Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, has “warned” President-elect Donald Trump not to interfere with their climate activities. Schmidt maintains the GISS global temperature series, arguably the most adjusted of all the global temperature products.
‘Global warming doesn’t care about the election’: Nasa scientist warns Donald Trump over interference
Senior Nasa scientist suggests he could resign if Donald Trump tries to skew climate change research results.
A senior Nasa scientist has told Donald Trump he is wrong if he thinks climate change is not happening and warned the President-elect that government scientists are “not going to stand” for any interference with their work.
Mr Trump has described global warming as a “hoax” perpetrated by China, vowed to unratify the landmark Paris Agreement and appointed a renowned climate-change denier to a senior environmental position in his transition team.
The science community and environmental campaigners in the US have already begun efforts to persuade Mr Trump that climate change is actually real before he takes office next year.
Dr Gavin Schmidt, the director of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, signalled they would have allies among the federal science agencies.
…
In an interview with The Independent, Dr Schmidt, who was born in London, said: “The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.
…
Asked if he would resign if the Trump administration adopted the most extreme form of climate change denial, Dr Schmidt said this was “an interesting question”. It would not cause him to quit “in and of itself”, he said.
“Government science and things generally go on regardless of the political views of the people at the top,” Dr Schmidt said. “The issue would be if you were being asked to skew your results in any way or asked not to talk about your results. Those would be much more serious issues.”
…
But he added: “Trump is obviously unique. It’s not just the same as Bush again.”
…
President-elect Donald Trump has already stated that he intends to refocus NASA on its original mission of space exploration.
“I will free NASA from the restriction of serving primarily as a logistics agency for low Earth orbit activity… Instead we will refocus its mission on space exploration.”
The needless duplication of climate work between multiple federal agencies has been noted before – in 2015, Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, introduced a bill calling on NASA to spend more of their time and effort exploring space.
Sent it great to have a President you can disagree with and “order around” without being called racist?
NASA should concentrate on space, and as far as weather is concerned, the space weather driven by solar activity should be in their domain of activity.
Another well known NASA scientist, Dr. David Hathaway, made a prediction (with which I strongly disagreed at the time) that dismally failed, but he was brave enough to come back and publicly acknowledge it.
Btw, Dr. Hathaway only yesterday published a new paper with this conclusion:
“We find that the polar fields, as given by the axial dipole strength and the average field strength above 55◦
, indicate that Cycle 25 will be similar in size to (or slightly smaller than) the current small cycle, Cycle 24. We also find (weaker) evidence that the southern hemisphere will be more active than the north. Small cycles, like Cycle 24, start late and leave behind long cycles with deep extended minima [Hathaway, 2015]. We expect a similar deep, extended minimum for the Cycle 24/25 minimum in 2020”
This time he appears to be a on right track.
For solar buffs interested the paper can be found here
If Gavin said a similar thing to President Obama or a President Hillary Clinton, Gavin would be labeled a racist and misogynist respectively, investigated for hate crimes, have his tax returns pulled, and be fired.
Perhaps Gavin misunderstood the definition of Doctorate and thought it implied Doctor it
Gee…this could spell the end of the 97% meme. Gavin and the other 3% might walk off the job due to a lack of funding and leave the actual 97% to repair their collective damage
NASA should concentrate on aeronautics and space.
“Gavin warns Donald not to mess with NASA Climate division.” Donald: “What NASA Climate division?”
*Hands Gavin his transfer to the new weather station at the old Bengazi Diplomatic campus.*
Better still is he can do a field study of UHI, in the most undeveloped country in the NH, the DPRK 🙂
You have to love this man’s honesty. I quote –
“The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.”
And then the jackass takes the position that we CAN control the climate, even though he says nature has the last vote. what a bonehead. This boy needs to go back to school to learn how to think and present his views.
I have never heard Trump deny that the climate is changing. And you can care about it all you want but you can’t change it.
Right. Kind of makes him dispensable then.
Great point bill p, we need an “ist” word for rich white male hatred. but if we use our secret decoder rings Schmidts message translates to don’t mess with my paycheck I’m still making mortgage payments and have an eye on a new BMW.
He should have his eye on a ticket overseas. Preferably someplace warm – and I don’t mean Australia!
hahahaha buttclown …that’s President Elect Trump your talkings too
Congress, please enact this one-sentence law: Any and all climate change laws or regulations enacted by the Government of the United States of America shall state how many years the habitability of Earth will be increased by the law/regulation and shall provide scientific proof substantiating the stated increase in habitability.
This will take the onus off climate change deniers and place it on the scientists promoting climate change legislation where it belongs.
It doesn’t take a scientist to know that Earth will only be habitable for a finite period of time. Even the most astute scientist knows that it is foolish to try to make that an infinite time period thru climate change laws.
Yeah Gavin, having a stare down with Trump is suuuucccchhh a goooooddd idea!
Dear Mr. Schmidt,
I’m not sure how to put this so I’ll keep it short —
NASA Climate Division does NOT belong to you!
Regards,
D. Trump (President elect)
oooo ! Big boy.
What’s he going to do, walk away in a huff and refuse to talk like he did with Dr Roy Spencer?
Maybe as head of GISS he will refuse to talk to Trump. Wow, that’ll show him !!!
Woe detide anyone who messes with Big Gav.
Dear Mr Schmidt,
You used to work for me, your fired
D Trump
How about just shutting their “work” down?
No further interference needed.
Hahaha….. yes Greg I hadn’t seen this in a while,
will this be like Gavin’s meeting at Trump Tower ?
Global Warming
– Dr. Gavin Schmidt Versus Dr. Roy Spencer
🙂
That’s hypocratic not ironing. 😉
All Right!!!
Listen up now!! The great Gavinator needs all the support he can muster, to show Ebell, they are serious!
Everyone in all Federal and State Agencies raise their hands and shout if you support Gavin! Please, be sure to send in confirmation using official Federal email.
heh heh heh
Double points if you use a private server to send in the confirmation.
I understand Hillary’s server has alot of cleared out space
Was it wiped with a cloth?
That could be a press-ient remark.
That reminds me, it’s time to take out the trash.
Yes, Gavin has just identified himself to Trump as a high priority target for “YOU’RE FIRED”. Gavin believes in too many of his own lies and elevated his own importance. GK
If not he will stamp his little foot and resign. Perhaps Donald will send someone with some boxes to help him pack. U-Haul and relocation companies are going to be busy come January – book early. Has one been booked for Samuel L Jackson to move him to South Africa? I do hope so.
And if Trump has any sense he will put Gavin on extended ‘Gardening leave’ to help relieve his obvious stress related outbursts before allowing him to retire on medical grounds.
How are you Chasmod ??
Gavin Schmidt probably knows more about twiddling with climate science than anybody.
I can’t keep up with the rate he diddles the numbers to fake what has actually been measured and reported by his own agency.
Is he that stupid, that he doesn’t know that we follow his every re-observation of the past, closer than we watch election results.
Well he’s probably got enough in his taxpayer pension fund already so he might as well resign, and go and enjoy the last days of our Goldilocks Climate.
G
Yeah, somehow I’ve a feeling that telling someone with Trump’s personality WHAT NOT TO DO could backfire spectacularly. So all these worried climate alarmists, Gavin included could just be takng the wrong approach to influencing The Donald
“MarkW November 17, 2016 at 7:11 am
That reminds me, it’s time to take out the trash.”
