Y2K Bug in NASA Climate Data ... LOL
ROLMAO, to all the global warming world is coming to an end people, read this.
http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm
An example of the Y2K discontinuity in action (Source: NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies) Years of bad data corrected; 1998 no longer the warmest year on record
My earlier column this week detailed the work of a volunteer team to assess problems with US temperature data used for climate modeling. One of these people is Steve McIntyre, who operates the site climateaudit.org. While inspecting historical temperature graphs, he noticed a strange discontinuity, or "jump" in many locations, all occurring around the time of January, 2000.
These graphs were created by NASA's Reto Ruedy and James Hansen (who shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change). Hansen refused to provide McKintyre with the algorithm used to generate graph data, so McKintyre reverse-engineered it. The result appeared to be a Y2K bug in the handling of the raw data.
McKintyre notified the pair of the bug; Ruedy replied and acknowledged the problem as an "oversight" that would be fixed in the next data refresh.
NASA has now silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now 1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second place. 1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II. Anthony Watts has put the new data in chart form, along with a more detailed summary of the events.
The effect of the correction on global temperatures is minor (some 1-2% less warming than originally thought), but the effect on the US global warming propaganda machine could be huge.
Then again-- maybe not. I strongly suspect this story will receive little to no attention from the mainstream media.
... most excellent!
http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm
An example of the Y2K discontinuity in action (Source: NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies) Years of bad data corrected; 1998 no longer the warmest year on record
My earlier column this week detailed the work of a volunteer team to assess problems with US temperature data used for climate modeling. One of these people is Steve McIntyre, who operates the site climateaudit.org. While inspecting historical temperature graphs, he noticed a strange discontinuity, or "jump" in many locations, all occurring around the time of January, 2000.
These graphs were created by NASA's Reto Ruedy and James Hansen (who shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change). Hansen refused to provide McKintyre with the algorithm used to generate graph data, so McKintyre reverse-engineered it. The result appeared to be a Y2K bug in the handling of the raw data.
McKintyre notified the pair of the bug; Ruedy replied and acknowledged the problem as an "oversight" that would be fixed in the next data refresh.
NASA has now silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now 1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second place. 1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II. Anthony Watts has put the new data in chart form, along with a more detailed summary of the events.
The effect of the correction on global temperatures is minor (some 1-2% less warming than originally thought), but the effect on the US global warming propaganda machine could be huge.
Then again-- maybe not. I strongly suspect this story will receive little to no attention from the mainstream media.
... most excellent!
0
-
Oh no!!! We must be headed toward global cooling!! Somebody tell the fear mongers to start running all the c&(% from the 70s. Next thing you know the ozone hole will be back...and the African bees, can't forget the bees....[;)] 0 -
Thanks, zipperzap 0 -
This is very good !!
Thank you !
A10 -
Welcome A1
Only the best,
hell with the
rest!
A20 -
OK!!!! All you global warming believers on this board stand up and take it like a man (or woman). Funny how a problem that was really no problem at all is now coming to light. Oversight???? I don't think so. I guess I should now get my tin foil hat out. Ya think?? 0 -
I will be going through the old "GLOBAL WARMING" post and finding the ones who actually do wear the tin foil on their heads. BRB 0 -
There is no proof offered what so ever, just some guy who doesn't offer any credentials making some unverifiable claims.
Furthermore, the dates he proposes have nothing to do with the Y2K issues.
storing only the digits 01 -> 99 does not result in a temperature from 1934 appearing less than a temperature from 1998.
If there were a glitch, say 2001 or 2002 were the warmest years on record, it would appear on the computer that 1901 or 1902 were the warmest.
Furthermore, it was known 1998 was the warmest year on record by 1999, no Y2k problems could have occured before Jan 1 2000. Nor would any jump in the data change the ranking of 1934 in relation to 1998.
This is a load of BS that is easily seen as such, except by those ignorant masses who swallow anything opposed to global warming, due to its perceived connection to liberal politics, hook - line - and sinker.
That article does not have one shred of evidence to support its claims0 -
quote:Originally posted by IAMAHUSKER
I will be going through the old "GLOBAL WARMING" post and finding the ones who actually do wear the tin foil on their heads. BRB
I'll save you the trouble of looking for my posts....I meet your criteria for the "tin foil" club..0 -
Nope, nothing is happening.... 
BTW: After about an hour or so of searching, I was unable to find anything on the GISS website regarding revised statistics due to the Y2K bug....I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I was unable to find them.
