Data Set Tampering, Exposed Fraud Just in Time for Paris.

[Billy_Bob]

Data Set Tampering, Exposed Fraud Just in Time for Paris.

You just cant make this stuff up. The terrestrial data sets are so screwed up that they are no longer fit for any scientific purpose. Monckton has really put this in vivid perspective.

View attachment 46445

The amount of data manipulation is so big that no one in science will now use any of the big three data sets in real work.

From 1979 to the present, the difference between the means of the terrestrial and satellite datasets is 0.40 K century–1; from 1990 to the present, the difference is 0.56 K century–1; from 1997 to the present, the difference has risen to a hefty 1.06 K century–1. It is pardonable to deduce from this that the chief purpose of the terrestrial tampering has been to wipe out the embarrassing Pause.

The graphs are below. Frankly, even after the tampering, the warming rate is nothing like what it should have been if any of the IPCC’s predictions had been true. My guess is that once they’ve got their world government in Paris they’ll stop tampering leave the temperature records alone.

Its no wonder they dont want any one to see the satellite data, it clearly exposes their fraud. Its a sad day in science to have government agenda destroy it.

Source

I think this may be a misunderstanding of how their individual anomalies are created. There's never been a HUGE disagreement between Satellite and the cooked land data. Just enough to make spurious statistical headlines..

The Sat data uses an normalization from the Sat era -- roughly 1979 to present. The others USED to use a 30 year average but most switched to "20th century averages" around 2000 because it's a larger scarier number.

So the ANOMALIES never agreed much. But the TEMPERATURES do.. Depends on what you SUBTRACT from a current data point to MAKE the anomaly... Graph them all together and you get..

Or something essentially similar.. If there are departures of more than 0.2degC --- somebody's mangling something and I don't think it's Monckton..

Largest diffs are probably in high Sea Temp yrs. With the Satellites getting it right because of broader and uniform coverage. Same with Arctic oscillations..

Saw an analysis of Sat vs GISS for the GOLDEN USHCN readings. Subtract those USCN readings from each of RSS, UAH, (2 sat processing centers) And GISS (boilerroom where NASA cooks the land/sea readings) and you find that GISS OBVIOUSLY is biased high,

Thank You. I hadn't see that graph before. It is rather stunning that RSS/UAH are much higher in the past but around 1998 they have become lower than the big three adjusted sets. Even US-CRN shows this discrepancy and alines with RSS/UAH data. The manipulations are pretty obvious to see with just a cursory look.. What is interesting is how all three of the land data sets jumped on the band wagon to give themselves credibility prior to Pairs without even looking or evaluating the manipulations. This tells me that it was a planned political event as true scientists would have looked and questioned the changes.

 

[flacaltenn]

Data Set Tampering, Exposed Fraud Just in Time for Paris.

You just cant make this stuff up. The terrestrial data sets are so screwed up that they are no longer fit for any scientific purpose. Monckton has really put this in vivid perspective.

View attachment 46445

The amount of data manipulation is so big that no one in science will now use any of the big three data sets in real work.

From 1979 to the present, the difference between the means of the terrestrial and satellite datasets is 0.40 K century–1; from 1990 to the present, the difference is 0.56 K century–1; from 1997 to the present, the difference has risen to a hefty 1.06 K century–1. It is pardonable to deduce from this that the chief purpose of the terrestrial tampering has been to wipe out the embarrassing Pause.

The graphs are below. Frankly, even after the tampering, the warming rate is nothing like what it should have been if any of the IPCC’s predictions had been true. My guess is that once they’ve got their world government in Paris they’ll stop tampering leave the temperature records alone.

Its no wonder they dont want any one to see the satellite data, it clearly exposes their fraud. Its a sad day in science to have government agenda destroy it.

Source

I think this may be a misunderstanding of how their individual anomalies are created. There's never been a HUGE disagreement between Satellite and the cooked land data. Just enough to make spurious statistical headlines..

The Sat data uses an normalization from the Sat era -- roughly 1979 to present. The others USED to use a 30 year average but most switched to "20th century averages" around 2000 because it's a larger scarier number.

So the ANOMALIES never agreed much. But the TEMPERATURES do.. Depends on what you SUBTRACT from a current data point to MAKE the anomaly... Graph them all together and you get..

Or something essentially similar.. If there are departures of more than 0.2degC --- somebody's mangling something and I don't think it's Monckton..

Largest diffs are probably in high Sea Temp yrs. With the Satellites getting it right because of broader and uniform coverage. Same with Arctic oscillations..

Saw an analysis of Sat vs GISS for the GOLDEN USHCN readings. Subtract those USCN readings from each of RSS, UAH, (2 sat processing centers) And GISS (boilerroom where NASA cooks the land/sea readings) and you find that GISS OBVIOUSLY is biased high,

Thank You. I hadn't see that graph before. It is rather stunning that RSS/UAH are much higher in the past but around 1998 they have become lower than the big three adjusted sets. Even US-CRN shows this discrepancy and alines with RSS/UAH data. The manipulations are pretty obvious to see with just a cursory look.. What is interesting is how all three of the land data sets jumped on the band wagon to give themselves credibility prior to Pairs without even looking or evaluating the manipulations. This tells me that it was a planned political event as true scientists would have looked and questioned the changes.

The telling part is when you compare US data using the "gold standard" USHCN network. RSS and UAH are by FAR the closest match.. With GISS way off into not only a bias error, but a significant slope difference as well.

 

[jc456]

See I now play that theory into all of what I watched with this forum and it is what they are after a master race. Truly Hitler like thinking going on. There plan would be to kill off bottom feeders and how far the threshold goes is open I bet.

So you think of yourself as a bottom feeder?

How exactly have you gone from added taxes, fuel cell cars and higher electric bills to "kill off the bottom feeders"?

First off, do I act like a bottom feeder on here? No. So nice try fool. So, I've asked and asked and you continuously fail to explain what your solution is. Can you tell me?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Like climategate...What are the chances that this does anything to Paris??? No one that has real power gives a damn! That is who is winning for better or worse.

 

[jc456]

Like climategate...What are the chances that this does anything to Paris??? No one that has real power gives a damn! That is who is winning for better or worse.

so Matt, what is the solution to your problem? Have one?