Is it really global warming, or NASA playing with the numbers?

Question

Seems interesting that even with a supposed consensus, scientist can not even get actual temperature readings to match. I wonder how many people realize NASA is adjusting historic temperatures down, while adjusting more recent temps up? Seems to me they should do the opposite to negate the Urban Heat Island Effect.

Well, you know the AGW proponents motto, "If the data does not fit the theory, don't change the theory, change the data." I'll bet they ran this through the computer models and arrived at this decision.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/02/a_tale_of_two_thermometers/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/05/goddard_nasa_thermometer/print.html

Answer 1

What about the satellite tempuratures? I have heard that satellites give a much more accurate reading then surface temperatures, but don't have the scientific background to verify it

Are the satellites more accurate? The satellite data seems to match the Had-Crut data which gives us two sources with similar results.

PS: I use the word similar because I didn't do any analysis of the two nor have I read an analysis.

Answer 2

Everyone is playing with the numbers to suit their position, but Global Warming is real.

Answer 3

All the datasets (NASA, Hadley, even UAH and RSS) show almost identical trends in global temperatures, as you can see if you adjust for their differing base periods and plot them on the same axes like this:

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2008/0...

The only reasons your article's graphs look different are

a) The axes are different - nice manipulation there

b) It shows monthly data for Hadley and yearly data for GISS

The only ones playing with the numbers are the people at the Register.

Answer 4

Notice the word "anomaly" on the Y-axis of the NASA graph.  It means "deviation or departure from the normal".  These graphs are not plotting the actual temperature, they are plotting the anomaly (difference) from a selected period of normal.

Hadley and NASA use 2 different periods for their normal base-line.  Hadley uses the period 1961 - 1990 and NASA uses the period 1951 - 1980. Since the average from 1961 - 1990 is warmer than the average from 1951 - 1980, Hadley's baseline is warmer than NASA's.  So obviously the Hadley anomaly plot will not go as high as the one from NASA.

But both charts show a warming of approximately 0.8 C. The little blue dip at the end of the Hadley plot is from the cold January/February, the NASA plot is averaged on years (it doesn't include the Jan - April data). The Hadley and NASA plots will be in agreement when they are both plotted over the same time periods.

For a full analysis (by a skilled Mathematician) of this subject, I'd recommend reading this article:

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/g...

Edit:

eric c - You are grossly mistaken. Take a look at this plot (normalized, so they can be compared on the same scale, temperature datasets over the past 32 years) and then explain to everyone again how the Hadley temperature dataset doesn't show warming over the past 30 years.

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2008/0...

I look forward to your scientific "explanation" ;-)

Answer 5

Really global warming.

Take a look at the first two graphs from your first website.  Had-Crut shows that we've warmed 0.9 degrees in the last 100 years while NASA shows....

that we've warmed 0.9 degrees in the last 100 years.  The only difference is their base period, where they set the zero, the averaging period (NASA uses 5 years which better averages out random fluctuations), and the SCALE on the y-axis, which is different, and deliberately misleading.

There's no significant difference, in spite of what the website says.  THEY'RE the ones "playing with the numbers".

It's hardly just NASA saying this.  EVERY major scientific organization has issued an official statement that this is real, and mostly caused by us.  The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Association, etc.

Answer 6

Ken and Bob miss the point.  The point is not how much the earth has warmed over 100 years but over the past 30 years.  Hadley does not show much warming.  The only reason why NASA does is by adjusting the temperature record.  

"The pre-1970 temperatures have been nearly uniformly adjusted downwards (red below green) - and the post 1970 temperatures have been adjusted upwards (red above green.) Some of the yearly temperatures have been adjusted by as much as 0.5 degrees. That is a huge total change for a country the size of the US with thousands of separate temperature records."

"How could it be determined that so many thermometers were wrong by an average of 0.5 degrees in one particular year several decades ago, and an accurate retrofit be made? Why is the adjustment 0.5 degrees one year, and 0.1 degrees the next?

Describing this more succinctly, the 2007 version of the data appears to have been sheared vertically across 1970 to create the appearance of a warming trend. "

Answer 7

I don't know if NASA is playing a numbers game when it comes to global warming.  However, I do know we need to take better of the place in which we live because we have no other place to go at the time.

When looking at environmental events  around the world, one can obviously see something is happening.  But, what to specifically attribute it too is something can not be pointed at this time mainly because we really don't know.  It's probably attributed to many things that man has and does not have control over.

Answer 8

NASA is exposing their own lies every time new information comes out.  The PDO is showing a cooling trend for the next 15-30 years, NASA states it will only cover the effects of global warming.  Basically, they bought themselves more time.

Tornadoes and floods in the midwest?????  It happens EVERY year and has been happening every year since Europeans came to America!  That's just like saying "it's snowing in Canada, must be because of global warming".

Answer 9

It sure looks like YOU have 'shaped' the data to fit YOUR 'beliefs'!

The intense storms in the mid-west are "playing" with the numbers!  It's the deepest flood waters ever recorded!  The last big flood was just 15 years ago. It was considered a "100 year flood",but now it's worse. The ever widening parameters of severe storms and weather records is a clear indicator of rapid climate change! How deep is too deep in a flood?  Have you even heard of the real possibility that we are experiencing abrupt climate change RIGHT NOW?   The scientists have been researching the effects of CO2 on our atmosphere for decades! Now that they have released their report[IPCC],the evidence is over whelming!

Answer 10

Is NASA lying about the daily tornadoes and floods in the Midwest?

Wake up! Rush is a drug addict and Bill O'reilly is a perv. (Remember the d***o butt shower phone call?)