. It's kind of like physics and entropy. Maybe the only way to avoid this is by mandating an organizational restructuring, with brand new people in leadership roles, every 15-20 years. I've felt for a long time that it isn't always the cream that rise to the top, but feces floats.
I become more convinced with each passing day that some highly-placed person within the climate research community had a conscience, just couldn't live with the fraud and deception any longer, and secretly compiled and released the whole set of e-mails so that the people would finally come to learn about the whole sordid mess.
Ding! Ding! Ding Ding! We have a Winner! Always follow the Benjamins.
Neat. What a great memory.
Neil also held records for the X-15. The X-15 set the world’s unoffical speed and altitude records of 4,520 mph and 354,200 feet. Most people do not remember that Neil was a Navy pilot with 78 combat missions in Korea.
Or better yet, “I have to how many millions and spend how many lifetimes in jail for stupidity? I did not even know being stupid was illegal! Would it help if I apologized to the millions of small children who have had nightmares and chronic emotional stress because of my stupidity?”
Yup. NASA at funding time would always say - there is water on the moon or Mars.
.
More media malpractice?
Robert Goddard’s grave is awfully windy lately...
My Mom’s uncle used to work on Goddard’s farm, tending his horses in the 20’s and 30’s and 40’s, back that era. Our family on that side was friends with the Goddards, it got my granddfather into his rest home free in Worcestor. Great Philanthropist.
“These emails, obtained by Christopher Horner, also show that the NASA GISS dataset was not independent of CRU data. “
Ping of definite interest. So yes, there has been collusion on temperature data supposedly “separately maintained.”
These two repositories were HEAVILY relied upon among global warming scientists and both are not grossly suspect.
More like aiding and abetting.
"Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity."
- Eisenhower 1961
Actually, these guys have even disgraced the name of Werner von Braun. Von Braun may have been a Nazi, but I'm not aware that he ever faked his data.
PING!!
Eisenhower was wrong. The solitary inventor is still the engine for innovation. Corporate R&D spends a lot of money to bring the innovations of those inventors to final fruition, but small business is still the spark plug.
RICO....
If the stories are true, he did fake data. He played the Nazis off of the Abwehr, Hitler off of Himmler, the wehrmacht off the SS and anyone else he could to get funding.
There are also stories of him making things not work quite right hoping the war would end before they perfected the rocket.
Are these true? I don’t know, but, he did seem to not care too much for the Hitlerites.
He is, as far as I know, the only Nazi to have a Arena named after him. Huntsville Al. has one.
You are missing the point. Look at how much money is being wasted, and what a corrupting influence it is on so-called “climate science.”
More settled science.
/sarc
ping
Rush covered in his 2nd hour. Said if the Chicoms need to have their journalists educated, send them over here. We are specializing, especially at the Columbia School of Journalism.
“AlGore HAS to know all of this was fraudulent”
~~~~~~~~
Also:
Junk Science Bombshell: NASA & Media Knew About Bogus Climate Data 3 Years Ago
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present -- and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
Just imagine how much other stuff there probably is out there that the media knows about, but won’t tell us. It would likely boggle the mind.
RICO!!!
for sure....traitors and co-conspirators in the subversion of our constitutional republic.
When will any remaining journalists of integrity become so alarmed at the degeneration of the profession that they devote themselves to regularly exposing their government propaganda stenographers by name?
Yep! bttt
"......Today, plowing through 1,500 pages of e-mails just dumped on me by NASA to, I get the feeling, forestall the inevitable litigation they knew became ripe this week I see the following e-mail from the good doctor to James Hansen. The footer jumped out at me. ..."
Continue reading here:
Planet Gore 03/09/2010
Chris Horner
Just saw that Ernest_at_the_Beach has a thread on it:
Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop ( global warming is exaggerated )
BTW: Do you remember the reporter named by Rush who wouldn't publish the information?
Some enterprising investigative reporter needs to create a timeline on this global conspiracy: What did they know, and when did they know it. Conspirators need to be imprisioned.
“..BTW: Do you remember the reporter named by Rush who wouldn’t publish the information?” ~ thouworm
Reporter Doyle Rice of USA Today (See below)
Climategate Stunner: NASA Heads Knew NASA Data Was Poor, Then Used Data from CRU
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-stunner-nasa-heads-knew-nasa-data-was-poor-then-used-data-from-cru/?singlepage=true
New emails from James Hansen and Reto Ruedy (download PDF here) show that NASA’s temperature data was doubted within NASA itself, and was not independent of CRU’s embattled data, as has been claimed.