Time to drain the swamp.
That’s to get the wrinkles out of the data
And Gavin’s going to do it in the full public gaze.
No, he’s a Doctor, thus he’s a Hyppocritic Oaf: “First, do no warm”.
“warned”? Are quoting yourself Eric?
No, he’s quoting a headline writer in the Independent. Neither seem to be quoting Gavin. Though he did suggest that he would resign if asked to skew or not talk about results. Which does seem to be the only honorable thing to do.
If Gavin were going to resign for skewing results, he should have quit long ago.
And he doesn’t debate with we realists either. Two strikes…
Schmidt succeeded Hansen as Skewer-in-Chief and GISS has managed the demonstrably most skewed climate data series for decades. So if Gavin expects the new administration to skew it a bit more they should get along just fine.
“demonstrably most skewed climate data series”
So who has demonstrated it? In fact, GISS doesn’t adjust data at all. They use ERSST and GHCN adjusted, both from NOAA. The task of integrating these to form an average is straightforward, and their code is public. I do the same myself, and show the results prior to GISS each month. They are very similar, even though I use GHCN unadjusted.
It’s about time some skeptic did “demonstrate” by calculating an index, instead of just talking about it. I think the last to do that was Muller, with BEST.
Nick Stokes —
Gavin is not afraid of being told not to talk about his results. Rather just the opposite. He is scared that they are going to make him tell how he got his results. When that happens he will resign to try to save his rear end.
Eugene WR Gallun
“In fact, GISS doesn’t adjust data at all.”
No , they CREATE it out of nothing.
Nearly 50% of land data, and most of sea surface data
“He is scared that they are going to make him tell how he got his results. “
No force required. The data is public – I use it myself. The code which reads in the data from public sources and produces the results is here. Notably, the British firm Ravenbrook reproduced the code in Python, and got identical results. No mystery there.
Though he did suggest that he would resign if asked to skew or not talk about results. Which does seem to be the only honorable thing to do.
Well since not talking seems to be his substitute for adult scientific debate and skewing results is what they do best, you are right : the most honourable thing for him to do would be to resign.
The only problem is that he has not honour or integrity either, so I’m not holding my breath.
Nick Stokes the question is why would NASA reproduce work that’s already being done by NOAA?
” the question is why would NASA reproduce work that’s already being done by NOAA”
Well, GISS did it first. Would you be happier if there was just one index?
Greg
“Well since not talking”
He runs a blog on which he writes rather prolifically.
“The only problem is that he has not honour or integrity”
It puzzles me that people are so confident in the wrongness of GISS when they can’t muster the skill or energy to try to do their own
GISS and co are obviously wrong, satellites should set the base for correction to the models that are homogenization/infill of the crappy land data. anyone who looks at this closely enough would come to the same conclusion, so this little game of pretending the land based data sets are somehow superior and correct is just a pathetic set of lies.
we end up with ridiculous situations like BOM in Australia claiming worlds best practices (GISS type homogenization) for stations like rutherglen –
http://jennifermarohasy.com/2016/06/audit-general-dismisses-need-for/
worlds best practice?? do you people who defend this crap really believe that you are fooling us?
Nick: I greatly appreciate that you continue to post here and maintain decorum and class. Many on either side could benefit from your example. I’m curious. You have shown a link to the algorithms that alter the data. Do you have a link to the data as originally recorded? Correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall that the British at a minimum can’t find all of those numbers anymore.
Nick, it’s only reproduced because they did the same thing, make up data from most of the planet. If you look at what was actually recorded, there is still warming, it just can’t be from Co2 because there has not been any measurable loss of cooling at night.
he would resign if asked to skew or not talk about results….
What a f’in little piece of slime…..implying that Trump would do that
Hi Nick,
Can you give us a step by step instruction on how to get the GHCN unadjusted and I mean fully raw data.
Weird world we live in, removing a skew is now called skewing.
What would Gavin do if Trump asked him to “unskew” his data?
“Homogenization”, so-called, is data adjustment.
Nick is right — it’s the NOAA data that is skewed. While the adjustments are clear, Karl was also clear that he had no intention of justifying his adjustments to the people before he retired. The same people who provided his paycheck for over 40 years.
I find it interesting that in his bio, he moved from his home state of Wisconsin to the University of Oklahoma, he decided to then work for the ERL in Raleigh. “I think the overwhelming Oklahoma heat was what really led to my final decision,” Karl said.
If only he grew up in Oklahoma and moved to Wisconsin — then we’d be talking about global cooling.
I’ve been building mine for about 6 or 7 years now, and while temps have gone up in places causing the average to go up, it’s not global, nor is it from co2 because there hasn’t been any loss of cooling. You need to look at both min and max trends instead of using average, it hides the truth.
Bill Illis November 17, 2016 at 6:42 am
Hi Nick,
Can you give us a step by step instruction on how to get the GHCN unadjusted and I mean fully raw data.
This would appear to be the link you need:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ghcnm/v3.php
So if it is actually NOAA that is Gissing our climate; and I believe you NIck, what the hell is NASA even doing being in another agency’s business.
Publish NOAA’snumbers, and get Goddard the hell out of the way, and back to rocket science.
G
Nick stokes —
When you create temperature readings for areas that have no actual data — the result is not data. And when you eliminate colder data from an area and then fill that area in by using data from warmer surrounding areas — that is fraud.
Remember — Michael Mann’s friends kept saying that they had replicated his Hockey Stick Graph when all that they did was repeat exactly his fraudulent methods using his cherry picked data — and getting his same fraudulent answers.
Gavin’s data methods are fraudulent and you claiming to replicate his results using that fraudulent data as a base is past silly. Its is Gavin’s methods of altering data he is going to be questioned about and rather than answer he will resign.
Eugene WR Gallun
Micro6500,
I completely agree with you that averages can hide a multitude of ‘sins,’ and that one needs to look at both TMax and TMin.
Stokes,
Are you going to respond to the request from John Eggert and Bill Ellis for a link to the raw data?
george e. smith November 17, 2016 at 9:05 am
Good afternoon george,
the answer to your question on why the adjusted dara comes out of NASA and not NOAA is NASA has the rocket science guys or a lease it did in the past. Who you going to trust NASA scientists or conspiracy theorists? That was the image they were trying to create in the public’s mind. They suborned the real purpose of GISS to gain credence for their whack-a-doodle activists obsessions.
As long as they did not have to be subjected to serious government scrutiny they could get away with it.
Now we have a administration that is hostile and suspicious of their methods, motives and announcements.
If it is true as many of us believe that they have been deliberately falsifying data that is used in to formula United States foreign and domestic policies they are now on a precarious footing. One foot on the banana peel with the other slipping.
michael
John Eggert,
“Do you have a link to the data as originally recorded?”
The GHCN data is posted every month in this directory. You’ll see that there are two sets of files, one marked qcu (unadjusted) and one qca (adjusted). Each has a tmax, tmin and tavg.
The GHCN data is compiled directly from the CLIMAT forms, which are submitted monthly to WMO by world met offices, and are shown on this site. You can check that those numbers are transcribed directly to GHCN. Even the quality control doesn’t remove or alter data – it just flags anything suspect.
“When you create temperature readings for areas that have no actual data — the result is not data. And when you eliminate colder data from an area and then fill that area in by using data from warmer surrounding areas — that is fraud.”
