Update: ‘Conning the Public’: Scientists Accuse NASA/NOAA of ‘Misleading’, ‘Deception’ & ‘Lying’ About ‘Hottest Year’ Claim – Concede 2014 probably not ‘hottest year’


By: - Climate DepotJanuary 18, 2015 5:57 PM with 35 comments

Climate Depot Special Report

Statement by Marc Morano, publisher of Climate Depot & Former Staff of U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee.: “The Feds are conning the public on 2014 being the “hottest year”. We now know that both NASA and NOAA (National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration) knew their ‘hottest year’ claims would not hold up to scientific scrutiny. But both agencies chose instead to loudly push the global warming narrative to a willing and compliant news media.

“The ‘hottest year’ claims had already been exposed as statistically meaningless and a confirmation of the 18 year plus temperature ‘pause’. See: Scientists balk at ‘hottest year’ claims: Ignores Satellites showing 18 Year ‘Pause’ – ‘We are arguing over the significance of hundredths of a degree’ – The ‘Pause’ continues

“The shameless activism shown by our federal scientists — particularly NASA GISS head Gavin Schmidt — may warrant further inspection by the new GOP Congress.” (End Morano statement. – Morano is producer and host of the upcoming climate documentary Climate Hustle. www.ClimateHustle.com)

#

UK Daily Mail: NASA climate scientists: We said 2014 was the warmest year on record… but we’re only 38% sure we were right – ‘NASA press release failed to mention this’ – Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies claimed its analysis of world temperatures showed ‘2014 was the warmest year on record’ – But it emerged that GISS’s analysis is subject to a margin of error – Nasa admits this means it is far from certain that 2014 set a record at all – The Nasa climate scientists who claimed 2014 set a new record for global warmth last night admitted they were only 38 per cent sure this was true. Yet the Nasa press release failed to mention this, as well as the fact that the alleged ‘record’ amounted to an increase over 2010, the previous ‘warmest year’, of just two-hundredths of a degree – or 0.02C. The margin of error is said by scientists to be approximately 0.1C – several times as much. As a result, GISS’s director Gavin Schmidt has now admitted Nasa thinks the likelihood that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880 is just 38 per cent. However, when asked by this newspaper whether he regretted that the news release did not mention this, he did not respond.

(Background on NASA’s Gavin Schmidt here. – Meet NASA’s New ‘James Hansen’ – Gavin Schmidt – the man who hates debate & loses when he does debate – He has been criticized by prominent scientists for ‘erroneously communicating the reality of the how climate system is actually behaving’)

Email: [email protected]

NASA’s Gavin Schmidt

#

NOAA, NASA quietly conceded: 2014 was probably not the warmest year on record – Former Harvard Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl: ‘According to NOAA, the probability that a different year than 2014 was the warmest one was 52%. – According to NASA, the probability that a different year than 2014 was the warmest one was 62%.’ It is more likely than not that the warmest year was a different one than 2014. – ‘As the tweet unambiguously proves, NASA’s Gavin Schmidt knew about this fact. That didn’t prevent them from pushing virtually all mainstream media to publish the lie – in the very title – that: NASA: 2014 was the warmest year’

Physicist Dr. Richard Muller’s Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project: ‘It is impossible to conclude from our analysis which of 2014, 2010, or 2005 was actually the warmest year… the Earth’s average temperature for the past decade has changed very little’

Analysis: NASA’s ‘hottest year’ claim ‘ignores the fact that its error bar is 500% larger than claimed record — & ignores that satellite data’ – Nasa ‘ignores the record Antarctic sea ice, ignores the above average global sea ice, ignores the record snow cover’

Analysis: NASA ‘has massively altered (temperature data) over the past decade’

Oops. NOAA (quietly) admits 2014 was ‘more unlikely than likely’ the warmest on record – According to NOAA definitions, global surface temperatures for 2014 were “More Unlikely Than Likely” the highest on record, but they failed to note that on the main page of their State of the Climate report…NOAA has once again shown it is a political entity, not a scientific one. And that’s a damn shame. The public needs openness from NOAA about climate; we do not need to be misled by politically motivated misdirection and misinformation.

