Meteorologist suggests NOAA manipulates data to support climate claims and political goals
Climate Depot
December 5, 2009
Below is a guest essay by Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo, the first Director of Meteorology at The Weather Channel and former chairman of the American Meteorological Society’s (AMS) Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting. D’Aleo publishes www.IceCap.US
NOAA chose to remove satellite input into their global ocean estimation. | |
D’Aleo comments on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) claim that global sea-surface temperatures (SST’s) were recently the hottest since 1880.
D’Aleo comments on NOAA’s claim of ‘record’ sea surface temps: To enable them to make the case the oceans are warming, NOAA chose to remove satellite input into their global ocean estimation and not make any attempt to operationally use NASA’s Argo data in the process. This resulted in a jump of 0.2C or more and ‘a new ocean warmth record’ in July. ARGO tells us this is another example of NOAA’s inexplicable decision to corrupt data to support political agendas.
D’Aleo on NOAA global temperature claims: What can I say. Between the station dropout (80% of the world’s stations, mostly rural), removal in US or absence globally of any UHI (Urban Heat Island) adjustment, bad siting for 90% of the climate stations and the recent removal of satellite input into the ocean temperature assessments, NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) has ensured that each and every month and season will rank and ‘validate’ their piece of excrement called CCSPand support the government’s argument for Cap-and-Tax, carbon regulations and global actions at Copenhagen.
This is not an indictment of the hard-working and honest rank-and-file NOAA employees at the local offices and even behind the scenes at NCDC. It is the fault of higher ups and managers whose jobs and reputations rely on perpetrating the global warming hoax long enough so the governments can have their way to control virtually every aspect of our lives and keep the funding at the highest possible level for those who have abused the science to their benefit. See also here, here and here.