March 10, 2010 - by Charlie Martin
Email messages http://pajamasmedia.com/files/2010/03/GISS-says-CRU-Better0001.pdf obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute via a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that the climate dataset of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was considered by the top climate scientists within NASA itself to be inferior to the data maintained by the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU).
The NASA scientists also felt that NASA GISS data was inferior to the National Climate Data Center Global Historical Climate Network (NCDC GHCN) database.
These emails, obtained by Christopher Horner, also show that the NASA GISS dataset was not independent of CRU data.
Further, all of this information regarding the accuracy and independence of NASA GISS data was directly communicated to a reporter from USA Today in August 2007.
The reporter never published it.
There are only four climate datasets available. All global warming study, such as the reports from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), must be based on these four.
They are: the NASA GISS dataset, the NCDC GHCN dataset, the CRU dataset, and the Japan Meteorological Agency dataset.
Following Climategate, when it became known that raw temperature data for CRU’s “HADCRU3 climate dataset had been destroyed, Phil Jones, CRU’s former director, said the data loss was not important because there were other independent climate datasets available.
But the emails reveal that at least three of the four datasets were not independent, that NASA GISS was not considered to be accurate, and that these quality issues were known to both top climate scientists and to the mainstream press.
In a response to reporter Doyle Rice of USA Today, Dr. Reto Ruedy a senior scientist at NASA recommended the following:
Continue using NCDC’s data for the U.S. means and Phil Jones’ [HADCRU3] data for the global means. …
We are basically a modeling group and were forced into rudimentary analysis of global observed data in the 70s and early 80s. …
Now we happily combine NCDC’s and Hadley Center data to … evaluate our model results.
This response was extended later the same day by Dr. James Hansen the head of NASA GISS:
[For] example, we extrapolate station measurements as much as 1200 km. This allows us to include results for the full Arctic. In 2005 this turned out to be important, as the Arctic had a large positive temperature anomaly. We thus found 2005 to be the warmest year in the record, while the British did not and initially NOAA also did not. …
It should be noted that the different groups have cooperated in a very friendly way to try to understand different conclusions when they arise.
Two implications of these emails: The data to which Phil Jones referred to as “independent” was not it was being “corrected” and reused among various climate science groups, and the independence of the results was no longer assured; and the NASA GISS data was of lower quality than Jones’ embattled CRU data.
The NCDC GHCN dataset mentioned in the Ruedy email has also been called into question by Joe D’Aleo and Anthony Watts. D’Aleo and Watts showed in a January 2010 report that changes in available measurement sites and the selection criteria involved in “homogenizing” the GHCN climate data raised serious questions about the usefulness of that dataset as well.
These three datasets from NASA GISS, NCDC GHCN, and CRU are the basis of essentially all climate study supporting anthropogenic global warming.
Charlie Martin is a Colorado computer scientist and freelance writer. He holds an MS in Computer Science from Duke University, where he spent six years with the National Biomedical Simulation Resource, Duke University Medical Center. Find him at http://chasrmartin.com, and on his blog at http://explorations.chasrmartin.com.
<>
More:
“......Today, plowing through 1,500 pages of e-mails just dumped on me by NASA to, I get the feeling, forestall the inevitable litigation they knew became ripe this week I see the following e-mail from the good doctor to James Hansen. The footer jumped out at me. ...”
Continue reading here:
Planet Gore 03/09/2010
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/
No, I'm not missing any point at all. I'm pointing out that despite the fact that all that money has been thrown against the wall, it is STILL the solitary brain or small group that comes up with game-changing new ideas.
a big “duh” on my part.... For some reason (brain fog), it was not clear to me that it was the same reporter.
Thanks again
For the most part, I agree, although scientists can sometimes achieve results on big projects that would be virtually impossible for a single scientist, like the A-bomb or manned space flight.
However, you still missed the point, in that you said Eisenhower was wrong, but he was not. If you read carefully, you will see that you agree with him. Eisenhower's point was to warn about unfortunate effects of government money on scientists. He said that the solitary inventor has been overshadowed by task forces with huge budgets, but for them "a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity." Which is why "climate scientists" produce poor results, while individual inventors do produce game-changing ideas.
I have a few inventions of my own, but I never received a dime from the government to help me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