NOAA concedes ‘Hottest Year’ claim ‘is within…the uncertainty of the dataset’ – ‘The new record high by 0.04 deg C is within the +/-0.09 deg C uncertainty of the dataset.’

Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer: ‘Why You are Being Misled on Global Temperatures’ – ‘I am embarrassed by the scientific community’s behavior on the subject’ – ‘In what universe does a temperature change that is too small for anyone to feel over a 50 year period become globally significant?’ – ‘Where we don’t know if the global average temperature is 58 or 59 or 60 deg. F, but we are sure that if it increases by 1 or 2 deg. F, that would be a catastrophe?’

Warmist_Year_Evah_scr

Cartoon Via WattsUPWithThat.com

Climatologist Dr. Tim Ball accuses NASA’s Gavin Schmidt of ‘climate deception.’ –  “Schmidt knows, after all his years with participating in the creation and naming of the RealClimate.org web site, that it is all about the headline,” Ball wrote via email on January 18.- “Schmidt has achieved that, and all the pointing out of errors and deceptions will not alter the impression left with the media and the public. As it is said, the lie is twice round the world before the truth even has its boots on,” Ball wrote. “Schmidt has taken on the [retired NASA scientist) James Hansen mantle with vigor and purpose and the climate deception continues,” Ball concluded.

Physicist Dr. Richard Muller’s Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project: ‘It is impossible to conclude from our analysis which of 2014, 2010, or 2005 was actually the warmest year… the Earth’s average temperature for the past decade has changed very little’ – Another analysis, from the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project, drawn from ten times as many measuring stations as GISS, concluded that if 2014 was a record year, it was by an even tinier amount.’

WMO in 2006 Demolishes NOAA/NASA Claims Of ‘Hottest Year’ – Global average temperature in 2006 is ‘statistically indistinguishable’ – WMO Flashback 2006: ‘All temperature values have uncertainties, which arise mainly from gaps in data coverage. The size of the uncertainties is such that the global average temperature for 2006 is statistically indistinguishable from, and could be anywhere between, the first and the eighth warmest year on record.’

UK’s Lord Christopher Monckton: ‘Was 2014 the warmest year on record? No, it wasn’t’ – ‘ According to the RSS satellite data, there has been no global warming – at all – for 18 years 3 months, notwithstanding ever-more-rapid increases in atmospheric CO2 concentration.’ – ‘Those who have repeatedly tampered with the terrestrial temperature record and have relied chiefly on the tampered results for their assertion that 2014 was “the warmest year on record”.  – ‘Their strategy is now clear: Cut worldwide CO2 emissions even though this is plainly unnecessary, and then – when temperature fails to rise as predicted – assert that the absence of global warming that would not have happened in any event is attributable to emissions cuts. On this daft basis, the world’s governments make policy at taxpayers’ expense.’

Monckton jan 2014

UK Met Office Say Surface Temperatures Should Agree With Satellites — ‘Except when they’re not!!’ – ‘In 2013, the Met Office had this to say about global temperature datasets: “Changes in temperature observed in surface data records are corroborated by records of temperatures in the troposphere recorded by satellites” Well, except when they’re not!!

‘NOAA used a specific ENSO index to claim that El Niño conditions did not exist in 2014, when at least one other index says El Niño conditions existed’ – ‘NOAA used a specific ENSO index to claim that El Niño conditions did not exist in 2014, when at least one other index says El Niño conditions existed.’

‘Earth is heading into its third year of above average sea ice cover, as government scientists, politicians and the press continue to insist that the poles are melting’ – ‘Why would NASA trust their own satellites, when they have a piss poor network of surface stations which doesn’t cover much of the planet, and they insist needs to be massively adjusted?’

