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.

Phil Jones Admits 60 Years of Warming from Urban Influences

Dr. Phil Jones, the head perpetrator in the ClimateGate scandal made his first public appearance since we learned that he had manipulated climate change data and he admitted that 40 percent of his warming data from the last 60 years was due to urban influences. If he admits to 40 percent, the reality is the percentage is probably much higher.

Phil Jones

The fragile and contentious house of climate change came tumbling down when citizens began to exercise their "right to know" on both sides of the Atlantic through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Jones refused to comply, directed those under him to ignore the requests, while at the same time he directed them to change some data, and eventually, his emails were hacked and placed on line.

Things have not been good for the disgraced Jones lately, who admitted yet another astonishing piece information when asked how often scientists asked to see his "raw data, methodology and computer codes." He replied "NEVER." Remarkable when you realize that climate change is about funding projects from the pockets of taxpayers, directly to the Al Gores and Phil Joneses of the world community.

Appearing before the U.K.'s Science and Technology Committee, onlookers say Jones' hands were trembling and he was pale. Appropriate for a man who used broad strokes to impose daunting climate change technology not only on his country, but on all the industrialized world.

Today, the UK Guardian said Jones admitted that "radically different finding" in his research, which Jones said showed "a slightly different conclusion" proved that urban influences played a big part in global warming:

But for the first time he did concede publicly that when he tried to repeat the 1990 study in 2008, he came up with radically different findings. Or, as he put it, "a slightly different conclusion". Fully 40% of warming there in the past 60 years was due to urban influences. "It's something we need to consider," he said.

Jones said he ignored the FOIA's because among climate scientists, it was not "standard practice" to release information and the data was "publicly available from American websites.

Watts Up With That says huh uh. Jones' claim that it was "not standard practice" to release data is not truthful, and prints documents proving Jones shared information when the requester was known not to be a skeptic, and kept information from those who were.

The Institute of Physics lashed out against Jones in the hearing, and had already submitted a 13-paragraph document to Parliament concerning the impropriety of Jones' actions. The following are some telling snippets of that document:

1) unless the disclosed e-mails are proved to be forgeries or adaptations, worrying implications arise for the integrity of scientific research in this field and for the credibility of the scientific method as practised in this context.

2) The CRU e-mails as published on the internet provide prima facie evidence of determined and co-ordinated refusals to comply with honourable scientific traditions and freedom of information law. 

4) Published reconstructions may represent only a part of the raw data available and may be sensitive to the choices made and the statistical techniques used. Different choices, omissions or statistical processes may lead to different conclusions. This possibility was evidently the reason behind some of the (rejected) requests for further information.

5) The e-mails reveal doubts as to the reliability of some of the reconstructions and raise questions as to the way in which they have been represented; for example, the apparent suppression, in graphics widely used by the IPCC, of proxy results for recent decades that do not agree with contemporary instrumental temperature measurements. 

6) There is also reason for concern at the intolerance to challenge displayed in the e-mails. This impedes the process of scientific 'self correction', which is vital to the integrity of the scientific process...

7) ...The e-mails illustrate the possibility of networks of like-minded researchers effectively excluding newcomers. Requiring data to be electronically accessible to all, at the time of publication, would remove this possibility.

10) ...most of the e-mails were exchanged with researchers in a number of other leading institutions involved in the formulation of the IPCC's conclusions on climate change. In so far as those scientists were complicit in the alleged scientific malpractices, there is need for a wider inquiry into the integrity of the scientific process in this field.

Dr. Phil Jones was forced to step down as the head of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit for at least the duration of the investigation.

Related and Background:

Al Gore ClimateGate: Mistakes - Not Just a Few

January 2010 Hottest January on Record! Hottest Evah!