The Earth’s global temperature is sampled. That is inevitable in any kind of measurement. If you want to value how much iron ore you are shipping, you sample. To measure your body temperature, you sample. You can’t measure everywhere, and because you can’t, that dowsn’t mean you know nothing.
I don’t know the evidence for removing colder areas. But that misses the point of anomaly. The mean for that location is subtracted, so whether they are usually colder doesn’t affect the average.
Nick Stokes November 17, 2016 at 1:27 pm
“If you want to value how much iron ore you are shipping, you sample. ”
No. You determine the exact amount. Exact weight. Iron ore can have impurities that change the content thus one sample can have a different weight from the next. Think of what happens it there is ether a greater or lower weight on a train.
To use temperature to measure climate the station must be reliable and the equipment used calibrated and capable of meeting the requirements on repeatably and accuracy.
We don’t have that. and Nick the silly little bit about the iron ore, its not to mock you or discredit you, very few people truly understand how difficult it is to get accurate and repeatable measures.
I agree you can’t measure everywhere. but where you can measure the locations and instruments used must not only withstand any level of scrutiny but also be subjected to it a constant and continuous basis.
The present methods and reliability of the systems used in determining NOAA’s and GISS temperature findings would not even be acceptable for use in a teddy bear factory.
michael
“You determine the exact amount. Exact weight.”
Actually, assessing (by sample) iron ore for shipping (Aus->China/Japan) is something I know a bit about. The key issue isn’t weight, but Fe content. And negatives like phosphate etc. A load is many thousand tons, and is assessed by analysing sample test tubes. OK, maybe big ones. Australia exports about $50 billion a year – the actual amount paid is determined by that sampling. The error is considered a fraction of a %, which is still a lot of money. The ore is sampled both on despatch and receipt, so the measures had better agree fairly well. They do.
Sampling is universal in science, and much of life. And the idea of estimating by sample average – ie extending the results to the unsampled region, is inherent. There is no other reason for sampling.
As to the actual measurements and location – that’s the data we have. GISS isn’t responsible for that, nor even NOAA in most of the world. Their job is to do the best with what we know. It isn’t nothing.
Not sure if Gavin is going to have to resign. Aren’t those kinds of appointments “at the pleasure of the President”? Rather than threatening the President-Elect, he should be job hunting about now.
An example of sampling is that they use Arctic land base stations to represent the temperature of the entire Arctic.
Except, that makes no sense. If water is 1% ice or 99% ice the temperature is the same. {Keep in mind that the NSIDC reports the surface area with 15% of ice on the very surface. Even if it is a puddle on top of the ice, it counts as water.} The air above it would respond to that temperature. It doesn’t work like this on land. But, the Arctic is reported to be the are warming the fastest.
‘Aren’t those kinds of appointments “at the pleasure of the President”?’
No. Jastrow was GISS director from 1961-1981, Hansen from 1981-2013 (Reagan to Obama), and Gavin since.
“Except, that makes no sense. If water is 1% ice or 99% ice the temperature is the same”
No, it’s general experience that Arctic temperatures, even over sea-ice, are not bounded below by -1.8°C. Basically, sea ice separates land and water, so temperature over it is like land.
But now we have satellites. Here is a recent paper based on AVHRR surface data. The following fig shows trends measured since 1981. Notew that it finds Arctic trend of 0.69°C/decade, similar to GISS Arctic 0.60.
Nick Stokes
November 17, 2016 at 1:38 am
No skeptic needs to calculate his or her own series. How about just using NOAA’s own GASTA from before it started gross, unwarranted adjustments?
Then go with figures that haven’t been bent, folded, spindled and mutilated beyond their mother’s recognition for after that time, c. 1998.
He is a fraud and you are too Stokes.
It’s not up to us to fix the problems with your network. The fact that even outsiders can see the problems means that you should have been able to see them as well.
Sorry for the late reply:
Would you care to explain away the emails that were leaked/hacked from GISS 5-6 years ago between Hansen and some of his team which clearly indicated that the series were being regularly “adjusted”. We have evidence that would foolish to deny that all those ‘adjustments” follow the same pattern – past gets colder, present gets warmer.
And the fact that the GISS series are the ones that differ the most from the RSS, UAH satellite and the radio sond Lower Troposphere data series? We are far beyond the point of accepting that stuff as some sort of happenstance and the GISS at face value. Naivety comes in various forms – I’ll take the hazmat suit.
Nick,
Gavin is clearly without a shred of honor. He’s a lying weasel and abject coward, with the waste of trillions in treasure and deaths of millions of people (not to mention birds and bats) on his greedy, grubby, bloody hands.
‘Would you care to explain away the emails that were leaked/hacked from GISS 5-6 years ago between Hansen and some of his team which clearly indicated that the series were being regularly “adjusted”. ‘
Until November 2011, GISS used GHCN V2 unadjusted, and made their own homogenisation. From then, they used GHCN V3 adjusted, and didn’t do their own. GHCN V3 came out in 2011.
The quote is,
‘in contrast to Mr Trump’s remarks about a hoax, Dr Schmidt said the scientific evidence for climate change was robust and defended the researchers studying it.’
Good for him.
next all he has to do is prove that climate change is catastrophic and anthropogenic.
If he does that, his job and the jobs of thousands of his fellows will be safe and secure.
If he does not, then the money spent on him and those thousands of model builders and helpers will be diverted to something else productive.
Maybe its time for a debate.
He has nothing to lose, after all, the planet and nature does not respect position or power.
Gavin’s problem is manyfold.
Prove there is a significant AGW,
prove the AGW is significantly dangerous,
prove mitigation works,
and suggest what mitigation methods politicians have.
I think the first is doable, the second is difficult, the third is just untrue, and the fourth is consists of ridiculously inefficient or harmful methods.
To me, ” data ” is what it says on the thermometer’s readout. I know how to read a thermometer; any kind of thermometer.
Now I have never seen an ” Anomalometer ” so I wouldn’t know how to read one of those, unless it is a whole lot more intuitive than Micro$oft Office.
I believe that the middle OA in NOAA stand for Ocean(ic) and Atmosphere(ic), and I suspect that those are two of the three places where any manifestation of ” Climate ” actually happens; the third being ” Land(ic) “.
As far as I know, once you are outside of planet earth, in outer space; there isn’t any such thing as “climate “, so for the life of me, I don’t see what it has to do with NASA or rockets.
And I still don’t understand why you report any numbers besides the ones that you read off the anomalometers.
Anybody who ever had anything to do with process control, knows that if you want to control the value of a process variable (v), with feedback system control loops, you MEASURE the instantaneous value of (v) and you force that to the ” set point “.
What you NEVER do, is MEASURE something (anything) ELSE, and then ASSUME some rigid formal relationship between (v) and anything else, and base your feedback set point on something else, rather than (v).
Systems that do the latter are often called ” bombs “. because they often blow up.
The reading on a thermometer (or anomalometer) is something real that you can observe.
Anything else that you can do with that reading (number) is a creation of the fictional art form known as mathematics, and does not belong in the universe of real things.
G
Nietzsche is more intuitive than Microsoft Office.
Hugs
November 17, 2016 at 6:42 am
IMO significant AGW has not been proven and probably can’t be. Whatever warming has actually happened since CO2 started rising monotonously after WWII is nothing out of the ordinary, hence the null hypothesis can’t be rejected. There is no human fingerprint, thus no significant AGW, if any Anthropogenic sign at all.
