Archives par mot-clé : NASA

Adjusted “Unadjusted” Data: NASA Uses The “Magic Wand Of Fudging”, Produces Warming Where There Never Was

by P. Gosselin, June 25, 2019 in NoTricksZone


By Kirye
and Pierre Gosselin

It’s been long known that NASA GISS has been going through its historical temperature data archives and erasing old temperature measurements and replacing them with new, made up figures without any real legitimate reason.

This practice has led to the formation of new datasets called “adjusted” data, with the old datasets being called “V3 unadjusted”. The problem for global warming activists, however, was that when anyone looks at the old “V3 unadjusted” – i.e. untampered data – they often found a downward linear temperature trend. Such negative trends of course are an embarrassment for global warming alarmists, who have been claiming the planet is warming up rapidly.

The adjusted “unadjusted” data

So what to do? Well, it seems that NASA has decided to adjust its “V3 unadjusted datasets” and rename them as “V4 unadjusted”. That’s right, the adjusted data has become the new V4 “unadjusted” data.

And what kind of trend does the new “V4 unadjusted” data show?

You guessed it. The new V4 unadjusted data are now yielding warmed up trends, even at places where a cooling trend once existed.

This is how NASA uses its magic wand of fudging to turn past cooling into (fake) warming.

6 examples of scandalous mischief by NASA

What follows are 6 examples, scattered across the globe and going back decades, which demonstrate this scandalous mischief taking place at NASA.

No. 1

Punta Arenas, Chile. Here we see how a clear cooling trend has been warmed up by NASA to produce a slight cooling trend:

 

giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/stdata_show_v3

giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/stdata_show_v4

If “Greenland is catastrophically melting”, how do alarmists explain NASA’s growing Greenland glacier?

by A. Watts, June19, 2019 in WUWT


It turned out to be a weather event, unrelated to “climate change”. The next year, there was no “insta-melt“.

In fact. we’d not even know about the melting in Greenland before satellites came on the scene. So how many times in the history of the Earth has Greenland has a quick melt spike? I’m guessing hundreds of thousands of times.

Jakobshavn Glacier in western Greenland is notorious for being the world’s fastest-moving glacier. It is also one of the most active, discharging a tremendous amount of ice from the Greenland Ice Sheet into Ilulissat Icefjord and adjacent Disko Bay—with implications for sea level rise. The image above, acquired on June 6, 2019, by the Operational Land Imager (OLI) on Landsat 8, shows a natural-color view of the glacier.

Jakobshavn has spent decades in retreat—that is, until scientists observed an unexpected advance between 2016 and 2017. In addition to growing toward the ocean, the glacier was found to be slowing and thickening. New data collected in March 2019 confirm that the glacier has grown for the third year in a row, and scientists attribute the change to cool ocean waters.

June 6th, 2019 Jakobshavn Glacier in western Greenland . Image acquired on June 6, 2019, by the Operational Land Imager (OLI) on Landsat 8, shows a natural-color view of the glacier.

Multiple NASA Studies Confirm Bedrock Heat Flow Behind Melting Polar Ice, Not Global Warming

by James E. Kamis, August 7, 2018 in ClimateChangeDispatch

In what amounts to dissension from National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) climate change policy, a series of just-released studies by working-level scientists prove that geological and not atmospheric forces are responsible for melting of Earth’s polar ice sheets.

 

NASA Greenland Study August 1, 2018

The results of this research study illustrated in Figure 2 confirm the very high geothermal bedrock heat-flow from Greenland’s massive subglacial Mantle Plume, which was originally documented in four previous research studies (see herehere, here, and here).

A geothermal heat-flow cause for the melting of Greenland’s ice sheet has been the focus of numerous Climate Change Dispatch articles (see here, here, here, and here).

 

 

The Little Ice Age: What Happened Around the World

by Marcia Wendorf, May 15, 2019 in InterestingEngineering


Between 1300 and 1850, the Earth experienced a Little Ice Age whose cause to this day is not known.

During the period 950 CE to 1250 CE, the earth experienced an unusually warm period, which became known as the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) or the Medieval Climatic Anomaly. At their height, temperatures during that period were similar to those experienced during earth’s mid-20th-century warming period.

Following the Medieval Warm Period came a period of intense cold, which has become known as the Little Ice Age (LIA). The term “Little Ice Age” was coined by Dutch-born American geologist F.E. Matthes in 1939. The LIA began around 1300 CE and lasted until about 1850 CE.

Within that stretch, NASA’s Earth Observatory has described three particularly cold periods: one around 1650, a second around 1770, and the third around 1850.

Fabricating A Warming: NASA Now Altering ‘Unadjusted” Data To Create New, Warmer ‘Unadjusted’ Data

by P. Gosselin, March 31, 2019 in NoTricksZone


By Kirye

and Pierre Gosselin

One fellow climate blogger recently wrote on how he’s been been looking at GHCN ‘unadjusted’ data and noticed that scientists at NASA appear to have been altering them: “This is a fairly disturbing development,” he wrote.

Heating up Reykjavik and Nuuk

Cited as an example is Reykyavik, Iceland. According to Tony Heller here, “The current version V4 has massively cooled the past, to make it look like Iceland is warming.”

Heller then posted a chart showing the difference between v2 unadjusted and the new v4 ‘unadjusted’ for the Reykjavik station.

 

Spreadsheet

Heller also found here that the same appears to be the case for Nuuk, Greenland as well.

NASA hides page saying the Sun was the primary climate driver, and clouds and particles are more important than greenhouse gases

by P. Homewood, February 18, 2019 i


Here’s the text from the original page (my bolding).

NASA 2010: What are the primary forcings of the Earth system?

