Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

NASA revises US temperatures downward

DixieFlatline

By DixieFlatline
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

DixieFlatline

DixieFlatline

Posted
Posted

I did a search and didn't find this. Apparently there was a bug found in NASA's software and once fixed moved the US temperatures down a bit. 1998 was marked as the hottest year in a 1000 years, but is now behind 1934. Other recent years have fallen out of the top 10.

I did some searching around to see if I could get both sides of the story, but most of what I find is people saying this debunks all global warming. This page seemed to be more balanced. But this subject isn't my forte, so I'm sure there are some on here who might have more insight.

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/08/09/bombshell-nasa-revises-recent-us-temperatures-downward-after-y2k-bug-fix/

......Here are the new numbers dating back to 1880. As you can see, there’s still a trend towards warming since the mid 1970s or so; the cooling period before that was, supposedly, the product of industrial sulphate pollutants inadvertently reflecting sunlight in the atmosphere, which cooled the planet. The sulphates have been reduced now and so, the theory goes, the warming has begun again. You’ll find the money data in table form here: 1998, which was once alleged to have been the hottest year in a millennium, is now the second hottest behind … 1934. 2001 used to be the eighth-hottest year on record but now, after the data was recalculated, it’s slipped out of the top ten, replaced by … 1939. To quote Coyote Blog:

All of these necessary revisions to surface temperatures will likely not make warming trends go away completely. What it may do is bring the warming down to match the much lower satellite measured warming numbers we have, and will make current warming look more like past natural warming trends (e.g. early in this century) rather than a catastrophe created by man. In my global warming book, I argue that future man-made warming probably will exist, but will be more like a half to one degree over the coming decades than the media-hyped numbers that are ten times higher.

Whether that’s true or not, I obviously have no idea. Expect some furious pushback about it from the Goracle’s acolytes very, very soon.

Exit question: Not counting Fox News, how much media attention do you suppose will be paid to this story?...

see link for full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alexey

alexey

Posted
Posted

There is a reason you cannot find a respectable source talking about this ;)

Fox's Angle misrepresented NASA correction to claim 1934 is now "hottest year" on record

http://mediamatters.org/items/200708120001?f=h_latest

Summary: On Special Report, Jim Angle reported that NASA was forced "to admit it was wrong when it said that 1998 was the hottest year on record" and that NASA "now says 1934 was the hottest year, followed by 1998, then 1921." But Angle did not inform viewers that NASA's revision affected annual temperature rankings for the United States only; it had no effect on the annual global temperature rankings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vinnick

Vinnick

Posted
Posted
hmm I thought this one was originally reported by the "Thoughtful American"

No, the "Thoughtful American" was bought by Newscorp and has been instructed by the admin to start running this picture on ever issue, front page, above the fold.

orig.jpg with the headline 'Mother Nature Wants To Kill You!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixieFlatline

DixieFlatline

Posted
  • Author
Posted
There is a reason you cannot find a respectable source talking about this ;)

Fox's Angle misrepresented NASA correction to claim 1934 is now "hottest year" on record

http://mediamatters.org/items/200708120001?f=h_latest

Actually, I knew it wasn't global, but when NASA first reported 1998 was the hottest year on record were they saying it was global or just for the US? If it was the latter, then this report isn't invalid. Whether it means anything to the global debate is something different of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alexey

alexey

Posted
Posted
Actually, I knew it wasn't global, but when NASA first reported 1998 was the hottest year on record were they saying it was global or just for the US? If it was the latter, then this report isn't invalid. Whether it means anything to the global debate is something different of course.

It's just interesting how many statements like these I had to go through(from here http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/columnists/story.html?id=61b0590f-c5e6-4772-8cd1-2fefe0905363):

That's been a common refrain for environmentalists, too, and one of the centrepieces of global warming hysteria

...

McIntyre has become the bane of many warmers' religious-like belief in climate catastrophe.

...

In other words, there is no discernible trend, no obvious warming of late.

...

Imagine if the shoe were on the other foot. Imagine the shrieking of the warmers if we had previously thought that hot years were scattered throughout the past 130 years, but after a correction the warmest years could be seen to be concentrated in the past decade.

They would insist the revised data proved their case. They would blitz every news organization and talk show. They would demand to be allowed to indoctrinate school children on the evils of cars and factories.

before finding one like this (from here http://mediamatters.org/items/200708120001?f=h_latest):

Angle further stated that "five of the hottest 10 years on record occurred before World War II." In fact, this statement is true only for temperatures in the United States; according to NASA, all 10 of the warmest years globally in the instrumental record have occurred after 1989.

btw Global Warming info is a great tool to calibrate bull detectors. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chomerics

chomerics

Posted
Posted

btw Global Warming info is a great tool to calibrate bull detectors. ;)

QFT. . .