The biggest, yet still negligible, human effect on GASTA (to the extent it can be measured) may be from cleaning up the atmosphere since the 1970s, thanks to environmental efforts by the so-called First World, then after the fall of the USSR, the Second World. China and India are dirtying it back up again, but globally we’re still better off than when the developed countries had polluted air.
People also contribute to cooling by our aerosols. So we don’t even know the net sign of human effects.
@Nick Stokes.”””””….. The Earth’s global temperature is sampled. That is inevitable in any kind of measurement. …..”””””
There’s THAT word.
I would probably agree that as far as UAH and RSS, the earth’s Temperature is “sampled” sans the extreme polar latitudes.
As far as surface based data measurements are concerned, that’s a joke to say the Temperatures are sampled. They are sampled in the sense that the Yamal Christmas tree was a sampling of Russian Temperatures.
“Sampling” means obtaining a minimum of 2Bt INDEPENDENT measures of a band limited (B) function per second for a time variable sample, and the corresponding number for a spatial variable sample.
In the case of the surface Temperature sampling, the twice a day, or min-max samples are only sufficient for a Temperature cycle that is strictly sinusoidal with NO harmonic content whatsoever, and nowhere on earth experiences such a diurnal Temperature cycle.
And for the spatial samples, that a total joke, and is short of the minimum by many orders of magnitude. Well Hansen says you only have to measure every 1200 km. You can have hundreds of spatial Temperature cycles over a distance of 1200 km at the surface.
So NO the global surface Temperatures are NOT sampled; not even half pie sampled.
G
Nick Sokes wrote:
“It puzzles me that people are so confident in the wrongness of GISS when they can’t muster the skill or energy to try to do their own”
So Nick, if one doesnt create and compute one’s own overnight interbank lending rate, one is disqualified from noting the abject and widespread fraud associated with the LIBOR?
Your rationale seems to me, to be absurd.
everyone knows you cant write science fiction unless you have been to the moon. eh Nick?
Well Nick, I can’t play a Beethoven Symphony all by myself either, but I have no need to even contemplate doing so, because there are plenty of competent orchestras that are quite capable of doing that any time I want to hear a Beethoven Symphony.
And as for wanting to know what earth’s global mean Temperature is doing; I have no interest whatsoever in that, as it hasn’t done anything magical for the last 600 million years; nor have I noticed any untoward changes anywhere I have been in the last 3/4 century at least, so I have no interest in knowing what the global Temperature is even thought to be, let alone what it is.
G
EternalOptimist:
We can of course make up stories about space, but we shouldn’t make claims about how space works in real life unless we’ve actually studied it. We can always speculate, but we shouldn’t claim that our speculations are more worth than the estimates of scientists who’ve spent years researching it. That said, I do believe that it’s valuable to listen to all scientists in the field, even those with controversial views, although it’s important to not just cherry-pick a few but try to get as broad a view as possible.
george e. smith:
If you have little or no interest in the subject, then you should leave it to the experts who know how to write symphonies to settle if there is a threatening man-made climate change or not, and stay neutral on the topic yourself.
Hannes: The problem is that it is patently obvious to even a casual observer that the so called “experts” aren’t doing that.
The claim that a few thousand measuring stations concentrated in 1 to 2% of the world’s surface is capable of measuring the earth’s temperature to within a tenth of a degree is utterly laughable. And I haven’t even started with the numerous, well documented quality control problems with most of the sensors.
Nick — those answers are night and day. When you test the iron and then ship it to the customer, someone will check it on the receiving end. If they don’t, then you may find the actual iron content slowly drifts down over time because there are $50 billion at stake. If there is a disagreement, then you will find an independent third lab to reconcile them — else the customers will find a new supply of iron. No business would get conducted without these verifications.
There is no receiving end on temperatures. When people criticize the results, then are demeaned, mocked and ostracized as oil industry plants. This is the phenomena of sampling temperatures. We need to have someone independently verify these results so that we can rely on them. Failing that, we have legitimate doubts. Instead of $50 billion, there is trillions at stake.
“There is no receiving end on temperatures.”
Actually, there is. We’re talking about the simple act of calculating the time/spatial average of a whole lot of data in the public domain. That’s the point of my simple challenge – instead of endless kvetching, calculate your own. Then you can have some basis for asserting how right or wrong it is, instead of just windy assertions.
“We need to have someone independently verify these results so that we can rely on them.”
Don’t just talk about it. Do it. I do.
Nick Stokes November 17, 2016 at 4:46 pm
Thanks for the reply.
I miss read ” If you want to value how much iron ore you are shipping,”
All of us compare to many apples and eggs, which cloud the issue.
Sampling may be acceptable for financial transactions but for the level of precision needed for determining slight changes it won’t work.
michael
Nick as a worker bee, I have shut down assembly lines on much less cause. And I was right.
Good point about criticizing the new president verses the out going one. We are in for many desperate battles with climate change being just one. For every action we take to dismantle the self interested bureaucracy we should take a very public action that is popular.
Let them fight the people.
Time to break out the Pugil Sticks (giant Q-Tips)
Sounds like Schmidt is admitting to significant levels of hanky-panky going on over at NASA.
Sounds like the best thing Trump can do is investigate and drain the NASA swamp too!
Those climate hucksters and shysters won’t be missed.
Not. One. Bit.
Schmidt’s smug, condescending attitude towards those seeing constructive climate debate is unwarranted – unless he has an agenda and/or is trying to hide something…..
Should Schmidt decide to resign: Happy Thanks Gavin-ing!
+100!
Don
“Schmidt’s smug, condescending attitude” is common to all liberal “elites”. They “know” that they are smarter, better educated, and better informed than anyone else and will not tolerate any disagreement with their vastly superior opinions. Your “facts” have no bearing because they already know.
Where’s Grif when you need him? Has he created his new ID yet?
Anyone who has a teenager has heard the phrase “I just know it!’ It the first indication of an unformed, malformed, deformed, etc. brain that isn’t fully matured. The connections just aren’t there to allow rational, logical thought. Anyone that is liberal and over 30 will probably never achieve those connections and will just keep on saying that “i know what you should be doing or I know how you should live”.
“Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, has ‘warned’ ”
Every time I see the word “warned” in an article like this, I think “threatened”. Who is this guy to be telling his new boss what he is allowed to do?
And isn’t this an awful case of the pot calling the kettle black? Under Gavin Schmidt, NASA has interfered in the official climate record to an obscene level.
to warn is not to threat and trump is not his boss… but it is quite a political statement from schmit… usually scientist have to convince polticiansthat theirs researchs are “good” for country in order to be funded..here, schmdt sees that trump may not agree so he tries to shortcut him and talk to the people directly..he wants to change the rules of a democratic country and make scientists above democracy..
in a word scientists alone should decide themseves about funding science.
Trump is not Gavin’s boss now, but he most certainly will be come January 20.
Jacques
The new administration will very much be GISS/Schmidt’s boss as of January. Trumps has made his views on climate just as explicitly clear as the current occupant of the White House and those views do not bode well for a lot of people across the various US climate/energy related agencies who have built and have been riding the green alarmist gravy train for years.
And they all know it. Last week we learnt that the EPA has made available counselors to help employees there with the “grief”…. As they say: knowing you’re going to be executed at dawn singularly focusses the mind.
yeah the hard light of democracy is pretty tough for those who don’t believe in it. I hope they have lots of money left for creating “comfort zones” and buying extra teddy bears for their staff to hug. It’s going to a very difficult time . Sob, sob.
