Scientist ruthlessly debunks NOAA climate claim

In face of intense criticism from alarmist scientists, Dr. John Christy went to great lengths in a Tuesday congressional hearing to detail why satellite-derived temperatures are much more reliable indicators of warming than surface thermometers.

Read Dr. Christy’s full testimony at CFACT.org.

“That’s where the real maDaily Caller  New Foundationss of the climate system exists in terms of the atmosphere,” Christy, a climate scientist at the University of Alabama and Alabama’s state climatologist, said in a Wednesday hearing before the House science committee.

“When a theory contradicts the facts” you need to change the theory, Christy said. “The real world is not going along with rapid warming. The models need to go back to the drawing board.”

Texas Republican Rep. Lamar Smith, the committee’s chairman, convened a hearing on the implications of President Barack Obama’s recent United Nations deal in Paris, which agreed to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

Christy doesn’t think signing onto a U.N. deal is good for Americans, and challenges the very data politicians and environmentalists rely on to push green energy policies.

“One of my many climate interests is the way surface temperatures are measured and how surface temperatures, especially over land, are affected by their surroundings,” Christy wrote in his prepared testimony.

Christy recently co-authored a study with veteran meteorologist Anthony Watts that found the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was basing its temperature adjustments on “compromised” temperature data.

John Christy

Dr. John Christy

The study found most of NOAA’s 1,218 thermometers were sited near artificial surfaces and heat sources like concrete, asphalt, and air conditioner exhausts that were causing more warming to show in the U.S. temperature record than was present at weather stations that were well-sited.

Christy and Watts surmised NOAA was basing its temperature adjustments (efforts made to get “biases” out of the temperature record) on bad data.

“I closely examined individual stations in different regions and have come to the conclusion that the magnitude of the relatively small signal we seek in human-induced climate change is easily convoluted by the growth of infrastructure around the thermometer stations and the variety of changes these stations undergo through time, as well as the variability of the natural ups and downs of climate,” Christy noted in his testimony.

“It is difficult to adjust for these contaminating factors to extract a pure dataset for greenhouse detection because often the non-climatic influence comes along very gradually just as is expected of the response to the enhanced greenhouse effect,” Christy added.

But that’s why Christy argues satellite-derived temperatures are a better way to look at how greenhouse gases are impacting the Earth’s climate.

“The bulk atmospheric temperature is where the signal is the largest,” Christy said in the hearing, referring to the greenhouse gas effect. “We have measurements for that — it doesn’t match up with the models.”

Satellite-derived temperatures have come under fire recently by scientists more alarmist about global warming than Christy, but the Alabama climatologist addressed those criticisms.

“Because this result challenges the current theory of greenhouse warming in relatively straightforward fashion, there have been several well-funded attacks on those of us who build and use such datasets and on the datasets themselves,” Christy said.

Climate models for the bulk atmosphere (where satellites measure temperature) show 2.5 times as much warming as has been observed by satellites and weather balloons.

“It is a bold strategy in my view to actively promote the output of theoretical climate models while attacking the multiple lines of evidence from observations,” Christy wrote. “Note that none of the observational datasets are perfect and continued scrutiny is healthy, but when multiple, independent groups generate the datasets and then when the results for two completely independent systems (balloons and satellites) agree closely with each other and disagree with the model output, one is left scratching one’s head at the decision to launch an offensive against the data.”

Follow Michael on Facebook and Twitter

This article originally appeared in The Daily Caller

Categories

About the Author: Michael Bastasch

Michael Bastasch writes on energy, climate and the environment for the Daily Caller.

  • Joseph Finney

    Climate change is all part of a U.N. conspiracy. They want the industrialized nations to distribute their wealth with the poor nations. They would bring down the richer nations in order to bring up the poorer nations. That sounds like everyone becoming a third world nation to me. The U.N. also knows that that will be a hard sell to Americans, so they are also bent on taking our guns. They are pushing the U.S. to sign various treaties on gun confiscation. Do they push that agenda in the poor countries especially a muslim country? Just wondering.

