NOAA/NCDC Commit Scienctic Fraud... Through Data Manipulation..

[Billy_Bob]

Ross Mckitrick just posted a review "first look" about this paper. He makes some major points and very politely rips it to shreds.

And this link points out just how dumb McKitrick's claims were, with special emphasis on how McKitrick doesn't understand statistics.

The Michigan Secular Student Alliance A First Look at Ross McKitrick s A First Look

Poor Billy. He literally has nothing except a few cult frauds on his side. Everyone outside of his cult is simply ignoring them. The mainstream media won't mention deniers any more, except to laugh at them. Even FOX considers deniers to be poison, that's how far their fortunes have fallen.

You post the same crap from the same shill site that has zero credibility over and over just like old fraud.... All I can do is laugh at you and your ignorance.

 

[Crick]

Here is a meaningful graphic from the kids at Michigan: The Michigan Secular Student Alliance A First Look at Ross McKitrick s A First Look

 

[jc456]

Here is a meaningful graphic from the kids at Michigan: The Michigan Secular Student Alliance A First Look at Ross McKitrick s A First Look

He really do get sucked in don't you dude you make me laugh a lot!

 

[Crick]

Did you read the exchange between Anthony Watts and Tom Peterson? HotWhopper The perversity of deniers - and the pause that never was with Tom Peterson

 

[jc456]

Did you read the exchange between Anthony Watts and Tom Peterson? HotWhopper The perversity of deniers - and the pause that never was with Tom Peterson

Zżzzzzzzzzzzz OMG, really? Did you watch the video? I'd challenge that dude. Holy crap batman he completely blew his own explanation of science right after he gave it. BTW, that was spot on. As for watt,?

 

[Kosh]

Did you read the exchange between Anthony Watts and Tom Peterson? HotWhopper The perversity of deniers - and the pause that never was with Tom Peterson

Don't you just love how these AGW cult zombies will post links without reading them..

 

[Crick]

No, that stuff was from Mamooth's link to the UMich kids giving McKittrick's First Look a First Look.

But, if I was a McKittrick fan, I'd be pretty disappointed.

 

[jc456]

No, that stuff was from Mamooth's link to the UMich kids giving McKittrick's First Look a First Look.

But, if I was a McKittrick fan, I'd be pretty disappointed.

Hahahaha

 

[jc456]

Did you read the exchange between Anthony Watts and Tom Peterson? HotWhopper The perversity of deniers - and the pause that never was with Tom Peterson

Don't you just love how these AGW cult zombies will post links without reading them..

I know right?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Did you read the exchange between Anthony Watts and Tom Peterson? HotWhopper The perversity of deniers - and the pause that never was with Tom Peterson

HOTWHOPPER???? SERIOUSLY????? You cited a let wing hack blog... Miriam is getting really desperate and will post anything to keep her socialist power play alive.

 

[Crick]

Did you read the exchange between Anthony Watts and Tom Peterson? HotWhopper The perversity of deniers - and the pause that never was with Tom Peterson

HOTWHOPPER???? SERIOUSLY????? You cited a let wing hack blog... Miriam is getting really desperate and will post anything to keep her socialist power play alive.

The material I am talking about is a conversation between Tom Peterson and Ross McKittrick. It was published with the permission of both of them.

Idiot.

 

[tinydancer]

The whole denier conspiracy theory makes no sense, given that the overall adjustments make the past global average look warmer, and thus makes the current warming look smaller.

How do deniers try to pass off their scam? They ignore the oceans. But since the oceans aren't ignored in the global average, that's not honest of the deniers.

If the goal was to make it look like there was more warming, why would scientists adjust past land temperatures down by a bit, and then totally overwhelm it by adjusting past ocean temperatures up by a lot? Scientists could have instead done nothing at all, and that would have made the warming look bigger. Instead, the scientists put great amounts of effort into making the warming look ... smaller.

The answer, of course, is that their is no fraud, except by the deniers. The scientists correct all the data for accuracy, and that just happens to make the current warming look smaller.

Fraud only by the deniers?