‘Earth is heading into its third year of above average sea ice cover, as government scientists, politicians and the press continue to insist that the poles are melting’

Analysis: NASA’s ‘hottest year’ claim ‘ignores the fact that its error bar is 500% larger than claimed record — & ignores that satellite data’ – Nasa ‘ignores the record Antarctic sea ice, ignores the above average global sea ice, ignores the record snow cover’

Analysis: NASA ‘has massively altered (temperature data) over the past decade’– ‘NASA GISS has nearly doubled reported 1880 to 2000 warming since their 2003 version. They have altered the data so much, they had to stretch the scale at both ends to fit their alterations on to the graph. This is not “reliable” data.’

Scientist calls warmist claim ‘preposterous’: Rips claim that there is only a ’1-in-27 Million Chance That Earth’s Record Hot Streak Is Natural’ – ‘It is a mark, and an important one, of how political climate “science” has become that statistics like this are quoted and accepted…So why do they quote these numbers Because they want to scare you into believing, without evidence, their alternate model, apocalyptic man-made global warming is true.’

Why Satellite Records Cannot Be Ignored – ‘Between 1979 and 2012, the satellite and surface data followed each other closely’ – ‘Until the difference between satellite and surface datasets can be fully explained, it is no more than political rhetoric to claim that 2014 was the warmest year on record.’

Flashback 2005: NASA’s James Hansen: No Agreement On What Is ‘Surface Air Temperature’ …Few Observed Data Filled In With ‘Guesses’ – Hansen: ‘To measure SAT (Surface Air Temperature) we have to agree on what it is and, as far as I know, no such standard has been suggested or generally adopted.’

Q. If Surface Air Temperatures cannot be measured, how are SAT maps created?
Hansen: ‘We may start out the model with the few observed data that are available and fill in the rest with guesses (also called extrapolations)’

#

Scientists balk at ‘hottest year’ claims: Ignores Satellites showing 18 Year ‘Pause’ – ‘We are arguing over the significance of hundredths of a degree’ – The ‘Pause’ continues

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano: ‘Claiming 2014 is the ‘hottest year’ on record based on hundredths of a degree temperature difference is a fancy way of saying the global warming ‘pause’ is continuing.’

Astrophysicist Dr. Dr David Whitehouse: ‘The NASA press release is highly misleading…talk of a record is scientifically and statistically meaningless.’

Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer: ‘Why 2014 Won’t Be the Warmest Year on Record’ (based on surface data)– ‘We are arguing over the significance of hundredths of a degree’

Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels debunks 2014 ‘hottest year’ claim: ‘Is 58.46° then distinguishable from 58.45°? In a word, ‘NO.’

No Record Temperatures According To Satellites

Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl: ‘Please laugh out loud when someone will be telling you that it was the warmest year’

Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke Sr.: ‘We have found a significant warm bias. Thus, the reported global average surface temperature anomaly is also too warm.’

Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry: ‘With 2014 essentially tied with 2005 and 2010 for hottest year, this implies that there has been essentially no trend in warming over the past decade.’

 

 


  • AlexI

    Don’t see what the fuss is about. 38% chance it’s 2014, 23% it’s 2010, 17% it’s 2005, 22% chance it’s some other year. I don’t see a problem with picking a “winner” based on highest likelihood in a problem with no deterministic (certain) solution. It’s not dissimilar to picking a winner in a boxing match that didn’t end in a knockout. If anything, the counterclaim “we’re only 38% sure about it” is more misleading because it attempts to discredit the original assertion without offering a viable alternative. Can we all be adults about it and argue about something more substantial?

    • Robert

      Thanks for the clear discussion and analysis.

    • atheistconservative

      The fuss is about making a claim of certainty when no certainty exists. End of story.

      • Robert

        Math is hard…

    • Gus

      38% chance that 2014 was the warmest year on record means 62% chance that it wasn’t.

      What needs to be explained in this context is (1) what does “on record” mean (restricted to satellite observations, since no global records exist prior to 1979?), and (2) how is the “chance” arrived at. Is it by a “show of hands,” as they do with their IPCC assessments (“high confidence” versus “low confidence”)? Or by a strict mathematical procedure. If so, which one?