Ocean Rise; Sea Levels Rise Never Began: Scientists Withdraw Claims of Sea Levels Rising

ClimateGate Phil Jones: No Global Warming Since 1995 Says Jones

ClimateGate 2008: Media Assisted Polar Bear Hysteria: Polar Bears Vanishing? Uh, no. And the Senate Knows it

Hottest Decade in History? Maybe Not - Earth-Based Climate Stations Manipulated

*****Phil Jones Hides Data from 42 Weather Stations

Inhofe Family Igloo Mocks Al Gore's Global Warming

Paul Dennis ClimateGate EMail Leaker? Were the Emails really hacked?

ABC Questions Climate Forecasts: Can Climate Science be Trusted?

ClimateGate: Global Warming Bullies 

ClimateGate Scientist Phil Jones Not Prosecuted: UAE Asks for Jones Resignation  

Murari Lal Glacier Scientist: Unverified Data Used for Political Pressure

Copenhagen Junket Cost Millions - Millions for Failure: Inhofe on Copenhagen Caviar

Copenhagen Hopenhagen Nopenhagen? Rajendra Pachauri Apocalypse Now

EPA Endangerment Finding: Obama's Carbon Dioxide Pollutant: Obama TopDown Control

Andrew Watson Marc Morano: Andrew Watson Calls Marc Morano A-Hole

Chris Horner Sues NASA? NASA Hidden Data: ClimateGate NASA FOIA

Network Media Silent on ClimateGate: Day 14 and Counting

Hide the Decline Graph: ClimateGate Hide the Decline "Trick": Jones and Mann Hide the Decline

Rajendra Pachauri Dismisses Top Warming Scientists: Jim Inhofe ClimateGate Investigation

ClimateGate Phil Jones Steps Down

Philip Jones ClimateGate: Phil Jones Global Chief Liar and Cheat 

CRU Souce Code Decoded: Marc Sheppard Finds the Fudge Factor 

ClimateGate: Global Warming Bullies 

ClimateGate Phil Jones Steps Aside: CRU Climategate Chief Steps Down

Jim Inhofe ClimateGate Investigation: Rajendra Pachauri Dismisses Top Warming Scientists

Scientists may sue Gore over "Warming and Change" Fraud

Jaws Dropped as Solar Scientist, Archibald, Praised C02

EPA Silences, Suppresses Opposition: EPA Lies

The EU's Carbon Trade: A Scheme and a Failure

The Fight for Human-made Global Warming

ClimateGate Phil Jones: No Global Warming Since 1995 Says Jones

In a report today out of the UK, Professor Phil Jones, the disgraced head of the world's climate data collection organization, says there has been no global warming since 1995.

 

Phil Jones

Jones, formerly the head of the UK's East Anglia Climate Unit, stepped down from his position recently, as an investigation into ClimateGate goes forward, but Jones did a Q and A with the BBC, and it is astonishing:

He is directly asked if there has been statistically-significant global warming from 1995 to present, and from January 2002 to present. His answer was no.

He is asked if he agrees that "natural influences could have contributed significantly to the global warming" from 1975-1998, which the ClimateGate bullies (Jones' cohorts in Climate Change) said was happening due to man-made causes.

Unbelievably, he says "this area is slightly outside my area of expertise," but goes on to talk about influences from volcanoes and the Sun: two volcanoes - one in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991, and he states that sun activity is essentially flat over this period. So no, he does not believe natural influences warmed anything. Later in the questioning, he says he firmly believes that man causes warming (the warming that has not happened).

About the "hockey stick graph," well those records are missing, and you know, he cops to having egregious organizational skills. In the Q and A below, the words "hockey stick" are not mentioned, but the famous "hide the decline" is, and that is all a misunderstanding after his emails were taken out of context.

Here is a snyopsis of the BBC exchange:

How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?

I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

When asked about the ClimateGate emails, he insists they were taken out of context. When asked why he asked a colleague to delete emails about an IPCC assessment report, he says the email was sent out of "frustration."

When asked how much faith he has in the Yamal tree ring data from Siberia, he said he believes the data is sound, but noted his colleague Keith Briffa has said he thinks something is "amiss with the Yamal tree-ring data."

I've read through Briffa's "validity of the published Yamal tree-ring chronology" and I don't find him indicating that something might be amiss, but then, I'm not a scientist. However, he does admit that ommiting some of the trees he used, and adding some trees that Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit suggested to replace his trees, would be done today under their "current practice."