NOAA caught committing fraud in Congressional testimony about ocean acidification Arizona Daily Independent



NOAA caught committing fraud in Congressional testimony about ocean acidification

 

[Old Rocks]

Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-first century and its impact on calcifying organisms Abstract Nature

Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-first century and its impact on calcifying organisms

Today's surface ocean is saturated with respect to calcium carbonate, but increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations are reducing ocean pH and carbonate ion concentrations, and thus the level of calcium carbonate saturation. Experimental evidence suggests that if these trends continue, key marine organisms—such as corals and some plankton—will have difficulty maintaining their external calcium carbonate skeletons. Here we use 13 models of the ocean–carbon cycle to assess calcium carbonate saturation under the IS92a 'business-as-usual' scenario for future emissions of anthropogenic carbon dioxide. In our projections, Southern Ocean surface waters will begin to become undersaturated with respect to aragonite, a metastable form of calcium carbonate, by the year 2050. By 2100, this undersaturation could extend throughout the entire Southern Ocean and into the subarctic Pacific Ocean. When live pteropods were exposed to our predicted level of undersaturation during a two-day shipboard experiment, their aragonite shells showed notable dissolution. Our findings indicate that conditions detrimental to high-latitude ecosystems could develop within decades, not centuries as suggested previously.

So you get your science from newspapers and blogs. Figures.

 

[Old Rocks]

Coral Reefs Under Rapid Climate Change and Ocean Acidification
Science 14 December 2007:
Vol. 318 no. 5857 pp. 1737-1742
DOI: 10.1126/science.1152509

• REVIEW

Coral Reefs Under Rapid Climate Change and Ocean Acidification

1. O. Hoegh-Guldberg1,*,
2. P. J. Mumby2,
3. A. J. Hooten3,
4. R. S. Steneck4,
5. P. Greenfield5,
6. E. Gomez6,
7. C. D. Harvell7,
8. P. F. Sale8,
9. A. J. Edwards9,
10. K. Caldeira10,
11. N. Knowlton11,
12. C. M. Eakin12,
13. R. Iglesias-Prieto13,
14. N. Muthiga14,
15. R. H. Bradbury15,
16. A. Dubi16,
17. M. E. Hatziolos17

+Author Affiliations

1. ↵* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected]

• ABSTRACT

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is expected to exceed 500 parts per million and global temperatures to rise by at least 2°C by 2050 to 2100, values that significantly exceed those of at least the past 420,000 years during which most extant marine organisms evolved. Under conditions expected in the 21st century, global warming and ocean acidification will compromise carbonate accretion, with corals becoming increasingly rare on reef systems. The result will be less diverse reef communities and carbonate reef structures that fail to be maintained. Climate change also exacerbates local stresses from declining water quality and overexploitation of key species, driving reefs increasingly toward the tipping point for functional collapse. This review presents future scenarios for coral reefs that predict increasingly serious consequences for reef-associated fisheries, tourism, coastal protection, and people. As the International Year of the Reef 2008 begins, scaled-up management intervention and decisive action on global emissions are required if the loss of coral-dominated ecosystems is to be avoided.

More information from real scientists.

 

[Old Rocks]

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), primarily from human fossil fuel combustion, reduces ocean pH and causes wholesale shifts in seawater carbonate chemistry. The process of ocean acidification is well documented in field data, and the rate will accelerate over this century unless future CO2 emissions are curbed dramatically. Acidification alters seawater chemical speciation and biogeochemical cycles of many elements and compounds. One well-known effect is the lowering of calcium carbonate saturation states, which impacts shell-forming marine organisms from plankton to benthic molluscs, echinoderms, and corals. Many calcifying species exhibit reduced calcification and growth rates in laboratory experiments under high-CO2 conditions. Ocean acidification also causes an increase in carbon fixation rates in some photosynthetic organisms (both calcifying and noncalcifying). The potential for marine organisms to adapt to increasing CO2 and broader implications for ocean ecosystems are not well known; both are high priorities for future research. Although ocean pH has varied in the geological past, paleo-events may be only imperfect analogs to current conditions.

Of course we all know them thar pointy headed librul scientists should not be allowed to do science. That should be reserved for obese Conservative junkies, fake British Lords, and other paragons of Conservative virtue.

