RELIGION IN POLITICS?
OBAMA'S SUMMIT ON VIOLENT EXTREMISM IS JUST ANOTHER JOKE PLAYED ON AMERICA AND THE WORLD

DANA ROHRABACHER IS WILLING TO LOOK AT CLIMATE DATA MANIPULATION

There is little doubt in my mind that the global climate activists have steadily degraded the raw weather data used to feed the models that appear to predict apocalyptic global climate change.

As we can see from this example, there is an unnatural bias introduced into data when it has been homogenized by scientists.

THE GREATEST DANGER FACING MANKIND IS NOT GLOBAL WARMING, BUT POLITICAL CORRUPTION

Much of the terrestrial temperature record has been corrupted to the point where the original raw data cannot be accessed, and only the statistically-manipulated data of unknown provenance and that has been “homogenized” is available. Therefore, it is possible that the warming trend has been “baked-in” to the cake before it even is processed by the models. Here is an example of the time-of-day correction bias (TOBS) for one data sample courtesy of Steve Goddard.

ushcn26

We need to bring sunlight into both politics and science. We need to avoid using science like a drunken individual using a light pole: for support rather than illumination.

<Source:One Citizen Speaking>     

GLOBAL WARMING IS MAN-MADE: BUT DOES NOT INVOLVE CARBON DIOXIDE

There are other datasets that do not show substantial global warming and yet these datasets are often omitted from studies conducted by global warming activists who mostly rely on the GHCN (Global Historical Climate Network) and their homogenized data.

The two datasets that are often ignored are those from Remote Sensing Systems (RSS - satellite data) and the state-of-the-art US Climate Reference Network (USCRN) which has none of the problems like those experienced by the GHCN. Both of which contradict the severity of the terrestrial datasets produced from the Global Historical Climate Network. <Source: One Citizen Speaking>

A honest man emerges from the legislative slime …

Enter Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) who appears willing to stand up and look at the data underlying billions of dollars of taxpayer money and the promulgation of restrictive rules and regulations that enlarge the size and scope of government, raise taxes, raise prices, and reduce our personal freedoms and liberty.

dr

And, there are those climate activists who consider Rohrabacher’s tweet to be a threat …

GOP Rep Rohrabacher Threatens Climate-Scientists in a Tweet

I've been trying to engage Dana Rohrabacher on twitter in an attempt to convince him that NASA and NOAA haven't been manipulating temperature data.

I even tweeted him links to results I got when I ran raw (i.e. non-adjusted) temperature data through a simple gridding/averaging routine I coded up some time ago.  I tried to show him that the global-warming trend seen in the data really is robust, and that no adjustments are needed to confirm the NASA/NOAA results.

I tried to convince Rohrabacher (by showing him my own global-temperature results) that the temperature adjustments largely cancel each other out for global-scale averages, and that the majority of the difference between raw and adjusted data results is the result of corrections for station moves. (The raw data contains no station-move corrections, while the adjusted data does contain those corrections).

My intention isn't so much to teach him (I may as tell teach my cat to perform long-division), but to leave juicy "electronic breadcrumbs" that future opposition-researchers can data-mine and hopefully use against Rohrabacher and the GOP in future elections. <Source>

Like anyone can posit a scientific explanation of a complex issue in a series of 140-character tweets.

Perhaps one should look at a definitive source …

Here is the warning contained in the “README” file at NOAA  <Source link to government database redacted> …

ghc-hdr

But when tracking data changes that should be well documented, you are on your own … 

GHCNM, V3, status file

(users can use this file to determine overall current status, including
information related to previous changes and errata).

DISCLAIMER: The status file does not record every possible change that may
have occurred from one version to another.  This would be impractical for a
variety of reasons. Therefore if a user is interested in discovering every
possible difference between two different file versions, they will need to
construct their own program to determine all possible changes between the file
versions.
<Source link to government database redacted>

And, if you don’t read the fine print, you might use the wrong data at the wrong time …

noaa header

NCDC uses two correction processes to remove inhomogeneities associated with factors unrelated to climate such as changes in observer practices, instrumentation, and changes in station location and environment that have occurred through time.

The first correction for time of observation changes in the United States was inadvertently disabled during late 2012. That algorithm provides for a physically based correction for observing time changes based on station history information.

NCDC also routinely runs a pairwise correction. algorithm that addresses such issues, but in an indirect manner. It successfully corrected for many of the time of observation issues, which minimized the effect of this processing omission.

The version 3.2.1 release also includes the use of updated data to improve quality control and correction processes of other U.S. stations and neighboring stations in Canada and Mexico.

Compared to analyses released in January 2013, the trend for certain calendar months has changed more than others. This effect is related to the seasonal nature of the reintroduced time-of-observation correction. Trends in U.S. winter temperature are higher while trends in summer temperatures are lower. For the globe, ranks of individual years changed in some instances by a few positions, but global temperature trends changed no more than 0.01°C/century for any month since 1880. <Source link to government database redacted>

Bottom line …

We need representatives who advocate for their constituents and, more broadly, “We the People” to counter lobbyists and other special interests who would be willing to use science to promote onerous and dangerous self-serving public policies.

And, as noted by the climate activist’s own words … it is not always about science, but about political power.

By their own admission, the data has been manipulated, sometimes to the point where critical datasets no longer contain original data, but statistically white-washed data that is better suited for the purpose of modeling global climate change as determined by a relatively few climate activists with their hands on the data cache.

-- steve 


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Comments