NASA: oops, we lied and got caught

submitted by Questionable from hostux.pics

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]package 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2007-aug-15-sci-temp15-story.html

The brouhaha was triggered Aug. 4 when Steve McIntyre of the blog Climateaudit.org e-mailed NASA scientists pointing out an unusual jump in temperature data from 1999 to 2000.

When researchers checked, they found that the agency had merged two data sets that had been incorrectly assumed to match.

When the data were corrected, it resulted in a decrease of 0.27 degrees Fahrenheit in yearly temperatures since 2000 and a smaller decrease in earlier years.

That meant that 1998, which had been 0.02 degrees warmer than 1934, was now 0.04 degrees cooler.

Wow what a scandal OP

[–]Questionable[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I don't know what you could mean by this. These are numbers that it's claimed can literally end all life on planet earth.

Do tell. What you are trying to say here? Explain it to me, as I were a child.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

1) The global mean surface temperature is increasing. For instance the 10 years 2013-2023 are all hotter than every year prior to 2013.

2) However if you look at the 1.88% of the earth's surface that is the continental United States, the randomness provides a stronger component of the variation. This is partly due to having a smaller sample. But also there's conservation of energy constraints if you take the whole planet, so the variation has to be heat moving into the oceans.

3) For the continental US, 1934 and 1998 were within error of the same temperature. NOAA has 1998 warmer.. NASA, apparently, has them the other way around.

4) As improvements and error corrections come to light, the rankings of years might change.

[–]package 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

  1. The difference didn't affect global averages, and only minimally affected a specific date range in US averages.

  2. The cause of the discrepancy is not being suppressed or obfuscated.

Global warming is largely BS, and you could make the argument that this bad data was used to push a narrative, but framing this story as intentionally bad data from NASA as part of a conspiracy is not reasonable or helpful.

[–]Jiminy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If 1934 was the hottest year this is all fake. Globe not warming.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If 1934 was the hottest year this is all fake. Globe not warming.

1934 was never the hottest year for the globe. Back in 2007, it was close to the hottest year for the lower 48 US states, 1.88% of the globe.

But even in the lower 48, 2012 was more than a degree (F) hotter than either 1934 or 1998..

Globally, the 1934 wasn't especially warm for the time, and a lot cooler than current temperatures.

[–]weavilsatemyface 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Climate denialists: "There is a conspiracy among climate scientists and they never listen to us!"

Climate scientists when a denialist actually finds a genuine error: "Hmm, that's interesting. I guess you're right, we'll fix it. Thanks."

Climate denialists: "See, they never listen to us!"

[–]Questionable[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Climate denialists, believe in man made climate change.

See how easy it is to call people names? You rotten climate denier.

[–]ShoahKahn 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Fun fact:

Of the 12,000 papers on "climate change", forwarded by independent climate scientists, 7,930 "had no position on the subject", and disregarded. A further 78 said there was human connection; 40 were undecided. The remaining reports, which said "humans contribute to" climate change were used to make the "97% of scientists agree" meme.

I.E., 12,000 - 7,930 = 4,070* => (78 + 40) / 4,070 x 100 = 2.9(%) => 100% - 3% = "97%"

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sounds like they don't know humans change climate with chemtrails.

[–]Jiminy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Busted