The Sun is the primary forcing of Earth’s climate system. Sunlight warms our world. Sunlight drives atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns. Sunlight powers the process of photosynthesis that plants need to grow. Sunlight causes convection which carries warmth and water vapor up into the sky where clouds form and bring rain. In short, the Sun drives almost every aspect of our world’s climate system and makes possible life as we know it.

Earth’s orbit around and orientation toward the Sun change over spans of many thousands of years. In turn, these changing “orbital mechanics” force climate to change because they change where and how much sunlight reaches Earth. (Please see for more details.) Thus, changing Earth’s exposure to sunlight forces climate to change. According to scientists’ models of Earth’s orbit and orientation toward the Sun indicate that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling — perhaps the next ice age.

Repost from JoNova

Antarctic Losing Tiny Amounts Of Ice (Or Maybe It’s Gaining Ice, NASA Is Not Sure!)

by P. Homewood, January 15, 2019 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat


Antarctica is shedding ice at a staggering rate.

Scientists have discovered global warming has caused the melting of the ice on the continent to increase sixfold since 1979.

This phenomenal rate of melting has seen global sea levels rise by more than half an inch – and experts predict it will get worse. 

Scientists have predicted a ‘multi-meter sea level rise from Antarctica in the coming centuries’ as a result of the vast loss of ice.

Researchers discovered that, between 1970 and 1990, the continent was shedding an average of 40 gigatons of ice mass annually.

This jumped to an average of 252 gigatons a year between 2009 and 2017.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6590841/Antarctica-losing-SIX-TIMES-ice-year-1970s.html#newcomment

 

You may of course recall that it was only three years ago that the same NASA, who are behind this latest scare story, were telling us that the ice cap was actually growing in Antarctica. But more of that in a minute.

There are several aspects to this latest story that need closer examination.

NASA: Global Warming Promotes Arctic Sea Ice Growth

by Eric Worrall, December 11, 2018 in WUWT


According to NASA, the increased rate of thickening of sea ice in the Arctic is due to Global Warming.

Read more: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/wintertime-arctic-sea-ice-growth-slows-long-term-decline-nasa

The abstract of the study:

Read more: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2018GL079223

I guess we should count ourselves lucky the world isn’t currently in a cooling phase, otherwise we might lose the Arctic icepack altogether.

 

La baisse de l’activité solaire conduit la NASA à annoncer un refroidissement climatique

by Anne Dolhein, 2 october 2018 in Reinformation.TV


La NASA – peu suspecte de climato-scepticisme – s’appuie sur de nouveaux résultats d’observations de température aux confins de l’atmosphère terrestre pour annoncer un refroidissement notable dans ces zones, lié à l’un des minima solaires les plus importants de l’ère spatiale. Il s’agit très clairement d’un refroidissement climatique entraîné par la baisse de l’activité solaire, confirmant le rôle important sinon prépondérant du soleil sur les variations de température de la planète.

« Nous constatons une tendance au refroidissement », vient ainsi de déclarer Martin Mlynczak, chercheur principal associé du centre de recherches Langley de la NASA. « Très loin de la surface de la terre, près du bord de l’espace, notre atmosphère perd de l’énergie calorifique. Si les tendances actuelles se poursuivent, on pourrait bientôt atteindre un record de froid pour notre ère spatiale », a-t-il affirmé.

NASA: The chill of solar minimum is being felt in our atmosphere – cooling trend seen

by Anthony Watts, September 28, 2018 in WUWT


These results come from the SABER instrument onboard NASA’s TIMED satellite. SABER monitors infrared emissions from carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), two substances that play a key role in the energy balance of air 100 to 300 kilometers above our planet’s surface. By measuring the infrared glow of these molecules, SABER can assess the thermal state of gas at the very top of the atmosphere–a layer researchers call “the thermosphere.”

When the thermosphere cools, it shrinks, literally decreasing the radius of Earth’s atmosphere. This shrinkage decreases aerodynamic drag on satellites in low-Earth orbit, extending their lifetimes. That’s the good news. The bad news is, it also delays the natural decay of space junk, resulting in a more cluttered environment around Earth.

NASA alarmism headline: ‘A World On Fire’

by Anthony Watts, August 23, 2018 in WUWT


The world is on fire. Or so it appears in this image from NASA’s Worldview. The red points overlaid on the image designate those areas that by using thermal bands detect actively burning fires. Africa seems to have the most concentrated fires. This could be due to the fact that these are most likely agricultural fires. The location, widespread nature, and number of fires suggest that these fires were deliberately set to manage land. Farmers often use fire to return nutrients to the soil and to clear the ground of unwanted plants. While fire helps enhance crops and grasses for pasture, the fires also produce smoke that degrades air quality.

Multiple NASA Studies Confirm Bedrock Heat Flow Behind Melting Polar Ice, Not Global Warming

by James E. Kamis, August 7, 2018 in ClimateChangeDisatch


In what amounts to dissension from National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) climate change policy, a series of just-released studies by working-level scientists prove that geological and not atmospheric forces are responsible for melting of Earth’s polar ice sheets.

Claim: U.N. data reflects greening of the Earth, not carbon dioxide

by A. Watts, May 15, 2018 in WUWT


NASA says the greening of the planet is due to increased CO2, these guys are arguing against that, saying increased forest growth “correlates strongly to the UN Development Programme’s Human Development Index”. Riiiighht. They say that “Europe’s early turnaround and expansion of forest resources obviously can’t be attributed to the rapid rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide that began decades later”. By the same token, the U.N. didn’t exist until decades later, and they sure as hell haven’t had any impact on the greening of the Eastern United States as shown in their map below (…)