You may recall a major story on climate change breaking in 2015 (conveniently published just before the major climate change summit in Paris) that purported to show that the supposed “hiatus” in global warming had never really occurred and that the earth was warming far more rapidly than previously thought.
But according to a bombshell exposé from the U.K. Daily Mail, a whistleblower from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration named John Bates has publicly called foul on that influential paper, pointing out a number of inconsistencies, cut corners and purposeful exaggerations included to reach a predetermined conclusion.
Bates claimed that the paper, authored by scientist Thomas Karl, then head of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, was rushed to completion before the climate change conference and utilized “unverifiable” methods and data pertaining to sea and land temperatures that were not properly adjusted, archived or reviewed prior to publishing.
One of the most accurate methods used to determine the changes in average sea temperature is to measure it via free-floating buoys, but another less accurate method is to measure the temperature of water drawn into a ship to cool the engines, an unreliable method as the ship itself serves as a source of heat that can increase the temperature of the water enough to provide higher than normal readings.
But at least that method is more accurate than the even older method of lowering buckets from the sides of ships to gather water and measure the temp.
However, when Karl put together the data for his study, he seemingly took the less accurate data from the ships as gospel and adjusted up the more accurate buoy readings to match them, in essence fudging the numbers to make it appear as though the water temperatures were warmer than they actually were.
Karl also relied heavily upon land temperature readings that were adjusted through an experimental, bug-filled, not-yet-ready-for-prime-time program that also resulted in higher temperatures.
In a lengthy technical blog post, Bates detailed the manner in which papers such as this are supposed to be formulated and reviewed so other scientists can replicate the study and verify the results, but Karl didn’t do that.
His conclusion was that Karl had placed his “thumb on the scale” throughout the entire process in a bid to make the study reach a pre-determined conclusion — specifically that there was no “pause” in global warming and never had been, obviously a shot across the bow at those skeptical of climate change.
In other words, Karl and his accomplices at NOAA lied about climate data to the American people and world leaders at a critical time when foolish progressive “solutions” were being tossed around and agreed upon — agreement that have been largely rejected by President Donald Trump, thankfully, as they will do nothing to stop the climate from changing, but will stop our economy from growing.
Please share this on Facebook and Twitter to help spread the word about a scientist at NOAA deliberately using bad data in a study of climate change.