E-Mail 'NASA corrects climate figures: Warmest year on record is 1934' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'NASA corrects climate figures: Warmest year on record is 1934' to a friend

Loading ...

16 Responses to "NASA corrects climate figures: Warmest year on record is 1934"

Great White Rat says:

August 10, 2007 at 1:40 am

The Goracle couldn’t be reached for comment.

Of course not. That would mean addressing the actual science involved, and the D student is way out of his depth there. It’s the same reason he won’t accept any of the debate challenges from real scientists, most recently by Dennis Avery.

Anytime the AGW discussions turn to actual science, climate alarmists tend to lose out to climate realists (a better term than “deniers”, don’t ya think?)
Big Bang Hunter says:

August 10, 2007 at 2:06 am

– Hey….common you guys….whats a 64 year error in terms of geological time….ffftttt

– Besides, it doesn’t matter if the data was cooked. If you live in the east you can “feel” the accuracy of the GW situation, and isn’t that what the true believers go by. Feel.

– Looks like the worst case of “warming” around here is on ole Al “Weather Machine” Gores face.

– Big Bang –
camojack says:

August 10, 2007 at 4:02 am

Cool. Pun definitely intended…
Terrye says:

August 10, 2007 at 6:05 am

Ever hear of the dirty 30’s? The Dust Bowl? The Okies?

My grandparents lost a farm in Oklahoma and went to California to work the camps back then. My mother was just a little girl but never forgot it.
Baklava says:

August 10, 2007 at 10:42 am

Leftists will continue with CO2 being a problem.

If you couple this NASA correction story with this Yahoo story we can see two things. CO2 is highly irrelevant and the warming that was thought isn’t taking place.

When CO2 is .3% of the atmosphere and water vapor which is more prevalent than CO2 has a measurably higher effect as a greenhouse gas (let’s ban water vapor) you can start to see where Bjorn Lomborg’s point that spending our resources on global warming would HARM more people than it would help if we used those resources for other means like disease, health, food.

ST, another note: This president has spent MORE on climate change than ANY other nation on earth yet leftists make IRRESPONSIBLE accusations without doing due diligence. See this excerpt from the link above:

The President Has Devoted $37 Billion To Climate Change-Related Activities Since 2001. The President has requested an additional $7.4 billion for FY 2008 â€“ $205 million more than this year. This amount would support a wide range of climate change-related research, development, and deployment programs, voluntary partnerships, and international aid efforts.
Severian says:

August 10, 2007 at 11:13 am

And it gets even worse:

Falsification of Data

How much did Jones know about Wang’s fabrications? As discussed in my Report on Wang’s claims, it appears very likely that Jones knew nothing at the time (1990). In 2001, however, Jones co-authored a study, by Yan et al., which considered two meteorological stations in China (at Beijing and at Shanghai). This study correctly describes how the stations had undergone relocations, and it concludes that those relocations substantially affected the measured temperatures—in direct contradiction to the claims of Wang. Thus, by 2001, Jones must have known that the claims of Wang were not wholly true.

On 19 June 2007, I e-mailed Jones about this, saying “this proves that you knew there were serious problems with Wang’s claims back in 2001; yet some of your work since then has continued to rely on those claims, most notably in the latest report from the IPCC”. I politely requested an explanation. I have not received a reply.

5. The fabrications of Wang were only discovered after the data for Jones et al. was made available, in April 2007. For years previously, several people, most prominently Warwick Hughes and Stephen McIntyre, had attempted to obtain this, and other, data from Jones. Jones had refused almost every request. Indeed, in response to requests for data about his work on global temperatures, Jones replied, “Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”.

Jones is a professor at a public university in the U.K. (the University of East Anglia). In early 2007, McIntyre and I separately filed formal requests for the data under the U.K. Freedom of Information Act. The university initially refused to release the data. I then drafted a letter to the U.K. Information Commissioner’s Office, alleging that the university was in violation of statute, and sent the draft to the university, asking them to let me know if they believed the letter to be inaccurate. Only then was the data was released.

It is worth noting that obtaining the data was only possible because Jones is in the U.K. In the U.S.A., where Wang is resident, data for publically-funded research does not have to be disclosed.

6. Although the claims of Wang were fabricated, this does not necessarily mean that the conclusion reached by Jones et al. for China is incorrect. It might be that the conclusion is correct, and there is other, valid, evidence to support that.

