GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISTS CLAIM WEATHER SATELLITES CAN’T BE TRUSTED
Article first appeared at thedailysheeple.com by Joshua Krause
Thedailysheeple -Global warming believers always say that climate skeptics are guilty of wishful thinking, and that they’re letting politics and emotions get in the way of indisputable scientific truths. Time and again they say that climate skeptics are cherry picking the data, and are falling for their own confirmation biases. They may be right. Many of the people who believe in man-made global warming are scientists, and scientists are really good at spotting those sorts of things. But they’re also human, so they’re just as likely to be guilty of cherry picking and confirmation bias as anyone else.
Never was this more true, than when NOAA announced earlier this year that the global warming “pause” didn’t happen. For the past 19 years give or take, the official data has shown very little global warming, which as you might expect has perturbed climate scientists ever since.
Then NOAA scientists conducted a study that claimed the methods used to measure ocean temperature in the past were inaccurate, and after compensating the data to reflect newer measuring techniques, they found that the world had been warming this whole time. The global warming pause was just a myth used by climate deniers to fool the public, and themselves.
Of course, this study completely ignored the most comprehensive ocean temperature testing system known as the Argo Array, and the biggest adjustments to the data are conveniently made for 1998-present day time period. So how did they really come to this new conclusion? We don’t know. Many of the adjustments that were made are left unexplained, and when a Congressman asked them to hand over the data and internal memos that were connected to the study,NOAA flat-out refused to do so. If that’s not suspicious, then I don’t know what is.
The study also completely ignored satellite derived temperature readings, which are widely regarded as the most accurate readings for finding global temperatures. The satellite data also confirms the global warming pause.
So what is a global warming believer to do when the data doesn’t match the theories and models? Find a way to discredit the source of the data of course.
The climate alarmists have come up with a brilliant new excuse to explain why there has been no “global warming” for nearly 19 years.
Turns out the satellite data is lying.
And to prove it they’ve come up with a glossy new video starring such entirely trustworthy and not at all biased climate experts as Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann , Kevin “Travesty” Trenberth and Ben Santer. (All of these paragons of scientific rectitude feature heavily in the Climategate emails)
The video is well produced and cleverly constructed – designed to look measured and reasonable rather than yet another shoddy hit job in the ongoing climate wars.
Sundry “experts”, adopting a tone of “more in sorrow than anger” gently express their reservations about the reliability of the satellite data which, right up until the release of this video, has generally been accepted as the most accurate gauge of global temperatures.
Here’s the video in question, which was released last week. Let’s play devil’s advocate for a moment, and assume that these scientists are correct, and that our satellites have failed to give us an accurate portrayal of the Earth’s temperature. What exactly are we left with? Ocean readings apparently weren’t accurate before, but now they are? Satellites were considered the most accurate tool for determining the Earth’s temperature for several decades, but suddenly now they’re not? What about land based weather stations? Oh yeah, those temperatures are riddled with inaccuracies and biasesas well.
So what we’re really left with is nothing at all. Doubt has been cast on all of the equipment we use to measure temperature, as well as the people who are collecting data from that equipment. It’s impossible to have any idea about what our planet is up to, much less what is causing it. Somehow, this “settled science” doesn’t sound so settled anymore, does it?