      What also needs to be explained is how is the “year’s temperature” arrived at. After all, temperatures vary daily, from place to place, with altitude and with the depth in the ocean. Do they simply average the lot over the whole globe, over the whole thickness of the atmosphere, over the whole depth of the ocean, and over the whole year, or do they weigh the average? If they weigh, how and why? If they don’t? Why don’t they? What do they do with data polluted by urban heat islands?

      Global temperatures observed during the 1998 super-El-Nino have not been exceeded in 2014 or in any other year after or before 1998 in the satellite record. Do they remove this point treating it as an abnormality then? But it was not an abnormality at all. It was a natural phenomenon, therefore it should remain included in the data sets. But if this is so, then 2014 could not have been “the warmest year on record.”

      Whichever way you look at it, it’s all just propaganda sham. It’s a shame that NOAA and NASA would be reduced to this.

      • Robert

        “38% chance that 2014 was the warmest year on record means 62% chance that it wasn’t.”

        Really?

        There is a bit more to the maths than simple subtraction. …

        But don’t let that bother your talking points.

        • Gus

          No, in this case, there isn’t, and if you knew anything about elementary mathematics yourself, you’d know this too.

          • Robert

            Plenty of sources walk through the issue showing you are incorrect.

            And , almost more importantly, do so without snarkiness.

            But if that is the way you want the world to see how you argue, go for it.

          • Gus

            Plenty of sources? Really? Name one?
            A fundamental law of probability calculus is
            P(not A) = 1 – P(A)

          • Robert

            Keep showing us…

          • Gus

            See table “Summary of Probabilities” in

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability#Mathematical_treatment

            row 2, “not A.”

          • Robert

            “elementary mathematics” “Calculus” “Wikipedia”

            And no walk through. ….

          • Gus

            You really don’t know any mathematics, do you?

          • Robert

            “elementary mathematics” “Calculus” “Wikipedia”

            Then attempted insult. And obfuscation, “You really don’t know any mathematics…”

          • Gus

            “>>> You really don’t know any mathematics… <<<"

            Well, you don't, do you? You're clueless about the most fundamental facts of, e.g., probability calculus, which is a part of high school curriculum. You don't seem to know anything about statistics either.

            It's not an insult. It's a diagnosis.

            Sadly, you're not alone in your ignorance. You share it with a vast majority of the "global warming" mob. All those vociferous activists, NGOs, economists, politicians, administrators, journalists, some businessmen even, who hang around and make their foul living of it, a scourge of humanity as they are, are equally clueless, gullible and uneducated dolts.

          • Robert

            “elementary mathematics” “Calculus” “Wikipedia”

            Then attempted insult. And obfuscation, “You really don’t know any mathematics…”
            “… foul living of it, a scourge of humanity as they are, ..”

      • Robert

        ” “show of hands,” as they do with their IPCC assessments…”

        Yah, sure…

        • Gus

          Yes, this is how they do it. There is no mathematical procedure behind their statements of “confidence,” they just make it up.

          • Robert

            “Yes, this is how they do it. ”

            Quote and cite.

          • Gus

            See

            http://judithcurry.com/2014/08/24/the-50-50-argument/

            and quotes from IPCC AR4. There is no well defined mathematical procedure behind IPCC assessments of confidence levels. It is all based on “expert judgement.” In other words, it is simply “made up.”
            There are strict mathematical procedures for calculating confidence levels, but IPCC does not follow them.

          • Robert

            “…and quotes from IPCC AR4. ”

            What a wasted opportunity; no quotes; no cites.

          • Gus

            You’ll find quotes aplenty in the in-depth article I referred you to. I don’t have to repeat it.

          • Robert

            “I don’t have to repeat it.”

            Sure…

      • BajaDreamer

        …..and even a 68% chance that the statement about 2014 was completely wrong!

    • yareusodumb

      In other words you want to drink the cool aid like the rest? Pathetic

    • BajaDreamer

      I don’t think your boxing analogy is quite proper since a boxing match only has two opponents.