Not directly, but Trump will be Gavin’s boss’s boss. Which amounts to the same thing.
Not only will Trump be his new boss in January.
His old boss Charlie “Muslim Outreach” Bolden will be gone.
Maybe better to keep your head down.
Ya gotta love the gavinator’s attempt to frame the argument as “climate change”.
Not that he can fool many people, outside of confirmed alarmists, believers and pseudo journalists.
Misdirection and sleight of hand.
“Under Gavin Schmidt, NASA has interfered in the official climate record to an obscene level.”
To a criminal level, imo, considering all the harm their CAGW deception has done to the entire world.
I discovered that tactic back when I was a beginning 19-year-old card-counter at a small casino in Northern Nevada. To draw attention away from one’s own cheating, accuse the victim of cheating you. The dealer was cheating ME, but accused me of bending the corners of certain cards to help identify them. Actually, he was stacking the deck on me.
I like this statement by Gavin Schmidt
So skewing your results is bad but skewing the source data is acceptable
AND
Not sharing your results is bad but not sharing your data is good
Sounds like yet another hypocrite with far too much power
Definitely time to refocus NASA’s efforts on their primary mission and if Gavin doesn’t wanna play, let him go home.
He uses the term “results” as if he has run a validation experiment.
Right – the Alarmists love to use science language such as “results” and “studies” and “data” and even sometimes “experiment” when in fact all they have are unproved models and output from unproved models.
Agreed. Normally bureaucrats and their minions, perform the same tasks no matter who is in charge.
It is a whole different case where activism has pushed aside honest work. Correcting and re-orienting a department’s work is not difficult. Nor will any investigations be difficult, if any evidence of wrongdoing is uncovered. Substantial malfeasance ensures that investigations will not overlook retirees.
• Why bad models? For over twenty years!?
• Why use models instead of actual temperatures?
• How much of the science uses models built upon bad models?
• Why use an inhomogeneous network of thousands of poorly placed, poorly maintained, errors ignored unique temperature placements, summed into an alleged average that fails to represent Earth?
• Why, in spite of Nick’s claims, adjust the past colder and the present warmer?
• Why adjust temperatures ever!! Adjusting a temperature due to TOBS differences is guessing, not correcting!
• Why fill in empty data with station data smeared from up to 1200km away?
• Why adjust SST because of shipboard engine mount temperatures?
• Why use CO2 models when a perfectly good OCO-2 satellite is visualizing CO2 concentrations?
• Why summarize data from origin through manipulation without keeping track of actual error rates; then present the final numbers with proper error rates calculated.
Yeah yeah, 38% certain; can one yell louder, I do not know!
And that “peer reviewed” science claim regarding CAGW science will be properly respected. heh heh.
ATheoK said, “Correcting and re-orienting a department’s work is not difficult.”
Au contraire – it is extraordinarily difficult and time-consuming to correct and re-orient a department’s work, even if activism is not at work. To intentionally and purposefully change the way things are done – and the attitudes that led them to be done that way in the first place – sometimes requires years of effort, because the people involved are entrenched in a certain way of thinking and doing. Some people will quit. Some people will change. And some new people will be hired. But it won’t be easy for the folks who are responsible for making the change happen.
It is not hard.
What you state is people unwilling to change. No that is not unusual. But people rarely quit unless provoked. Oddly the ones who do quit are often both the most ingenious, yet the least tractable.
People that you would like to quit rarely do.
I’ve locked up hand and desk calculators, removed accounting tablets, hid excess pens and pencils leaving only red ones; then after repeated education attempts, excessed employees and eliminated their positions.
The department then got analyzed, positions rewritten that explicitly demand requisite skills and experience with the necessary technology. One department completely restructured and reorganized with two thirds of the staff retuning to work floor environments.
Another method is to take a department and seek out work despised by other groups.
It is amazing to watch qualified people eager to prove their worth by conquering impossible/difficult tasks; first as individuals, then as a team. That reorganization was far easier, with most of the work convincing disappointed unenthused employees of their value, one day at a time; and sometimes one hour at a time.
Again, it is not difficult. It does take determination, a boss that backs your work and obstinate refusal to believe “It can’t be done”.
e.g. A County hired a tough new police Commissioner who waded into police departments that refused modernity.
There are a number of applications that go through police channels.
The Commissioner informed his staff that changing to a paperless environment mandates eliminating manual paper work.
He got a lot of grief and claims that such programming would take years.
So the Commissioner walked into the stations and went through the paper work. He held each paper application up and declared that each form would be computer processed with 48 hours, until a quicker program was developed.
Officers that refused to do the work were disciplined and reassigned, until he reached younger officers who were not afraid of computers. The newer officers developed their own programs within months.
That was just one way, a new Commissioner changed an entire County’s police department to be more efficient, more responsive to the public and less distanced.
What is “government science” and why is it different than “non government science”
Government science is like regular science only slower, much more expensive, unaccountable and WRONG!
Government Science is science bought by use of government funding requiring a political bent to garner further government funding. It’s called feeding the cash cow to get more money
“asked not to talk about your results”… as was the EPA scientist “skeptic” whose results destroyed the EPA claim of dangerous CO2 “pollution”.
The Gavin Schmidt tail will be docked. The corruption of the NASA mission by the climate-ecomongers at GISS will come to an end.
Schmidt should be just be let go. His manipulations of data would be enough to fire anybody from their job, be it NASA or the corner grocery store
Frog march him right out of there and secure the hard-drives until they can be copied and examined … I’ll bet that Schmuckzie has his own personal server 😉
Get the feeling he’s getting real nervous , don’t know why .
Resign??? that would be a great way to clear the decks of the Climate Hustlers. I think everyone sees that.
GS civil service protections make firing somewhat difficult. Maybe @climateofgavin could become @mailroomboyofgavin?
The only words Schmidt s ever likely to hear from President Trump are..
YOU’RE FIRED
Good luck finding a park bench Gavin..
There will be lots of your fellow scammers seeking them out as well.
@Joel O’Bryan
As someone who has existed in the NASA realm.
I can assure you that raising the ire of your superiors is a good way to find yourself “repurposed”.
“Hey Gavin, we need a new Director of Paper Clip Allocation”
In Nome Alaska.
Lots of CO2 on Mars. NASA are just the guys to get him and his adjustable thermometer there!
Having done research for EPA for over 20 years, under both Democratic and Republican administrations, I know how changes are made with regard to career employees and political policies. First, there are several layers of top level political appointees that are sworn to support the administration’s policies, Second, reorganization both within and between agencies, Third, and most used is reassignment of individuals to positions that they want like so they will either retire or resign.
Mr. Schmidt knows it, too.
IOW: He’ll stay unless he is “reassigned.”
Hm. How about that new position in the Arctic? (from job listing) Weather Station Maintenance Technician — North Region — Help us keep the Arctic safe for polar bears. Responsible for calibration, data collection, and general upkeep of all Arctic weather stations. Travel required. Proficient with shot gun. Must have completed Survival at Subzero Refresher Course within 2 weeks of hiring. Excellent pay and benefits (afteryouhaveworkedtherefor5years).
