On the heels of the recent damaging emails about falsified climate data, we have another study that shows that NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) started taking climate measuring stations off-line in areas that showed cooler temperatures.
Joseph D’Aleo, the first Director of Meteorology and co-founder of the Weather Channel, and Anthony Watts, a meteorologist and founder of SurfaceStations.org just released a report titled: SURFACE TEMPERATURE RECORDS: POLICY DRIVEN DECEPTION?
In that January 29 report, they find that starting in 1990, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) began systematically eliminating climate measuring stations in cooler locations around the world. Yes, that’s right. They began eliminating stations that tended to record cooler temperatures and drove up the average measured temperature. The eliminated stations had been in higher latitudes and altitudes, inland areas away from the sea, as well as more rural locations. The drop in the number of weather stations was dramatic, declining from more than 6,000 stations to fewer than 1,500.
The first take-away message for policy makers is this: Instrumental temperature data for the pre-satellite era (1850-1980) have been so widely, systematically, and unidirectionally tampered with that it cannot be credibly asserted there has been any significant “global warming” in the 20th century.
Several other points they make:
*All of the problems have skewed the data so as greatly to overstate observed warming both regionally and globally.
*Global terrestrial temperature data are gravely compromised because more than three-quarters of the 6,000 stations that once existed are no longer reporting.
*There has been a severe bias towards removing higher-altitude, higher-latitude, and rural stations, leading to a further serious overstatement of warming.
Their report provides examples of how the systematic elimination of stations and unexplained adjustments in temperature data caused measured temperatures to rise for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Norway, Sweden, and the United States. Many adjustments change what would have been a drop in temperatures into an increase. Take New Zealand, where D’Aleo and Watts note: “About half the adjustments actually created a warming trend where none existed; the other half greatly exaggerated existing warming.”
Talk about crazy-making. In the face of so much falsified data, the climate change proponents loud cries for policies like cap and trade are falling more and more on deaf ears.
Just last week, Arizona governor Jan Brewer signed an executive order stating that Arizona will no longer participate in the Western Climate Initiative. Utah Representative Mike Noel is also introducing a resolution requesting that Utah withdraw from the WCI. Representative Kerry Gibson has introduced a resolution requesting that the EPA back off and immediately halt its carbon dioxide reduction policies and programs until a full and independent investigation of climate data and global warming science can be substantiated. This new report will only aid in its passage.
And to think Congressman Jason Chaffetz was skeptical of global climate change before it was cool to be skeptical. Two years ago at convention, he emphatically stated “Global warming is a FARCE”. Now, close to half of the general public do not believe that the climate change is human caused – and the number is growing.
February 11, 2010 at 7:49 pm
Amazing.
February 12, 2010 at 7:56 am
Wow. Climate change denialism is going the way of 9/11 conspiracy theories. With about as much credibility.
February 12, 2010 at 8:53 am
Stop the presses. Jason Chaffetz is right and the overwhelming majority of the world’s brightest and best climatologists who have studied the effects of atmosphere on climate change all their lives are WRONG.
Just when you thought Utah could not come across as more STUPID to the rest of the nation . . . We can’t let scientific facts get in the way of right wing partisan ideology now, can we? I suppose the same group that thinks Sarah Palin has the qualifications to be president are those denying climate change. Strangely, it is all beginning to make sense to me now.
February 12, 2010 at 10:06 am
The point is that Global Warming is only a fraction of the damage done by pollution and our modern society.
10,000 premature dealths in the US due to the use of coal in the US for energy.
These findings do not negate the need to end the oil based economy, to become energy independent, to move as quickly as possible to renewable energy. Not only for the environmental effects, but for the effects on our economy and our National security.
February 12, 2010 at 10:07 am
I wonder if Mike Noel is doing so, due to the large coal deposits near Alton, and other power related issues in Kane County.
February 12, 2010 at 10:47 am
Just to go back to the previous denialist disinformation campaign you referenced, the CRU e-mails did not provide any evidence of “falsified climate data.”
February 12, 2010 at 7:44 pm
JBT: You used to call it global warming. Why are you calling it climate change now?
February 13, 2010 at 12:06 pm
Considering Watt’s poor track record in this area, I’m skeptical that he has found a major flaw.
Here’s a good article on why his previous attempt at showing the temperature records were wrong was itself in error:
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1419&tstamp=&page=18
In particular, it points to this study that confirms that Watts was wrong:
http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2/monthly/menne-etal2010.pdf
February 13, 2010 at 12:10 pm
Holly,
I’m curious. Why do you, like a lot of other conservatives, immediately assume global warming is wrong, and pounce on non-reviewed studies, such as the one published by Watts, proclaiming that this is where the truth is to be found?
Have you had an open mind and studied the science yourself? Do you actually have the scientific background necessary to read the literature in this area, from reputable journals, so that you can see what they are doing? If not, why do you prefer to trust someone like Watts, rather than the University of Utah and BYU (and many other) scientists who have taken the time to not only publish peer-reviewed work but also visit the capital to point out why the legislature is wrong on this issue?
February 22, 2010 at 12:55 am
[...] http://hollyonthehill.wordpress.com/2010/02/11/more-climate-gate/ [...]
April 22, 2010 at 7:34 pm
[...] Click to read the article [...]