      But now a horse race………

      Let’s also keep in mind that the left leaning liberal media only bothered to report on the small portion of the report which said 2014 was the warmest year. They did not report at all on the portion which said that there was only a 38% chance, much less the accompanying part that said there was a 68% chance that the statement was completely wrong!

  • Frederick Colbourne

    Well is anyone does not see the issue based on the various blogs, let them look at graphs of the data.

    The URL below plots land-based data showing a rise in temperature since 2001 while the satellite and sea-surface data show a fall in global temperature.

    The satellite temperature gives almost complete coverage of the globe. Sea-surface temperature coverage corroborates the satellite data set.

    However the land-based temperature is not representative of the Earth because it ignores the oceans (30% of the surface), most of Canada and the former USSR, most of Africa and South America, most of the polar regions and most mountainous regions of the Earth. This data set is biased towards developed countries of the northern hemisphere.

    From top to bottom GISS (land-based), Hadley (sea surface) and RSS (satellite).

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:2001/to:2014/trend/plot/gistemp/from:2001/to:2014/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2001/to:2014/trend/plot/rss/from:2001/to:2014/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2001/to:2014/plot/gistemp/from:2001/to:2014

  • Oliver_K_Manuel

    If the Sun is of paramount importance to all Earth’s inhabitants, and . . .

    . . . if leaders of Russian, American, Asian, African and European nations are working together behind-the-scenes, following UN’s Agenda 21 (Chapter 31) [1] to control public access to science & technology, they will ask leaders of their own National Academy of Sciences NOT to address publicly nine pages of precise experimental data [2] that FALSIFY:

    1. The Standard Solar Model
    2. The Standard Nuclear Model
    3. The Standard Climate Model
    ,

    models they uniformly endorsed for the past seventy years (2015 – 1945 = 70 yr)

    To date this self-identification voting has been unanimously in favor of a tyrannical one-world government – guided by UN’s Agenda 21 – that is totally out of contact with reality.

    https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/01/18/a-true-statement-from-the-experts/

    References:
    1. UN Agenda 21, “Chapter 31: Science & Technology” http://habitat.igc.org/agenda21/index.htm

    2. “Solar energy,” Adv. Astronomy (submitted for on-line review, 6 Jan 2015)
    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Solar_Energy_For_Review.pdf

  • Oliver_K_Manuel

    Politically correct thinking and the lock-step consensus “science” that now plagues society can be traced back to a 1972 document the UN adopted almost immediately after Kissinger secretly flew to China and agreed to end the Apollo program in exchange for a new world-wide peace agreement:

    United Nations Agenda 21
    http://habitat.igc.org/agenda21/index.htm

  • Mervyn

    Anyone remember this warning by John Coleman?

  • Snowy Smith

    GOALS of the COMMUNIST JEW WORLD ORDER.
    The JEW WORLD ORDER is made up of:
    Political Power,
    Military Power,
    Economic Power,
    Scientific Power,
    Cultural Power,
    And
    Religious Power.