Gavin Schmidt ought to consider himself lucky if he is offered the opportunity to resign. He should have been dismissed quite some time ago for perpetrating the real fraud that contributes to the hoax.
Firing a government bureaucrat is hard. Doing Reduction in Force, “RIF”: is much easier. Eliminating the entire GISS temperature calculation group as redundant and uneccessary, accomplishes more. and quickly. They can scurry for appointments elsewhere say at NOAA can supply a refuge for some. The way to stop that is to notify associated agencies of planed manpower reductions, thus providing no home to run to, eliminates the future exile resistance as well.
You just have to know how to play the federal employment game.
RIF his ar$e and those of all his partners in crime!
Warning the President? What is he going to do if President Trump closes GISS, change all the temperatures back to the original?
Schmidt should look outside and see if that building on Broadway his office is in has a for sale sign on it yet!
Put it up for bid! Heck maybe then it could be bought by Ivanka and converted into a grand Trump Hotel?
Schmidt thinks he is going to resign if Trump starts messing with his area. What do you suppose will happen first? His resignation or his position being eliminated? We ought to start a pool on that.
Either/Or would be fine with us.( And I hope he doesn’t get the golden handshake)
Gavin seems to think that NASA actually does administer air and space and is above it all.
Didn’t NASA use to spend their money on space research and getting American astronauts into space ? Now they have to hitch a ride on a 1960s Russian space taxi to get there while the bucks get spent on Gavin’s folly .
I have nothing against the Soyuz launch system (the only one and one of the safest anywhere) but paying 60 million a shot irks me as well
As one who was born in 1958, & witnessed all the efforts of NASA, the successes, & the tragic failures, getting to the moon first & beating the Soviets, it saddens me deeply that this once wonderful & inspiring organisation, has fallen & plumetted the depths of arrogance! Whenever I need a lift, I watch Apollo 13!
NASA has all the talent and hardware they need to get back into space in a big way. What NASA needs is a leader with vision, not a bureaucrat, who never looks up.
NASA could do twice as much at the same cost with a good leader who actually sees the Big Picture. There are people out there with the qualifications. The problem is getting the right person in the right job at the right time. Kind of like putting Trump in Office.
We have the right person in the White House. Now, we need to get the right person to lead NASA and the human race into deeper space.
As an employee of Rocketdyne and JPL in the 50s and 60s (and an avid SF fan) “getting to the moon first & beating the Soviets” always struck me as a reprise of the effort of Lief Ericson, or the Chinese Armada. The Earth is still awaiting its Space Columbus, to make a lasting contribution to extraterrestrial expansion.
Sounds like an invitation for the new administration to take a closer look at the “things (that) generally go on” there.
Absolutely. Trump start a process to make the inner workings of GISS open. I suspect GISS is very politicized.
FLASHBACK: NASA’s “priorities” under President Obama:
. . .”President Obama told NASA administrator Charles Bolden that his highest priority should be “to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science…”
Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/07/nasas_muslim_outreach_106214.html#ixzz4QFGnQmID
The closer you look at Obama the more difficult it is to not reach the conclusion that he is indeed some kind of deep undercover mole attempting to bring down the US. Never been one for conspiracies but can that statement about NASA’s highest priority really leave any serious doubt?
+1000
Obama was out to implement Saul Alinsky’s theory on how to destroy the middle classes. By overwhelming the welfare system.
I didn’t believe what I read. But NASA admin told that.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/7875584/Barack-Obama-Nasa-must-try-to-make-Muslims-feel-good.html
It was clear from the start that Obama hated NASA because Americans were proud of it, so he changed its mission to things like Muslim outreach, which fundamentally transformed our pride to revulsion.
The left have done the same thing with the NFL and for the same reason, First, injecting racial and political divisions, and now having players insult America, thus repulsing former fans from the game.
I disagree. Pushing for NASA to use commercial launches wherever possible is one of the few good things Obama has done. Unfortunately, Congress ignored him, and ordered NASA to build their own rocket that will cost 10x as much to launch as the commercial options, if it ever flies.
MarkG November 17, 2016 at 7:12 am
No MarkG I like the fact that the private sector is trying to get into the near earth orbit game, but still no man -safe system. To many launch failures. The new NASA system which now in the test stage will be capable of deep space missions, Mars and possibly Jupiter. None of the private sector system are past the design stage.
While there are some capsules that could be rated man capable the launch vehicles are still to unreliable.
Only NASA has the expertise and financial resources for such enterprises. Russians are still using the original Soyuz capsules. China copied it for their program.
Also it needs to be pointed out that these private companies are funded by the US government, which amounts to a duplication of effort which we can not afford at this time. Sometime it just has to be accepted, there are somethings that government do better and that only governments can do. Space exploration at this time is one of those.
michael
“To many launch failures.”
The shuttle killed its crew one time in sixty. It’ll be pretty hard for a private launcher to have a safety record that bad.
And SLS will do little that Falcon Heavy won’t do, except cost 10x as much and keep a lot of people employed in important Congressional districts.
MarkG November 17, 2016 at 7:29 pm
“The shuttle killed its crew one time in sixty. It’ll be pretty hard for a private launcher to have a safety record that bad.”
True we lost two shuttles. Now add in the Mercury Gemini and Apollo, also add in Soviet – Russian launchs.
Considering the private sector can not even reliable deliver lunch let alone send a manned mission up.
Lets be honest the Russians have to keep a booster ready to back stop our private sector fails. We are suppose to be pulling our weight, how many times has Ivan had to rush a shipment of borscht up to the space station because we are playing corporate welfare with are space program.
Game over, turn things back over to the folks who know what they are doing.
If you want to subsidize private section okay, lets see if they at least get delivering lunch down pat. But stop paying Ivan ro back stop them.
Or did you think Putin did it for free.
michael
Oh I also know about White he and the other two were childhood heroes
“the climate is changing and you can try to deny it”
When has any sceptic denied that the climate has changed, will change, changes? He’s so full of sh1t his eyes are brown.
Careful!
Brown-eyed people may take offence.
He will be on the top of the list of the guys DT will kick in the ass…
schmidt, not my head of NASA
jono1066,
+10
I met Gavin at a conference back in 2008 or so, and we discussed (sort of) the climate of Alaska. I had just finished a report which showed that there was NO global warming trend up there, looking at the entire period of record data (since the 1899 gold rush). His first words were “cherry picking”, which apparently is his first and only response to anything that shows he’s wrong.
So use of all the data for the whole period of record is cherry picking, in Gavinworld.
Such an arrogant puffball.
Now as a “civil servant” he is warning his new boss.
Aren’t civil service jobs to serve the country, not the servant?
Get rid of him.
Gavin is a civil serpent.
Chimp — civil serpent — got to like it!! — Eugene WR Gallun
I like that one Chimp!
Nothing civil about him.
Mark,
You’re right!
A Silly Serpent.
+1776
Problem is, if you replace him with a skeptic, they’ll say the data is being falsified. So they need someone impartial. Hmm, but if you’re not a believer, than you’re a skeptic.
There ain’t no winning this one!!
Not a problem for a skeptic.
You publish the raw data.
Then methods and assumptions used to make any adjustments.
Then you publish the result and ask for everyone to find any faults/holes/bad assumptions
I believe they call this new fangled idea the “scientific method” or some such.
Your concern about tantrums is noted. Thank goodness Trump had no such fear. The point being is that there will be kicking and screaming no matter what is done and if one is afraid of how the left, MSM, etc will react then your just playing into their hands.
