While still carrying the label “Development Prototype”, the website looks mostly functional. www.climate.gov
It is the effort of the new NOAA Climate Services division – your tax dollars at work. They write:
At this time, the NCS Portal prototype only scratches the surface of the many climate datasets, products, and services available across NOAA. This effort will gradually transition from a prototype to an operational status over the next year. Our plan is to actively gather user feedback through focus groups, usability studies, and informal communications. Over the next several years, we will expand the NCS Portal’s scope and functionality in a user-driven manner to greatly enhance the accessibility and usefulness of NOAA’s climate resources. As this effort continues to expand in future years, partners from outside of NOAA will become involved in this effort. The NCS Portal will be a central component of NOAA’s commitment to enhancing the access to and extensibility of climate data and services, timely articles and information, education resources, and tools for engagement and decision-making.
Here’s the main page, which is not fully shown because it is so tall:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
They even have a hockey stick on the page banner. Subliminal message not lost in this Kiwi!
“The NCS Portal will be a central component of NOAA’s commitment to enhancing the access to and extensibility of climate data and services, timely articles and information, education resources, and tools for engagement and decision-making.”
Someone needs to teach these folks how to write a basic English sentence.
I know – this is the standard language found in business, education, and government nowadays. They think it makes them sound smarter, but it is just a heaping helping of convoluted gobbledy-gook.
The ‘incoming sunlight’ graph is using an obsolete TSI-reconstruction.
Does anyone else notice that if you drag the little slider bar to 2009, all of the graphs but one go to 2009. Sunlight %, whatever that is stops at 1999. Any particular reason for this?
John Egan (21:52:21) : “…Someone needs to teach these folks how to write a basic English sentence. I know – this is the standard language found in business, education, and government nowadays. They think it makes them sound smarter, but it is just a heaping helping of convoluted gobbledy-gook.”
No matter how thin they slice it, it’s still baloney.
Interesting that Arctic sea ice is included in the dashboard, yet Antarctic is not. I can’t help but speculate as to why…
No need for sarcasm. This is what you want isn’t it. Greater transparency and access to data. Use the opportunity.
Why does the September Arctic ice extent end in 2008?
IIRC, the September 2009 level was roughly that of 2005!
Re: Michael R (21:56:08)
“Any particular reason for this?”
Easy.. it’s NASA.
A bloated bureaucratic government entity that has to spend as much money as possible in order to ensure funding for the next cycle. Never mind that former NASA head Michael Griffith (also ex CEO of the CIA’s In-Q-tel) was lambasted by Hansen for having a less than AGW compliant position.
“In particular, James Hansen, NASA’s top official on climate change, said Griffin’s comments showed “arrogance and ignorance”, as millions will likely be harmed by global warming.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Griffin
Published on October 16, 2004
The Genesis space capsule that crashed into the Utah desert last month failed because four pencil-stub-sized gravity switches designed to trigger release of the spacecraft’s parachutes were installed backwards, NASA officials said Friday.
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=MN&p_theme=mn&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=1064E9A0F38C39E8&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM
09 October 1999
NASA lost its $125 million Mars Climate Orbiter spacecraft as a result of a mistake that would shame a first-year physics studentfailing to convert Imperial units to metric. The problem arose from a culture clash between spacecraft engineers and navigation specialists, says Mary Hardin, a spokeswoman for NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16422070.900-schoolkid-blunder-brought-down-mars-probe.html
On the left side:
Carbon Dioxide: Earth’s Hottest Topic.
They got that one right.
Translates to Hotly Debated. now that the squelchers are going away.
I will be impressed when they start including the data pre-1900, as far back as possible.
Lay it all out on the table.
The intellectual and prestigious nature of The Wall Street Journal is not compromised in reporting on Climategate.
“The East Anglians’ mistreatment of scientists who challenged global warming’s claims—plotting to shut them up and shut down their ability to publish—evokes the attempt to silence Galileo. The exchanges between Penn State’s Michael Mann and East Anglia CRU director Phil Jones sound like Father Firenzuola, the Commissary-General of the Inquisition.
For three centuries Galileo has symbolized dissent in science. In our time, most scientists outside this circle have kept silent as their climatologist fellows, helped by the cardinals of the press, mocked and ostracized scientists who questioned this grand theory of global doom. Even a doubter as eminent as Princeton’s Freeman Dyson was dismissed as an aging crank.”