    All to produce:
    A One World Government,
    A One World Economy,
    A One World Military,
    A One World Society,
    A One World Religion,
    A One World JEW BANK,
    A One World Currency,
    All enforced with ABSOLUTE BRUTAL CONTROL.
    The JEW WORLD ORDER is a COMMUNIST MILITARY DICTATORSHIP, a Fraudulent JEW SCAM.
    The JEW WORLD ORDER will be financed by CARBON TAXES from the JWO Fraudulent CO2 SCAM.
    The JEW WORLD ORDER One World Government will be totally OWNED and CONTROLLED by the London and Wall Street JEW BANKERS.
    There will be
    NO Democracy,
    NO Voting,
    NO Freedom of Speech,
    NO Gun Ownership,
    NO Property Ownership,
    NO Farm Ownership,
    NO Protest Marches,
    We will all be SLAVES.
    All enforced by a COMMUNIST MILITARY POLICE FORCE.
    YOU will all be forced to serve in the JEW One World ARMY against anyone who resists the JWO.
    Any person who does not fall in line with the COMMUNIST JEW WORLD ORDER will be EXTERMINATED.
    Resisters will simply disappear.
    If you want to know what is coming soon in the JWO all you have to do is go back in history to the JEW COMMUNIST Bolshevik Revolution in USSR.
    The JEWS Invented Communism.
    The Bolshevik Revolution SCAM in USSR was totally financed by New York JEW Bankers.
    This was one of the biggest JEW SCAMS in World History.
    The Russians were mostly White Christians.
    The JEWS fraudulently forced COMMUNISM on the Russian Christian people.
    62 MILLION PEOPLE were MURDERED in that JEW COMMUNIST Bolshevik Revolution in USSR.
    All the Military Leaders and the Educated were MURDERED FIRST.
    All Resisters simply disappeared.
    FOOD was used as a WEAPON.
    The above is the absolute TRUTH.
    The JEW WORLD ORDER is already in its advanced stages World Wide however it is hitting the wall with massive resistance from President Putin our Russian Christian leader.
    JEW WORLD ORDER is in crisis mode.
    http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/06/01/365067/bilderbergers-face-iranrussiachina-wall/
    Bilderberg’s New World Order plot hits Iran-Russia-China wall.
    Every year, the world’s most powerful people meet in secret. Their agenda: total world domination. Big JEW media observe a near-total blackout.
    It sounds like dystopian science fiction, or a conspiracy theorist’s worst nightmare.
    The strangest part is that it’s true. The 2011 destabilization of Syria, the 9/11/2008 JEW Goldman-Sachs-led controlled demolition of the world economy, and the JEW 9/11 false flag events were all plotted or okayed by the Bilderbergers.
    All planned and carried out by the JEW WORLD ORDER.
    Fortunately, the world is fighting back. The rise of the internet-based alternative media has shredded the secrecy surrounding the annual Bilderberg conference, allowing the people a glimpse of what their EVIL masters have in store for them. And the nations resisting the Bilderbergers’ world takeover attempt, led by Iran, Russia and China, are gaining ground.
    Well done President Putin.

    The USA Government has been totally HIJACKED by the JEW WORLD ORDER Synagogue of Satin doing EVIL all over the World.
    They are starting Wars and financing TERRORISTS all over the World to take down any Government that is resisting the Plans of the JEW WORLD ORDER.
    URGENT:
    Never forget that the JEWS did 9-11
    It’s time to get rid of these JEW WORLD ORDER War Mongering PARASITES.
    Our HERO President Putin our Russian Christian leader is our only hope.
    We need to support him in every way possible.
    NO MORE WARS FOR THE JEWS.
    Feel free to add anything I missed.
    For the latest TRUE NEWS:
    http://www.realjewnews.com/
    http://www.presstv.com
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/
    Please Copy and FORWARD World Wide.
    It’s time to stand up and be counted.
    It’s also time to BAN DEPLETED URANIUM World Wide and prosecute the War Mongers for using it.
    Bring back Christmas.
    Regards
    Snowy Smith
    South Africa

  • yareusodumb

    The scam from the feds continues just so they get our tax money

  • Peter

    I would just like to know why the oceans are acidifying when according to scientists the oceans are warming which means not as much Co2 can be held in solution which should make the ocean more alkaline??

  • dqn

    As the old saying goes…”follow the money”. Every year the worlds governments spend 10’s of billions on ‘fighting climate change and/or saving the planet’. The scientists who need work, especially the younger PHD’s (after all, they have families to support and bills to pay just like the rest of us) are only too happy to do research that confirms the environmental whackos’ contention that the planet is gonna burn up if we don’t abandon our 21’st century lifestyle and go back to the dark ages where lifespans averaged maybe 35 years, and people lived lives that were described as short and brutish. After all, the climate change skeptic scientists, thanks to all the political correctness that has infected most if not all of our governments, are completely shut out of research funds. Even those engaged in the pure sciences! Add in the UN’s never ceasing goal of becoming the world’s central government controlling everything and you have the prefect storm for what the Paris COP membership is fervently wishing for; World Government! After all, according to them everything we do in our lives affects our ‘climate’ and thus needs to be controlled – by them.