In fact, according to a link on the front page of the website (http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20070208/) the warmest years on record are:
2005
1998
2002
2003
2006
The head of GISS appearently never recieved the memo on the blogger's breakthrough either:
"2007 is likely to be warmer than 2006," said James Hansen, director of NASA GISS, "and it may turn out to be the warmest year in the period of instrumental measurements. Increased warmth is likely this year because an El Ni?o is underway in the tropical Pacific Ocean and because of continuing increases in human-made greenhouse gases.0 -
NOAA Reports 2006 Warmest Year on Record for U.S.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2007/s2772.htm0 -
The 'proof' is in 10,000 years of ice cores - and it's up to YOU to 'prove' that this isn't
just another sun (cliclic fluctuation) warming trend - have you done that?0 -
quote:Originally posted by zipperzap
The 'proof' is in 10,000 years of ice cores - and it's up to YOU to 'prove' that this isn't
just another sun (cliclic fluctuation) warming trend - have you done that?
zip.....Ice cores go back a hell of a lot farther than 10,000 years.....Here's an article about a 740,000 year old core sample
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/06/040611080100.htm
Several articles I've read (yes, I do read them) concerning ice samples point to high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. I can find some if you'd like0 -
Let's not forget how those two little rovers have ruined Mars. It too, is experiencing a warming climate. All due to mans medling with a couple of RC cars! Deny it's our fault all you want, but before those little things...... 0 -
I googled the article and it seems to be on a lot of blogs, but no major media outlets have picked it up. I have a feeling this may be a bit of a hoax. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by carbine100
Let's not forget how those two little rovers have ruined Mars. It too, is experiencing a warming climate.
Let's not forget that Mars has no ocean and a very thin atmosphere.....
The term "apples to oranges" comes to mind0 -
Well NOAA has a flaw in there problem in global warming. the people that they get there temperature readings from are off cause they don't check the guidelines NOAA makes for the censors nor does NOAA send out people to check them for violations. the major cause is people like me or you and business are putting the censors by roads, on roofs, near air conditioners which as you know put off heat. And NOAA is the place most Global Warming tree huggers get there data for global warming. so if the data is flawed then well its just a big lie. And your wondering what the temperatures are like in the areas that are following the guidelines, well lets just say there pretty much the same as they where when they were first installed.
there was a story done on it on the news i think fox or it was a dateline special, it was done a week or so ago. i tried to look but couldn't find a link.0 -
quote:Originally posted by joker5656
Well NOAA has a flaw in there problem in global warming. the people that they get there temperature readings from are off cause they don't check the guidelines NOAA makes for the censors nor does NOAA send out people to check them for violations. the major cause is people like me or you and business are putting the censors by roads, on roofs, near air conditioners which as you know put off heat. And NOAA is the place most Global Warming tree huggers get there data for global warming. so if the data is flawed then well its just a big lie. And your wondering what the temperatures are like in the areas that are following the guidelines, well lets just say there pretty much the same as they where when they were first installed.
Please forgive my snickering, but is this intentional?0 -
quote:Rack Ops;
Let's not forget that Mars has no ocean and a very thin atmosphere.....
The term "apples to oranges" comes to mind
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/39079/story.htm
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2007/2007-08-10-02.asp0 -
quote:Originally posted by zipperzap
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/39079/story.htm
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2007/2007-08-10-02.asp
Perhaps I'm slow......what exactly was I to learn by reading those?0 -
I require a RELIABLE source before I can make judgements,
any dumbarse teenager can make a blog, that does not make them reliable.0 -
That you're slow.
[;)]0 -
fair enough
Guess I'd rather be slow than someone who trumpets bogus information
(the original blog)0 -
Read all the temperature records for a far back as man has them. Don't forget those that show that when man air pollution was at it's highest to that date, the Earth got colder. And that NASA says that the Sun has gotten hotter. All that is going on is it's time to come out of the Little Ice Age which began in 1317. Check out what the climate was before the Little Ice Age. Hint - Climates of Germany, France, and Britton were more like San Diego, California all year long. What is their climate like today? 0 -
Here's my report from San Diego:
We seem to be OK ... scared me for a minute!
Partly Cloudy
76?F
Feels Like
76?F
Updated Aug 11 12:00 p.m. PT
Watch the San Diego Forecast
UV Index: 7 High
Wind: From WNW at 10 mph
Humidity: 58%
Pressure: 29.96 in.
Dew Point: 60?F
Visibility: 7.0 miles0 -
Right Zip - Everyone should now move to San Diego - please.
A10 -
Too bad.....I figured we'd get a decent debate going over this.
Guess the chest thumping gets bothersome once your legs have been kicked out from beneath you...0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
26 comments