Climategate: Science Is Dying
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704107104574572091993737848.html
They should add a Finnish Video: Climate Catastrophe Canceled
Starring Mcintyre
http://dotsub.com/view/19f9c335-b023-4a40-9453-a98477314bf2
This video tells the fako-Science story (Pre CRU ClimateGate) very very well
And Add it here…
It looks like the shown warming trend is directly related to increased sunlight, albeit in a lagging fashion as one would expect from a huge heatsink like planet earth. Still, I want to see the medieval warming period for comparison. As it is, the dashboard page was doubtlessly designed with a warmist bias.
As you know the Copenhagen global warming summit will start soon. Ironically, Copenhagen has just recorded its coldest November ever since records began!
HR (22:08:25) :
No need for sarcasm. This is what you want isn’t it. Greater transparency and access to data. Use the opportunity.
Funny that the old practice of only including data that proves AGW still survives.. everything that disproves it is noticeably absent..
Kirk W. Hanneman (22:04:23) :
“Interesting that Arctic sea ice is included in the dashboard, yet Antarctic is not. I can’t help but speculate as to why…”
Yes, Antarctic Sea Ice charts don’t fit well in the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming narrative so NOAA chooses to suppress them:
Antarctic Sea Ice Extent from NSIDC:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
Antarctic Sea Ice Extent from Cryoshoere Today:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.south.jpg
Global Sea Ice Area from Cryoshpere Today:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
Re: Kirk W. Hanneman (22:04:23) :
Interesting that Arctic sea ice is included in the dashboard, yet Antarctic is not. I can’t help but speculate as to why…
Yeah, I’m guessing it’s because Antarctic sea ice is actually increasing, and has been doing so at a statistically significant rate since 1970. Can’t have any seeds of global warming doubt sown, can we now?
rbateman (22:11:38) :
“On the left side:
Carbon Dioxide: Earth’s Hottest Topic.”
It is not NOT Earth’s hottest topic. If the powers that be would pay attention to REAL pollution problems and start focusing back on real science, we would be OK.
But, NOOOOO……public servant James Hansen goes on record about Copenhagen.
We appreciate that, but……
Stick to asteroids and Carrington, Mr. (Dr.?) Hansen, and we won’t have a problem.
The problem is they have been diverted by the “hottest topic” while the real scientific woes have been staring us in the face all along.
Start paying attention to the REAL threats to our existence…and learn how to adapt thereto.
Simple solution.
NOAA…are you paying attention??? I did not think so.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
NOAA Climate Services Portal Dashboard results:
– Temps: leveling/declining;
– CO2: rising increasingly;
– Sunlight %: level;
– Sea level: leveling;
– Arcitc ice: ticking up;
Summary: CO2 non-correlation to any other above data sets. And this proves what?
– Antarctic ice: not included;
– Solar flux: not included;
– Sunspots: not included;
– ENSO: not included.
Well balanced perspectives presented on that site.
“The increase of co2 we see is 100% due to the human activity, give or take a few percent”… “no competing theory”… Less than 1% chance this is caused from something else…
Really there is “no competing theory”? None?
We shall see what we shall see.
So far, it looks like the start of a PR orchestrated campaign with homogenized [and sterilized] data and stories.
There’s safety and security in dogma.
Nice to see everyone pointing out things like the lack of antarctic ice graphs.
Also, the designers of the website had better hope that nobody clicks on the sunlight graph – the one it pops up is more indicative of the sun’s power. For that matter, they’d better hope that we don’t click on the temp. graph – it doesn’t look as scary without all the red and blue lines.
Doesn’t increased CO2 availability allow for increases in vegitation growth?
i.e. The trees in the rain forest have virtually nothing in the soil, from which to grow. Long term, all their building blocks come from the atmosphere + the sun.
Maybe the next “sky is falling” Gore issue will be “Oh no, we’re removing all the lubricant (petrolium) from the earth. It’s going to stop spinning!
Leif is always on top of obsolete data.
Note the default year of the end-handle in the graph section, 2000. Choosen to give the maximum impression of increase. If focus period would be set to the last ten years , that ought be of more interest, a different picuture emerges…