I find it hilarious how they pull a data set off a NASA website, completely ignore what the facts are and misrepresent them to obfuscate the waters.

There should be a little flag that goes off when you see something like this happen. . .in other words, if the data backed their case, why lie about it? it is yet again, another chink in the armor or the GW naysayers and it exposes them as frauds for what, the 1,000th time?

Thanks for showing this tidbit from a conservative website Dixie, it shows a lot of people what the actual truth is, and who is perverting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Punani

Johnny Punani

Posted
Posted
QFT. . .

I find it hilarious how they pull a data set off a NASA website, completely ignore what the facts are and misrepresent them to obfuscate the waters.

There should be a little flag that goes off when you see something like this happen. . .in other words, if the data backed their case, why lie about it? it is yet again, another chink in the armor or the GW naysayers and it exposes them as frauds for what, the 1,000th time?

Thanks for showing this tidbit from a conservative website Dixie, it shows a lot of people what the actual truth is, and who is perverting it.

Well Mike, if you could think outside the box for one second you might be able to understand the issue is the exaggeration and misrepresentation of that data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Punani

Johnny Punani

Posted
Posted
It's just interesting how many statements like these I had to go through(from here http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/columnists/story.html?id=61b0590f-c5e6-4772-8cd1-2fefe0905363):

before finding one like this (from here http://mediamatters.org/items/200708120001?f=h_latest):

btw Global Warming info is a great tool to calibrate bull detectors. ;)

Speaking of BS, you forgot to mention this little part...

But available surface temperature readings cover only half the planet even today. Before the Second World War, they covered less than a quarter. So U.S. readings for a period that goes as far back as 1880 are among the most reliable there are.

Oops...

Considering the US has a hugely disporportional amount of surface sites compared to the rest of the planet, that correction is going to have an effect on the whole planet, not just the US. But hey, don't let me stop you from sipping the kool-aid and patting yourself on the back for thinking you proved something.

fig1.gif

GHCN-Monthly Coverage Map for Mean Temps

And it's not according to NASA either. The GHCN (the temp data you posted) is not run by NASA. It is a part of the NCDC (National Climatic Data Center).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alexey

alexey

Posted
Posted
Considering the US has a hugely disporportional amount of surface sites compared to the rest of the planet, that correction is going to have an effect on the whole planet, not just the US. But hey, don't let me stop you from sipping the kool-aid and patting yourself on the back for thinking you proved something.

Revised numbers still have 10 of the warmest years globally having occurred after 1989.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
portisizzle

portisizzle

Posted
Posted

It continues to amaze me how many posters on this website act like they WANT global warming to be a fact. As if it furthers some agenda or validates some part of their psyche that is dependant upon their Marxist view of a social utopia.

How about you global warming mongers step back from the politics for a minute and recognize what is going on here. The scientific hypothesis that says global warming is real and is caused by humans is being logically and systematically beat to the ground.

Let science win and politics lose. You socialists need to get another platform that does not require facts and logic.......maybe universal healthcare is what the doctor ordered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jbooma

jbooma

Posted
Posted

Let science win and politics lose.

Agree 100%

We will never know the truth until it is not a political issues, this is a science issue so let them be ones to tell us what is happening.

I love how people jump to conclusions because the last couple of days the temps have been close or above 100, yet they forget to add it still has been one of the coolest summers that i can remember in a long time. I have no AC in my car (lazy to get it fixed) I have only been hurting a couple of days this year. In the past I would need the AC almost all summer :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Corcaigh

Corcaigh

Posted
Posted
It continues to amaze me how many posters on this website act like they WANT global warming to be a fact. As if it furthers some agenda or validates some part of their psyche that is dependant upon their Marxist view of a social utopia.

How about you global warming mongers step back from the politics for a minute and recognize what is going on here. The scientific hypothesis that says global warming is real and is caused by humans is being logically and systematically beat to the ground.

Let science win and politics lose. You socialists need to get another platform that does not require facts and logic.......maybe universal healthcare is what the doctor ordered?

An honest look at the situation would show scientists arguing that global warming is real, and it is the politicians here in the US who have argued against it.

Separate global warming from a debate on its cause(s). The wealth of data does seem to show that the Earth is getting warmer. Do you dispute this?