Since the publication of Jones et al. (1990), there have been several studies on the effects of urbanization on temperature measurements in China. The most recent study, in 2007, is by GuoYu Ren and colleagues at the Laboratory for Climate Studies in China. This study concludes that a large part of the warming that has been measured in China is due to the effects of urbanization on measurement. (The study is also supported by the analysis of He et al. (2007) for the years 1991â€“2000.)

Hence the conclusion of Jones et al. does seem to be incorrect. Even if the new study had concluded the same as Jones et al., though, the central issue here—lack of research integrity—would remain valid.
Tom TB says:

August 10, 2007 at 11:21 am

I just get the wisdom of the ages, in this case from my 87 year old mother. She has never lived in a house with air conditioning, has been in the same place for 52 years, and says the seasons cycle, and Algore Inc.’s theories are bunk.
Severian says:

August 10, 2007 at 11:24 am

I bet the AGW proponents can hardly wait until all the old folks die off so they aren’t around to point out the facts about the past, obtained thru direct observation. Erasing history, as the AGW proponents wanted to do with the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age, is apparently all the rage these days.
Yax K'uk Mo' says:

August 10, 2007 at 11:36 am

::snort:: I guess this means Global Warming IS man-made…

…made by fudging the numbers.
Wizbang says:

August 10, 2007 at 1:00 pm

Al Gore’s Global Warming Hysteria the Result of a NASA Programming Error

This is big, big news. Al Gore’s global warming cause is based upon NASA graphs that say 1998 was the hottest year of the millennium. It turns out that is…
Great White Rat says:

August 11, 2007 at 9:21 am

This tells you in one sentence why AGW has no scientific basis:

Hansen refused to provide McKintyre with the algorithm used to generate graph data, so McKintyre reverse-engineered it.

True scientists are only concerned with the accuracy of their data and conclusions. They don’t mind other scientists repeating the work or examining the data and verifying those conclusions. Instead, the AGW crowd guards their “data” rabidly, and demands that everyone take their conclusions on faith. That makes them cultists.

I’m thinking we’ll have the First Church of Global Warming and Discount Carbon Credits Outlet belching out this kind of nonsense right up until the time a glacier comes down from the polar regions and crunches the Goracle’s mansion into splinters.
sunsettommy says:

August 11, 2007 at 9:43 am

Baklava:

If you couple this NASA correction story with this Yahoo story we can see two things. CO2 is highly irrelevant and the warming that was thought isn’t taking place.

When CO2 is .3% of the atmosphere and water vapor which is more prevalent than CO2 has a measurably higher effect as a greenhouse gas (let’s ban water vapor) you can start to see where Bjorn Lomborg’s point that spending our resources on global warming would HARM more people than it would help if we used those resources for other means like disease, health, food.

It gets even worse when you look at the spectral window.There it shows that CO2 AND Water Vapor overlap a lot.Meaning that CO2 does not do all the warm forcing in such bands.Water vapor by its Volume is the dominant force there.

Plus CO2 has little warm forcing power in the tropical regions due to the high humidity levels there.Water Vapor is dominant there.

CO2 warm forcing power is at its greatest in the POLAR regions because there is so little Water Vapor there.But we see only regional melting in the artic and almost all of Antarctica is either stable or COOLING.

Warming in the Artcic is because of TRANSPORTED warm air masses.Now that the PDO has recently shifted over to a COOLING phase.There should be less warming effect in the Artic in the future.

Already Alaska had eperienced the coldest winter in many years last winter.Will it continue to show a cooler trend this coming winter?
Baklava says:

August 11, 2007 at 10:15 am

sunsettommy,

I emailed about 20 people the good news (NASA corrections). Some of them were lefties.

ALL of the lefties replied saying things such as “5 of the 7 last years were the warmest….”

um….
no….
That was the point of the story. The figures have been changed now.

I don’t know if they simply did not read the story, did not believe the story, or didn’t understand the story because I didn’t reply and didn’t ask.

I wonder what goes on in a lefty brain that complete turns off this good news???
Severian says:

August 11, 2007 at 11:15 am

Not only the recent GISS “mistake” but there are other signs the amount of warming is overstated. The GISS data only covers the US, but recently serious and credible allegations of data falsification have been leveled at some of the main papers, and two of the main authors of the IPCC report, of data falsification regarding temperature station locations and temperatures in China. I commented and provided links to this above.

