XPost: alt.home.repair, alt.global-warming, rec.food.cooking   
   XPost: fl.politics, uk.environment   
   From: dtl@invalid.net   
      
   a425couple wrote:   
   > On 11/12/24 08:24, De-Trois-Leaning wrote:   
   >> Ed P wrote:   
   >>> I know you have some background in the sciences, have you ever looked at   
   >>   
   >> THIS:   
   >>   
   >> https://dailysceptic.org/2024/11/05/science-shock-u-k-met-office-is-   
   >> inventing-temperature-data-from-100-non-existent-stations/   
   >>   
   >> Shocking evidence has emerged that points to the U.K. Met Office   
   >> inventing temperature data from over 100 non-existent weather   
   >> stations. The explosive allegations have been made by citizen   
   >> journalist Ray Sanders and sent to the new Labour Science Minister   
   >> Peter Kyle MP. Following a number of Freedom of Information requests   
   >> to the Met Office and diligent field work visiting individuals   
   >> stations, Sanders has discovered that 103 stations out of 302 sites   
   >> supplying temperature averages do not exist. “How would any reasonable   
   >> observer know that the data was not real and simply ‘made up’ by a   
   >> Government agency,” asks Sanders. He calls for an “open declaration”   
   >> of likely inaccuracy of existing published data, “to avoid other   
   >> institutions and researchers using unreliable data and reaching   
   >> erroneous conclusions”.   
   >   
   > WOW!  Fabricating evidence?!!   
      
   And that is with precedent - big time:   
      
   https://science.house.gov/2017/2/exposed-how-world-leaders-were-   
   uped-investing-billions-over-manipulated-global   
      
   A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s   
   National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own   
   rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but   
   flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world   
   leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate   
   conference in Paris in 2015.   
      
   The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in   
   the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never   
   existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than   
   scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare,   
   it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by   
   politicians and policy makers.   
      
   But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an   
   impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence   
   that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.   
      
   It was never subjected to NOAA’s rigorous internal evaluation process –   
   which Dr Bates devised.   
      
   His vehement objections to the publication of the faulty data were   
   overridden by his NOAA superiors in what he describes as a ‘blatant   
   attempt to intensify the impact’ of what became known as the Pausebuster   
   paper.   
      
   His disclosures are likely to stiffen President Trump’s determination to   
   enact his pledges to reverse his predecessor’s ‘green’ policies, and to   
   withdraw from the Paris deal – so triggering an intense political row.   
      
   In an exclusive interview, Dr Bates accused the lead author of the   
   paper, Thomas Karl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section   
   that produces climate data – the National Centers for Environmental   
   Information (NCEI) – of ‘insisting on decisions and scientific choices   
   that maximised warming and minimised documentation… in an effort to   
   discredit the notion of a global warming pause, rushed so that he could   
   time publication to influence national and international deliberations   
   on climate policy’.   
      
   Dr. Bates was one of two Principal Scientists at NCEI, based in   
   Asheville, North Carolina.   
      
   A blatant attempt to intensify paper's impact   
      
   Official delegations from America, Britain and the EU were strongly   
   influenced by the flawed NOAA study as they hammered out the Paris   
   Agreement – and committed advanced nations to sweeping reductions in   
   their use of fossil fuel and to spending £80 billion every year on new,   
   climate-related aid projects.   
      
   The scandal has disturbing echoes of the ‘Climategate’ affair which   
   broke shortly before the UN climate summit in 2009, when the leak of   
   thousands of emails between climate scientists suggested they had   
   manipulated and hidden data. Some were British experts at the   
   influential Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.   
      
   NOAA’s 2015 ‘Pausebuster’ paper was based on two new temperature sets of   
   data – one containing measurements of temperatures at the planet’s   
   surface on land, the other at the surface of the seas.   
      
   Both datasets were flawed. This newspaper has learnt that NOAA has now   
   decided that the sea dataset will have to be replaced and substantially   
   revised just 18 months after it was issued, because it used unreliable   
   methods which overstated the speed of warming. The revised data will   
   show both lower temperatures and a slower rate in the recent warming trend.   
      
   The land temperature dataset used by the study was afflicted by   
   devastating bugs in its software that rendered its findings ‘unstable’.   
      
   The paper relied on a preliminary, ‘alpha’ version of the data which was   
   never approved or verified.   
      
   A final, approved version has still not been issued. None of the data on   
   which the paper was based was properly ‘archived’ – a mandatory   
   requirement meant to ensure that raw data and the software used to   
   process it is accessible to other scientists, so they can verify NOAA   
   results.   
      
   Dr Bates retired from NOAA at the end of last year after a 40-year   
   career in meteorology and climate science. As recently as 2014, the   
   Obama administration awarded him a special gold medal for his work in   
   setting new, supposedly binding standards ‘to produce and preserve   
   climate data records’.   
      
   Yet when it came to the paper timed to influence the Paris conference,   
   Dr Bates said, these standards were flagrantly ignored.   
      
   The paper was published in June 2015 by the journal Science. Entitled   
   ‘Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming   
   hiatus’, the document said the widely reported ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’   
   was   
   a myth.   
      
   Less than two years earlier, a blockbuster report from the UN   
   Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which drew on the work   
   of hundreds of scientists around the world, had found ‘a much smaller   
   increasing trend over the past 15 years 1998-2012 than over the past 30   
   to 60 years’. Explaining the pause became a key issue for climate   
   science. It was seized on by global warming sceptics, because the level   
   of CO2 in the atmosphere had continued to rise.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)