UPDATE: We updated this article to address concerns after a reader cited research and recommendations by the fact-checking organization Climate Feedback.
Climate Feedback presented their analysis of our source article, including academic publications by several of its contributors. They concluded the article contained misleading and unsupported details:
Key Take Away
Temperature measurements made with different instruments and methods over time must necessarily be adjusted to ensure high-quality records of temperature that reliably represent changes. The adjustments needed for land stations in the United States often increase the apparent long-term warming, but overall, adjustments actually reduce the global warming trend.
What does an organization do when the real numbers don’t support the agenda they are pushing?
Sometimes they fudge the numbers. Cherry pick what helps prop up the lie and ignore the real facts.
This happens so often that The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has been doing just that in order to support their biggest science scandal: global warming. Selling their brand of science, their “truth” about global warming brings in extra funding, yet their data is off by 50%.
For the past 18 years, satellites have shown no global warming, where as the “the land based data sets like the ones maintained by NOAA for the US Historical Climate Network (USHCN) continue to show a warming trend.” How can this be?
One explanation, by meteorologist Anthony Watts, shows NOAA using readings from areas that experience Urban Heat Island effect, that is instruments surrounded by buildings, roads or airports nearby which raises the temperatures due to local “environment” and not climate or weather.
Read more on the next page.
No , not another corrupt organization!!
Nick Noelte: Contrary to your asinine insistence that I’m a denier, I’m agnostic on the issue: I don’t know enough to take a position either way, no matter how much information I consume. Besides, reality has already demonstrated that, in this matter, the predictions are not even close to most past predictions. Furthermore, advocates pretty much agree that nothing we do is going to change matters significantly. (How convenient.) But politicians want to throw every tax dollar they can collect at it anyway. Sounds like a win for someone, common-core Gates being one of them. You’re certain there’s a climate god controlling everything and if we just worship him-her-it they’ll forgives us our trespass. I don’t believe in your god, nor do I absolutely doubt he-she-it exists. I don’t know, but you keep insisting I’m an atheist if it makes you feel righteous and gives you that tingle up your leg.
No money cut all funding for these pricks.
I’m not saying I believe it. I do know that we are in an El Niño cycle and we expected to substantial rainfall this season predicted by the national weather association. This article was about how the NOAA covers up phony research put on by themselves in order to maintain reimbursement…. I’m just trying to prove my point about how research is performed with a specific equitation created by the research team which does not include all variables external or internal to include and not limited to biases in order to and so happens to achieve a specific desirable outcome
when they went to the ice pack to prove warming,, the got frozen in and had to get a Navy ice breaker to get them out,, so much for global warming
I know that the earth heats up and cools down. It’s the nature of our world. Ice ages and then glaciers shrink back. It’s just common sense.
global warming is not real
These numbers are off of a military server…
A crock eh?… How’s your day at the beach for Christmas in new York this year?
Just as enjoyable as my trip to the slopes in July about 100,000 years ago when a glacier covered my state. Hmmm, wonder where and how that glacier disappeared.
why are we paying tax dollars for falsified data..?