So, the data for the US was wrong, due to an error. This error was hard to find because people like Hansen didn’t want to make their methods available, which makes you wonder if they knew the error existed but didn’t want it found as it was in a direction that helped “prove” their case. And you have two authors of the glorified, never wrong, it’s the consensus so it has to be right IPCC falsifying data to create a larger temperature rise than actually exists. Then you have an ongoing survey of temp measurement stations that indicates that it’s highly possible, even likely, that the US temp measurements are contaminated by urban heat island effects and poor placement, which means that the actual temps are even lower. Great, an entire field of science based on lies and distortions and errors.

And now you have some “experts” saying that global warming has been stable due to “natural” effects (WTH?) and that it’ll really take off after 2009. So, it hasn’t happened in the past, it’s not happening NOW, but TRUST US, it’s going to happen real soon!

You just can’t make this stuff up.
sunsettommy says:

August 11, 2007 at 7:45 pm

sunsettommy,

I emailed about 20 people the good news (NASA corrections). Some of them were lefties.

ALL of the lefties replied saying things such as “5 of the 7 last years were the warmestâ€¦.”

umâ€¦.
noâ€¦.
That was the point of the story. The figures have been changed now.

I don’t know if they simply did not read the story, did not believe the story, or didn’t understand the story because I didn’t reply and didn’t ask.

I wonder what goes on in a lefty brain that complete turns off this good news???

Comment by Baklava @ 8/11/2007 – 10:15 am

Right now in a different forum I am dealing with a dingbat who after being shown the new GISS data by several members comes back with smears against Anthony Watts and Steve McKitrick.

I just very recently posted showing this:

== Re: Comment #2 by Sir OB ==
=”How did Anthony Watts contribute? I thought this was a climate audit thing.”=

Here’s how I understand it Sir OB though I am sure there is more to the story.

The whole issue came up because of some photos Anthony Watts volunteers took of the Detroit Lakes, MN USHCN site in July.

LINK 1

Climate Audit first commented on the Detroit Lakes site on July 26th.

LINK 2

The debate/discussion continued with a post at
LINK 3 on August 1st.

With a further look at the data, Steve McIntyre discovered the Y2K error and announced it on August 3rd.

LINK 4

And NASA corrected it’s GISTEMP data on August 7th. I believe.

LINK 5

All happened very fast.

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.

And while it appears Anthony Watts intentions were only to document this site, its unintended consequences have resulted in a significant correction to NASA’s GISTEMP records for all of the US. (And within 20 days of the photos being taken!)

Very interesting (and valuable) work.

Comment by Paul G. — August 9, 2007 @ 2:am

LINK 6

It will be interesting if the dweeb finally get it.

The old worn out Exxon smear too.He has been shown that the smear is stupid.He still clings to it.

I think he is mentally deficient because he has been shown solid data and links to them and the NASA’s own link showing the corrections.He still fights it anyway with his feeble distortions a 10 year old would spot.

The man aptly named Al is a proven product of the school of stupid.
Severian says:

August 11, 2007 at 8:02 pm

The man aptly named Al is a proven product of the school of stupid.

No kidding, he is as dense and obtuse as they come. He’ll never read and understand what you and I and Crabby have been showing him. For one I think he is actually too stupid, judging by some of the “facts” he’s quoted to refute us, which actually support it or aren’t even related. He, like too many, is also ideologically blinded, he refuses to even read and absorb anything that undercuts his beliefs, which is a pretty sad thing if you stop and think about it.

Don’t know if you saw it, he complained to the moderators about me. ROFL, if you’re whining to Mommy that someone called you an idiot, it’s best not to do it by saying “This idiot called me an idiot.”

But that’s to be expected, when you can’t argue with facts, do what the Global Warmers do best, attempt to shut down the argument.

I predict he’ll disappear now. The really frustrating and sad thing is how many there are like him, we’ve seen them here on our beloved ST’s site, no matter what you say, what links you show them, they refuse to read it, all they do is google for a site to tell them that it’s ok not to think, and tell them what to cut and paste in reply. When did so damned many people opt out of being thinking, rational human beings?

Comments are closed.