In otherwords, they have changed their methods (maybe because something was amiss), and today, McIntyre's trees would be used, and no warming would be indicated. I believe the bottomline of the Yamal tree ring, for someone miles below the novice level, is McIntyre may have believed Briffa used trees from an area where trees were increasing in quantity (indicating warming) but did not use trees from areas in Russia where there was no increase.

When asked if he agrees that "the debate on climate change is over," he said no.

When asked about intimation in the emails that he was trying to subvert the the process of peer review, in an effort to influence editors, he said: "I do not accept that."

When asked where he draws the line on the handling of data, and does he accept that he crossed the line, he said that is a matter for independent review.

When asked if he expects to return to the position of director of the Climate Research Unit, he said "the question is not for me to answer."

He also said his life, since the emails were leaked, had been awful.


Related and Background:
Ocean Rise: Sea Level Rise Never Began: Scientists Withdraw Claims of Sea Levels Rising

ClimateGate Phil Jones: No Global Warming Since 1995 Says Jones

ClimateGate 2008: Media Assisted Polar Bear Hysteria: Polar Bears Vanishing? Uh, no. And the Senate Knows it

Hottest Decade in History? Maybe Not - Earth-Based Climate Stations Manipulated


*****Phil Jones Hides Data from 42 Weather Stations

Jim Inhofe Igloo: Inhofe Family Igloo Mocks Al Gore's Global Warming

IPCC ClimateGate Grow: Counterfeit Claims about Netherlands

ABC Questions Climate Forecasts: Can Climate Science be Trusted?

ClimateGate: Global Warming Bullies 

ClimateGate Scientist Phil Jones Not Prosecuted: UAE Asks for Jones Resignation  

Murari Lal Glacier Scientist: Unverified Data Used for Political Pressure

Copenhagen Junket Cost Millions - Millions for Failure: Inhofe on Copenhagen Caviar

Copenhagen Hopenhagen Nopenhagen? Rajendra Pachauri Apocalypse Now

EPA Endangerment Finding: Obama's Carbon Dioxide Pollutant: Obama TopDown Control

Andrew Watson Marc Morano: Andrew Watson Calls Marc Morano A-Hole

Chris Horner Sues NASA? NASA Hidden Data: ClimateGate NASA FOIA

Network Media Silent on ClimateGate: Day 14 and Counting

Hide the Decline Graph: ClimateGate Hide the Decline "Trick": Jones and Mann Hide the Decline

Rajendra Pachauri Dismisses Top Warming Scientists: Jim Inhofe ClimateGate Investigation

ClimateGate Phil Jones Steps Down

Philip Jones ClimateGate: Phil Jones Global Chief Liar and Cheat 

CRU Souce Code Decoded: Marc Sheppard Finds the Fudge Factor 

ClimateGate: Global Warming Bullies 

ClimateGate Phil Jones Steps Aside: CRU Climategate Chief Steps Down

Jim Inhofe ClimateGate Investigation: Rajendra Pachauri Dismisses Top Warming Scientists

Scientists may sue Gore over "Warming and Change" Fraud

Jaws Dropped as Solar Scientist, Archibald, Praised C02

EPA Silences, Suppresses Opposition: EPA Lies

The EU's Carbon Trade: A Scheme and a Failure

The Fight for Human-made Global Warming
 

Phil Jones Hides Data from 42 Weather Stations: ClimateGate Latest Scandal

Phil Jones, the dedicated manipulator of Climate Change data apparently hid data from 42 weather stations in China. This is the latest ClimateGate scandal, emanating from ten years of damning hacked emails.

The short story is that these 42 stations in rural China grew into larger communities over time, skewing the key temperature data, and skewing the findings of an important 1990 report. The UN's IPCC used this data to show that the rising temperatures recorded in China were a result of climate changes rather than the warming effects of expanding cities. Source: The Guardian

A new name emerges with this particular scandal. A University at Albany scientist, Dr. Wei-Chyung Wang, said to be a "Jone's collaborator" on the 42 weather stations, has been cleared by his University of "scientific fraud," (of course he was), but The Guardian says at least one "senior colleague had" serious concerns about his work.