Once that question is answered it's a matter of what is the impact and what, if anything we can do about it. I agree there is a lot of uncertainty on how severe the changes will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cdowwe

Cdowwe

Posted
Posted
Agree 100%

We will never know the truth until it is not a political issues, this is a science issue so let them be ones to tell us what is happening.

I love how people jump to conclusions because the last couple of days the temps have been close or above 100, yet they forget to add it still has been one of the coolest summers that i can remember in a long time. I have no AC in my car (lazy to get it fixed) I have only been hurting a couple of days this year. In the past I would need the AC almost all summer :)

But Leo said it wasn't political at the Oscars?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted

On a somewhat related note, not that I'm into this topic.

UK mathematician alleges IPCC Urban Heat Island fraud

The allegations by British mathematician Douglas J Keenan concern the following 2 papers co-authored by Wei-Chyung Wang, a professor at the University at Albany, State University of New York:

The report concludes:

First, there has been a marked lack of integrity in some important work on global warming that is relied upon by the IPCC. Second, the insignificance of urbanization effects on temperature measurements has not been established as reliably as the IPCC assessment report assumes.

Visit the link for the actual report

http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/002214.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
portisizzle

portisizzle

Posted
Posted

http://www.grassrootinstitute.org/GrassrootPerspective/PhysicsTrumps.shtml

Studiously hidden from public view are some extraordinary findings in physics which are providing new understanding of our planetary history, as well as providing a much more plausible scientific understanding of global warming. Regrettably, the current hysteria about global warming is based much more on fear, political agendas, and computer models that don’t agree with each other or the climate, rather than hard-nosed evidence and science.

The climate forces which have led to the estimated 0.6C degree temperature increase over the past 100 years or more (according to the International Panel on Climate Change) have been assumed to be man-made CO2 emissions from advanced nations including the U.S. We know this can’t be true for several reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
haawhat

haawhat

Posted
Posted
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joe Sick

Joe Sick

Posted
Posted
Agree 100%

We will never know the truth until it is not a political issues, this is a science issue so let them be ones to tell us what is happening.

I love how people jump to conclusions because the last couple of days the temps have been close or above 100, yet they forget to add it still has been one of the coolest summers that i can remember in a long time. I have no AC in my car (lazy to get it fixed) I have only been hurting a couple of days this year. In the past I would need the AC almost all summer :)

How are we supposed to get past this as a "political issue" if one side doesn't always believe in science? How can you have a debate with people who actually believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old?

Couple that with the Republican belief that businesses can do no wrong and I don't ever seeing people in total agreement over the issue. There will still be that hardcore percentage (like Bush's current supporters) who will deny the facts until the end.

I'm sure if you keep telling people your anecdote about A/C in your car then we will reach consensus on this topic in no time. :doh:

I also don't understand why people claim that global warmers believers (or realists, as I call them) are rooting for global warming to happen. Do believers want to ride a freaking bus, use those crappy lightbulbs or ask for cleaner energy sources? No.

Does it ever occur to deniers that maybe, just maybe, people who believe in global warming are just trying to do what is right for the Earth and for humanity? No, there must be some type of socialist/marxist/whatever plot behind it. How are you supposed to reason with people like this? Answer: you don't. You relegate these nutroots to the fringes of society and educated thought and do what the majority knows is the right thing. You accept the facts as they come and try your best to clean up the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xameil

Xameil

Posted
Posted
Agree 100%

We will never know the truth until it is not a political issues, this is a science issue so let them be ones to tell us what is happening.

I love how people jump to conclusions because the last couple of days the temps have been close or above 100, yet they forget to add it still has been one of the coolest summers that i can remember in a long time. I have no AC in my car (lazy to get it fixed) I have only been hurting a couple of days this year. In the past I would need the AC almost all summer :)

Only problem with this, is there is no "pure" science anymore. It has all been tainted by politics and peoples agendas. If the Scientist wants the money, he/she has to come up with what the supplier wants otherwise no money for the next project. Sad state of affairs really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
portisizzle

portisizzle

Posted
Posted

Frankly I am a bit tired of the same old excuses given by global warming mongers. As if pro global warming by humans scientists aren't being shown with equal amounts of bias. This thread proves to me how bad science has been politicized. Pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vinnick

Vinnick

Posted
Posted

I'm telling you. Liberal Bloggers and Unwed Mothers will be the end of everything.

All you donkey's who say "Why does it hurt to be more environmentally friendly?", can suck it.

Mother Nature doesn't give a break when she's attacking us with Floods and Plague and Poison Monkey's!

Surely, you agree we can do without her!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...