The only way to win this is to defund the department and make all of their records (emails, data, source code) public.
And they should be audited and that made public. Audit all of the big climate tax money sinks, and make their records public. Show Americans what we paid hundreds of billions of dollars for.
Why would you replace him? Just shut it down. If there’s an actual need for ‘climate science’, someone will fund it elsewhere.
Just shut the whole thing down. It does nothing but duplicate the work of other agencies anyway.
Just shut it down. Go back to building rockets.
Yes, there is! Stop worrying about what they think and just ignore them. Reduce them to nothing but a bunch of ankle biters.
If the source is the NOAA adjusted data, the what does GISS do? Make maps and graphs?
If so, we do not need 2 groups. Close GISS. Take NOAA to task for the adjustments.
Excellent summation Richard.
There’s a lot of projection in climate projection.
You’re right, Gavin, nature does have the last vote. Here is her vote.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2845972
Gavin’s nature trick … for sure!
Something unusual happening with temperatures at the DMI Daily Arctic mean temperatures north of 80N.
Way above normal for this time of year and prolonged.
Either DMI has some more serious explaining to do or something weird is happening to the climate.
I certainly hope the former.
Latter.
High DMI temperatures can only mean one thing. There is NO SUNLIGHT in those areas, so the temperatures can only be raised by the incursion of warm, water vapour laden air…now think…what happens when warm water vapour laden air arrives in a zone where the the temperature is MINUS 15˚C?
Explains why Greenland is piling on the ice…yes?
If you look at the data for previous years- DMI goes back to the 1950s- you’ll see wide fluctuations outside of the melt season. If it’s -20C, rather than -40C, it doesn’t make a difference. Sea water will still freeze.
Check out the storm system which has just moved into the central arctic via the Fram Strait. Importing warmer air?
Yes, something unusual is happening up there.
Ice formation has stalled on the Atlantic side and ice there may even be melting on the leading edge…
Unusual since when?
Unusual since last Tuesday week. I have a feeling that the climate kooks are finally about to be pinched off into their own little religious bubble world leaving the rest of us to get on with things. They will become generally more widely recognised as some weird cult substituting tipping points and thermageddon for the rapture.
Go look up the temperatures in Siberia. -40C in some places. The polar vortex has moved from the pole down to Siberia which happens often enough in November. Siberia or North America gets it instead.
… And, that polar location is the heat’s last stop before radiation to space.
You may find this of some interest. Sea ice extent on a month by month basid is not related to temperature as closely as assumed. I would be very interested in your comments. munshi-sonoma-edu. thanks.
Link.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2869646
Here is the reason why temps have been above average. Note the warm influx from the Bering Strait, and from the Atlantic side of the Arctic as well…https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=107.70,69.40,302
Over the last several months surface winds have consistenty pushed north into the Arctic. What you see right now using earthnull is a recent shift in surface winds.
“……nature has the last vote on this”.
I’m glad we’ve cleared that up, Gavin. Enjoy your retirement.
The BBC has the story as NASA warning Trump. The BBC is pushing the story as if its the whole of NASA that is warning Trump. The reality is that its a has-been desperate to save his job making up a story, but then the BBC is a climate war monger.
@sadbutmadlad
Just a comment. I know from long history that NASA does not antagonize those that hold the purse strings. A President Trump would fall into that category.
Surely the ultimate interference is funding something as without it the project would be non existent.
“Dr Schmidt said. ‘The issue would be if you were being asked to skew your results in any way….’.”
I’m holding my sides. I think I may have hurt myself.
I guess there’s no issue if you did it without being asked!
Cut the funding and they’ll all go away. If their research is legitimate I’m sure they’ll find private investors to “fight the good fight”.
that is the good test , if they really are out to ‘save the planet ‘ will they carry on after the glory and the cash is no longer there , or fade away because the planet in the end does not need saving ?
Soros et al can carry the can for a while instead of the taxpayer.
You will believe in our tripe or else!! We will not stand for your disbelief. Really???
I think we shouldn’t be too harsh with these guys. However clever you are it is hard to grapple with opposing points of view when your continued employment depends on your not grappling with it. Besides he is a mathematician, a humble modeller, and may not have the experience to evaluate real world data
Never really understood why NASA was doing climate anyway. I guess in today’s world its a way to snag funding. Looks like the Data Massager In Chief is going out fighting.
yarpos —
In the public mind NASA had a sky high reputation. Climate fraud has hid behind that reputation right from the beginner. That is why NASA was brought into doing climate. It was the perfect front for the coming intended fraud.
Eugene WR Gallun
Gavin Schmidt is use to bullying people. He may not get a chance to resign.
Oh and if he has destroyed any records he might as well cover himself with jelly cause he’s toast. No one is going to spend any effort to protect him, they will all be making their deals.
Also the progressives are still looking for a sacrificial lamb, since he is really not one of them, he can be thrown to the wolves.
Cagw was President Obama’s legacy in waiting. None of the progressives are going to tie themselves to his ego. Once the facts start bubbling out everyone will be pointing fingers saying well he (Gavin Schmidt, or spin the wheel) was the expert I never dreamed he would deceive or mislead me. Oh dear!
michael
Mike
Maybe Gavin can get Bull to represent him.
Gavin Schmidt should read up on Reagan vs Air Controllers.
stuartiynne — you pegged it exactly — Eugene WR Gallun
+1776
Ding Dong the witch is dead!
Trump doesn’t understand much about climate science but Obama had it exactly wrong for 8 years and Trump is going in the opposite direction.
The climate munchkins are celebrating their freedom.
Which old witch, the climate witch(-:
Nobody can know everything. The trick is to surround yourself with trustworthy people who know the things that you don’t.
Yes, but you must be able to understand what those trustworthy people tell you, or else you won’t be able to determine if they are trustworthy or not.
Blindly relying on others to tell you what you don’t know is… not good.
” “The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.”
Mr. Schmidt, could you explain to me, when was the climate NOT changing ?
Asked if he would resign if the Trump administration adopted the most extreme form of climate change denial,
he answered , not has long has the gravy train keeps rolling and to be frank I would have a hard time getting a job anywhere else . No I am looking to count down the clock to retirement, and walk away with fat pension and to do that after doing virtual nothing that was any use to anyone else but my own ego .
Proud to say that not a single comment I have ever made on RealClimate™ has made it through moderation. Not even in the “borehole”. Not one.
My own record in this regard is sullied by one very innocuous comment that was posted…out of maybe fifty. My notion is the moderators have to read them.
For them the debate is over, the science settled. All they are willing to do is commiserate with the choir boys on that site.
” Schmidt maintains the GISS global temperature series, arguably the most adjusted of all the global temperature products.”
This is not true. The only adjustment that GISS applies is the UHI adjustment, based on satellite observed night lights..
GHCN adjusts met station data, but GHCN is a NOAA subdivision, not GISS/NASA.
GISS simply use met station and SST data as they come, delivered by NOAA..
So you’re saying that GISS further manipulates the already manipulated ‘data’ as they come from NOAA … that’s manipulation by an order of magnitude, no wonder they can’t be trusted. So Schmukzie really is just the last crook in the congo line of ‘climate’ shysters.
Yes, GISS cool the temperature trend of the real world, to that of a fictive non-urban world..
GISS V RSS (5 year averages matched at 1981)
And you say GISS is cooling the real data .. seriously , you have to be JOKING.
roflmao..