The leaked emails from the CRU reveal that the former director of the unit, Tom Wigley, harboured grave doubts about the cover-up of the shortcomings in Jones and Wang's work. Wigley was in charge of CRU when the original paper was published. "Were you taking W-CW [Wang] on trust?" he asked Jones. He continued: "Why, why, why did you and W-CW not simply say this right at the start?"

 As thousands of hacked emails from the University of East Anglia continue to yield proof of deception, once again Professor Phil Jones is found to be at the head of the snake:

The apparent attempts to cover up problems with temperature data from the Chinese weather stations provide the first link between the email scandal and the UN's embattled climate science body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as a paper based on the measurements was used to bolster IPCC statements about rapid global warming in recent decades.

Wang claimed he had documentation that would clear both himself and Phil Jones of any questions about the weather station data, but that documentation "did not exist."

Phil Jones' refusal to provide his research data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) raised the ire of those paying attention. Of 105 FOIA requests, only 10 has been fulfilled.

Related and Background:
Ocean Rise; Sea Levels Rise Never Began: Scientists Withdraw Claims of Sea Levels Rising

ClimateGate Phil Jones: No Global Warming Since 1995 Says Jones

ClimateGate 2008: Media Assisted Polar Bear Hysteria: Polar Bears Vanishing? Uh, no. And the Senate Knows it

Hottest Decade in History? Maybe Not - Earth-Based Climate Stations Manipulated

*****Phil Jones Hides Data from 42 Weather Stations

Inhofe Family Igloo Mocks Al Gore's Global Warming

Paul Dennis ClimateGate EMail Leaker? Were the Emails really hacked?

IPCC ClimateGate Grow: Counterfeit Claims about Netherlands 

ABC Questions Climate Forecasts: Can Climate Science be Trusted?
ClimateGate: Global Warming Bullies 

ClimateGate Scientist Phil Jones Not Prosecuted: UAE Asks for Jones Resignation  

Murari Lal Glacier Scientist: Unverified Data Used for Political Pressure

Copenhagen Junket Cost Millions - Millions for Failure: Inhofe on Copenhagen Caviar

Copenhagen Hopenhagen Nopenhagen? Rajendra Pachauri Apocalypse Now

EPA Endangerment Finding: Obama's Carbon Dioxide Pollutant: Obama TopDown Control

Andrew Watson Marc Morano: Andrew Watson Calls Marc Morano A-Hole

Chris Horner Sues NASA? NASA Hidden Data: ClimateGate NASA FOIA

Network Media Silent on ClimateGate: Day 14 and Counting

Hide the Decline Graph: ClimateGate Hide the Decline "Trick": Jones and Mann Hide the Decline

Rajendra Pachauri Dismisses Top Warming Scientists: Jim Inhofe ClimateGate Investigation

ClimateGate Phil Jones Steps Down

Philip Jones ClimateGate: Phil Jones Global Chief Liar and Cheat 

CRU Souce Code Decoded: Marc Sheppard Finds the Fudge Factor 

ClimateGate: Global Warming Bullies 

ClimateGate Phil Jones Steps Aside: CRU Climategate Chief Steps Down

Jim Inhofe ClimateGate Investigation: Rajendra Pachauri Dismisses Top Warming Scientists

Scientists may sue Gore over "Warming and Change" Fraud

Jaws Dropped as Solar Scientist, Archibald, Praised C02

EPA Silences, Suppresses Opposition: EPA Lies

The EU's Carbon Trade: A Scheme and a Failure

The Fight for Human-made Global Warming


Important Resources:

Climate Depot

Watts Up With That?

Climate Audit, stephen McIntyre

A list of prominent scientists who have reversed their opinions
 



Jones has stepped aside as head of the UEA Climate Unit while an investigation into earlier findings from the hacked emails are examined. He refused to comment on this latest