Thursday, April 1, 2010

ClimateGate: Sea Ice Returns: Senate Demands NASA Flawed Data Explanation

As the true loons of global warming pretend that ClimateGate has not happened, we learn that Artic Sea ice  is "about to hit normal," for the first time since 2001, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center for this time of year. The U.S. Senate is finally demanding explanation from NASA about their roll in global warming and their flawed climate data.

There's a lot of ClimateGate news out. The following compilation comes through the amazing Climate Depot. Here are some discussions you might be interested in:

Why Climate Models Lie: Article says "climate scientists have been less than truthful" about their data. We certainly know this to be true after ClimateGate, but this is a good overview of deceptions we can attribute to faulty (inaccurate) computer data.

Senators Demand Explanation of NASA Flawed Climate Data. Two Republican Senators, John Barraso (WY) and David Vitter (LA) has written to NASA Chief Charles Bolden saying the American people deserve to know the truth about the data. They point to "corrupted data," and have asked Bolden to testify before the Senate. Read Senator Barrasso's letter to NASA:

We shouldn't make decisions affecting millions of American jobs when the data isn't credible. 
And then, there's this: NASA Data Worse than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits. How disgusting is it that our own American NASA is a fraud. It makes me sick to my stomach to even think about it. But...
NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched ClimateGate data.
Christopher Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute says of NASA's four temperature data sets,  "three out of the four...stink." Anyway we look at it, NASA employees are government employees, and it pains me to put it that way.

Whitewashing Professor Jones and CRU: Across the pond, where all the data was accumulated and supposedly "organized" by climate-fraud-once-considered-guru, Professor Phil Jones, we learn that Jones and his fraudulent allies have escaped the whole debacle with their reputations "intact." The thing to remember here is that they escaped prosecution because of a 6-month statute of limitations law.
The report makes the amazing statement that 'The scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact," making the reader wonder what such a committee would consider enough to damage a Warming scientist's reputation - nothing it would seem!
And then, 56% trust Weathercasters more than Al Gore on Global Warming.

©2007-2012copyrightMaggie M. Thornton