Captain Nemo wrote on Dec 12^th, 2018 at 5:01pm:



yes and where there are no measurements - they estimate.

BTW - did you know that they actually changed the Argo buoy data?

It seems that the Argo buoys were showing cooling. The bloke in charge thought that can't be right, so they adjusted the algorithm.

You would think that they would have actually calibrated the buoys before deployment.

lee wrote on Dec 12^th, 2018 at 6:25pm:


I recon they're desperate to start that trillion dollar carbon derivatives market and financially enslave the whole world, before it cools down too much and they're left holding their dicks in the wind.

Ajax wrote on Dec 12^th, 2018 at 6:44pm:



Unemployment and public shaming.

Ajax wrote on Dec 12^th, 2018 at 6:44pm:

This is devastating, NASA scientists are on the take!
Take them all out the back, line them up and shoot them.

On the other hand at least there is nothing in the claims of human induced global warming because they are all bullshitting.

lee wrote on Dec 12^th, 2018 at 6:25pm:


Hmm, your story checks out.

"NASA scientist, Josh Willis, was so concerned that his data, showing ocean cooling, did not fit the official consensus on climate change that he searched for a solution. 

"Eventually he “applied a correction” so the historical ocean temperature record showed a relatively steady increase in line with the climate models."

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 13^th, 2018 at 10:48am:


The original -

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/OceanCooling

Captain Nemo wrote on Dec 13^th, 2018 at 11:07am:


Which of course does not say it is good.

Captain Nemo wrote on Dec 13^th, 2018 at 11:07am:



Actually HadCRUt4 is alleged to be the best. And even that is not saying it is good.

"In this research report, the most important surface data adjustment issues are identified and past changes in the previously reported historical data are quantified. It was found that each new version of GAST has nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history. And, it was nearly always accomplished by
systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature pattern. This was true for all three entities providing GAST data measurement, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU. "

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062...

"For station data to be useful for such studies, it is essential that the time series of observations are consistent, and that any non-climatic temperature jumps, introduced by station moves or equipment updates, are eliminated. In adjusted data the effect of such non-climatic influences is eliminated whenever possible. Originally, only documented cases were adjusted, however the current procedure used by NOAA/NCEI applies an automated system that uses systematic comparisons with neighboring stations to deal with undocumented instances of artificial changes."

So how do they know there were actual changes? Neighbouring stations don't necessarily reflect what is happening elsewhere. Eg. A thunderstorm is a local event. It causes cooling. How would a neighbouring station know that?

Captain Nemo wrote on Dec 13^th, 2018 at 2:04pm:


Jesus, that guy's a fair dinkum nutter.