 

[Crick]

Fraud only by the deniers?
NOAA caught committing fraud in Congressional testimony about ocean acidification Arizona Daily Independent


NOAA caught committing fraud in Congressional testimony about ocean acidification

The Arizona Daily Independent? Wow. And what should we expect from the Arizona Daily Independent? Why, that they would give credence to things like:

"The story was broken by Marita Noon, executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc in an article at Cfact here. The story was reposted and amplified on WattsUpWithThat. Read those posts for greater detail."

Now THAT is the pinncacle of fact-based, fully verified, objective journalism. Right, Ms Dancer?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Coral Reefs Under Rapid Climate Change and Ocean Acidification
Science 14 December 2007:
Vol. 318 no. 5857 pp. 1737-1742
DOI: 10.1126/science.1152509

• REVIEW

Coral Reefs Under Rapid Climate Change and Ocean Acidification

1. O. Hoegh-Guldberg1,*,
2. P. J. Mumby2,
3. A. J. Hooten3,
4. R. S. Steneck4,
5. P. Greenfield5,
6. E. Gomez6,
7. C. D. Harvell7,
8. P. F. Sale8,
9. A. J. Edwards9,
10. K. Caldeira10,
11. N. Knowlton11,
12. C. M. Eakin12,
13. R. Iglesias-Prieto13,
14. N. Muthiga14,
15. R. H. Bradbury15,
16. A. Dubi16,
17. M. E. Hatziolos17

+Author Affiliations

1. ↵* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected]

• ABSTRACT

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is expected to exceed 500 parts per million and global temperatures to rise by at least 2°C by 2050 to 2100, values that significantly exceed those of at least the past 420,000 years during which most extant marine organisms evolved. Under conditions expected in the 21st century, global warming and ocean acidification will compromise carbonate accretion, with corals becoming increasingly rare on reef systems. The result will be less diverse reef communities and carbonate reef structures that fail to be maintained. Climate change also exacerbates local stresses from declining water quality and overexploitation of key species, driving reefs increasingly toward the tipping point for functional collapse. This review presents future scenarios for coral reefs that predict increasingly serious consequences for reef-associated fisheries, tourism, coastal protection, and people. As the International Year of the Reef 2008 begins, scaled-up management intervention and decisive action on global emissions are required if the loss of coral-dominated ecosystems is to be avoided.

More information from real scientists.

Old Fraud uses a debunked paper..... One that has been shown untrue by empirical evidence, showing the coral reef's have adapted to the slight changes and are now flourishing just as they have done for millennia..

Real Scientists would have looked at the long term data before putting up a paper so easily destroyed by empirical evidence..

 

[mamooth]

HOTWHOPPER???? SERIOUSLY????? You cited a let wing hack blog... Miriam is getting really desperate and will post anything to keep her socialist power play alive.

Please Billy, tell us more about this one-woman blogger "socialist power play".

Billy was banned from the comments there, for acting like he does here. It was a woman who banned him, Billy has issues, hence his especially hysterical reaction.

 

[Theowl32]

LOL, the data is blatantly manipulated. Right in front of us. They just do it and the morons on the left just clap away.

Just when you thought the morons on the left could not possibly get any dumber.

Just when you thought you could not hate liberals more today than you did yesterday. Holy shit left wingers are fucking stupid.

 

[flacaltenn]

From that paper Billy Boy. Note the lower graph which clearly displays the effect of the corrections. It is NOT doing what you claim it to be. The corrections are significantly warming pre-1940 surface temperatures.

Still a perfect record in not correctly interpreting graphs.. SIGNIFICANTLY??? They are just trying to flatten it out.

I have NO IDEA what 1915 data has to do with the currrent temperature pause.. Maybe BillyBob can enlighten me.. Because I see the data getting cooked, but I don't really care unless they are making the expected exaggerated claims that usually come with the cooking..

Despite BullWinkles' reading of significant. This looks like a cover to find another 0.033deg positive trend to the pause. Enough to make even the most climate scientist assert that "there is no statistically valid pause"..