There are so many places where the real data is cooling , but GISS and the other mal-adjusters have changed it to warming. Its a FRAUD and a FARCE.
You can ignore all those.. but it only make you look like a propaganda fool.
Here’s a shocker:
The above link makes the point that even 2.7% may be an overestimate.
The vast majority of the world is non-urban and the vast majority of the climate happens in non-urban areas. It is a problem, then, if climate data over represents urban areas. It is also a problem that vast areas of the planet have no surface stations and are represented by estimated data.
commieBob —
Only 2.7% of the earth is urban. Thankyou for calling OR on that. I was going to call him an idiot but didn’t have the data on hand to back it up.
Eugene WR Gallun
PS — Maybe OR is counting all the floating cities that cover our oceans, do you think?
O R
November 17, 2016 at 2:18 am
YHGTBSM!
GISS is so corrupt that their algorithm for UHI adjustment actually makes the “data” series hotter rather than cooler.
On Trump’s first day, he should shut down the criminal enterprises of GISS and NCAR, effective immediately. And banish all NOAA leadership drones who can’t be fired to Alaska, Siberia not being available. Better yet, the South Pole.
commieBob,
I’m glad to hear that the effect is so small globally (but still on the conservative side). However, in densely populated European countries, typically 10% of the total area is considered urban.
And yes, it is important to restrict the influence of urban met stations to urban areas only, when making large scale/global averages.
The need for near complete global station coverage is somewhat exaggerated. The global warming signal is easily picked up by very few stations.
I did this exercise i while ago. If UAH only were allowed to retrieve satellite readings from 18 points, equally spread worldwide, few people would notice the difference when it comes to global change..
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_dL1shkWewadExwM3VOaVJBUU0
“The global warming signal is easily picked up by very few stations.”
If you choose those stations carefully.
Do make sure they are urban stations, though or at least have a strong urban signal.
Actually, let’s choose the SoPol region as one of those measurements shall we.
and just to check
Here is Japan from 1950-1990 the 40 year of strong development
There was a slight step mid 1990’s then this
And just for good measure . lets choose the NoPol region this century before the current El Nino.
Yep.. warming signals everywhere.. NOT !!!
Now, I bet you will choose a point heavily influenced by either urban or El Nino effects.
Because everyone knows that urban and El Nino and AMO/PD effects are the ONLY warming in the whole satellite record.
Actually.. that’s a thing about the satellite data.. urban effects are basically gone, because, unlike GISS it isn’t HIGHLY BIASED towards urban measurements, but also measure way more than 50% of the surface.
Fabrication of data is not required like in GISS.
To AndyG55, the guy who can’t find a straw in a haystack….
Here is some “trend-dropping” from the North Pole region, 80N-90N, 1997-2016:
Plain averages for what is found in the zone, missing gridcells ignored…
Satellites
RSS 3.3 TLT 0,7 C/decade
UAH 5.6 TLT 0.7 C/decade
Surface
Gistemp loti 0.9 C C/decade
Cowtan & WAY 1.4 C/decade
CRUTEM4.5 1.5 C/decade
GHCN/CAMS 0.9 C/ decade
Reanalyses 2m temp
MERRA2 0.9 C/decade
NCEP/NCAR 1.2 C/decade
ERA-interim 1.7 C/decade
AndyG55, if you think I cherrypicked 18 points, that’s not true. Its a regular pattern and first try.
Only 0.17% of the global spatial temperature information is used:
http://postmyimage.com/img2/621_UAH_18.png
Here is the inverted day to day average change in temp.
It’s from about 60 some million surface stations.
UHI via night lights has already been demonstrated to be an invalid method.
Population data is easy to acquire. The census bureau provides population data broken out geographically.
The only reason to use night lights to estimate population is because you don’t want to produce accurate results.
Demonstrated to be invalid by whom? Have you read tendentious blog posts instead of scientific papers?
Try the original: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/2010_Hansen_ha00510u.pdf
OR,
Another pack of lies by the cartoonish clown and lying lunatic Haha Hansen? Thanks for the laugh!
Chimp, in O R’ s mental case, it is called brain-washed advocacy..
or he’s on the trough.
For those who can read: In the Hansen 2010 paper where they used unadjusted GHCN 2, the UHI adjustment brought down the CONUS long-term trend by 10%
Nowadays when GISS use adjusted GHCN 3, the nightlighs UHI adjustment has no significant effect, because the GHCN algorithm has already eliminated UHI bias.
This phenomenon is well known; a belt has little effect on your pants if you already are wearing suspenders..
” The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.”
Of course the climate is changing! What sort of scientist is this guy?
Why dosn’t he prove that it is the fault of mankind if he is so smart?
Cheers
Roger
http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com
ADFAIK DT never disputed that the clamate is changing – and will be changing until the Good Lord takes other decisions.
I hope that DT manages to get the databenders off the trough.
Tony Heller identifies the handiwork.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=tony+heller&&view=detail&mid=769E71AC154A4C9EDBBA769E71AC154A4C9EDBBA&FORM=VRDGAR
I am well aware of Tony Heller’s “handiwork”
Inconvenient facts, such as cooling of data from one of the most techical stations worldwide, does not pass moderation on his blog..
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/v3/products/stnplots/7/70089009000.gif
LOL
You do realize that is a plot of anomalies, not actual temperature data
Thanks for showing us the COOLING or ZERO trend in Antarctica.. But we already knew.
And that is now with over 400ppm ! .. oops !!
Gavin Schmidt refused to even sit at the same table as Roy Spencer when John Stossel interviewed the both of them 2 years ago. What Gavin and “climate inc.” wouldn’t and won’t admit is the uncertainty of their suppositions, which always ends with their invocation of the precautionary principle. “But, what if were right?” Yes, let’s spend 10% of GDP on non-solutions to non-existent problems so that nerds can virtue signal.
DO NOT insult nerds that way.
They universally seek truth, the name you are looking for is “Social Justice Warrior”
I thought they spent most of their time seeking dates?
MarkW,
Ain’t THAT the truth! :>)
Pulling the precautionary principle out of your ass, means you don’t have any real science to back up your argument.
I reckon he’ll be looking for a new job. Donald loves people who tell him not to do things. On ya bike, sport.
“It is expected that there will be discrepancies between models and observations. However, why these arise and what one should conclude from them are interesting and more subtle than most people realize. Indeed, such discrepancies are the classic way we learn something new.” — Gavin Schmidt on RealClimate.org https://www.ted.com/speakers/gavin_schmidt
Learned something yet, Mr Schmidt??
Isn’t it odd that the main thing which is to be learned i.e. that the models and by extension the hypotheses and assumptions they encapsulate are simply wrong is the very thing which must never even be considered. This is how we know that what we are dealing with here is completely outside of the purview of science and lies solely in the supernatural ‘Magisterium’.
Two quotes from Gavin Schmidt :
“If the models are as flawed as critics say you have to ask yourself, ‘How come they work? ‘ “
and
“It’s the whole or it’s nothing.”
It might come as a surprise to the NASA’s supremo that models don’t work, not whole, not even partially; and as you said Gavin the climate models are worth ‘nothing’.
Barn side……
OOPS.. MISSED..
Build a bigger barn !!
Or move the barn !! It was obviously built in the wrong place.
Well, that’s one straightforward way to get rid of this idiot!