    • Daniel F. Melton

      The agenda is to rob from the rich, and keep it. The poorest countries will remain destitute, simply because they are ruled by despots. One prime example and comparison is Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Even disaster relief for survivors of the 2010 earthquake attracts vultures from as far away as Washington (bill clinton for one) to pick the bones of the destitute.

      • Joseph Finney

        So true. Look at Mubarak, from Egypt if I spelled it right. He was the Egyptian leader for 30 years and the U.S. gave that country 60 billion dollars in aide. He was ousted and he had 60 billion in a foreign bank. We give so much money now, without robbing the people, and it gets in used against us or in a dictators pocket.

        • Daniel F. Melton

          Follow the money. Much of it sticks to the fingers of the power brokers in washington.

    • TLN2

      I agree with you, however it also appears to be a push for global government.

  • Dano2
    • Daniel F. Melton

      Still worshiping at that altar I see. It’s amazing how closely the numbers follow the computer models when ya adjust the records.

      • Dano2

        Feel free to address the refutation I posted, thanks!

        Best,

        D

        • Betawelder

          What you posted is simply more of the manipulated data.

          • Dano2

            Wrong, thanks!

            Best,

            D

          • Daniel F. Melton

            You’re arguing with a computer program that almost passes the Turing test.

        • Daniel F. Melton

          Your refutation has all the weight of the testimony of convicted perjurers, and amounts to the “yes I did-no you didn’t” logic of a four year old.

          • Dano2

            Can’t do it, thanks!

            Best,

            D

    • 1 degree in 100 yrs, Michigan used to be covered under a glacier, What caused global warming back in the ice age? Woolly Mammoth Farts?

      • Dano2

        o Great Lakes were formed by a glacier, therefore…therefore…well, there used to be more glaciers! [2 points]

        https://www.facebook.com/ClimateDenialistTalkingPointGame

        Best,

        D

      • peachnectar

        I live in the desert. The temps announced from the city areas that are paved over are much warmer that my ‘cool’ back yard with trees and greenery in the summer. Placement of the temp. recorders is cherry picked to show the desired results.

        • Dano2

          Placement of the temp. recorders is cherry picked to show the desired results.

          You made that up.

          Best,

          D

      • Weedbay Guy

        Ancient earth was covered entirely by trees, with the dead trees falling on the forest floor. The former forest floor was buried, and we now dig down to that level and extract the coal. But for thousands of years the forest floor sat on top of the crust of the earth. Decomposing and turning into coal. One day a volcano or perhaps lightning ignited the coal. The dinosaurs never saw it coming. What’s your excuse?

    • Betawelder

      More Kool Aid

  • disqus_c1mBD6Pc4C

    reality- demonstrated,, discrepancies- explained,,

  • Tom Baker

    Where is the proof of global warming? In 2007 Gore said based on scientific FACT, the polar Ice cap would be GONE in 2014. Well the Ice cap is as large as ever. The Antarctia is bigger than ever. so they lied to create backing. Then they said the polar bears are dying off because of the lack of ice. Just another lie because the bears are as populated as ever, and the ice is just fine. Many scientists are now saying the temperature rise is in a :pause” for the last EIGHTEEN years…..I have always had to laugh at the 97% of scientists agree with the global warming BS. you could get 97% to agree the sky is blue. If you delve into these scientists they quote, they are all on government grants.. Humm gee I wonder…..Follow the money.

    • Dano2

      False: Gore said based on scientific FACT, the polar Ice cap would be GONE in 2014.

      False: the Ice cap is as large as ever.

      False: The Antarctia (sic) is bigger than ever

      False: the bears are as populated (sic) as ever

      False: the ice is just fine

      False: Many scientists are now saying the temperature rise is in a :pause” for the last EIGHTEEN years

      Impressive!

      Best,

      D

      • Tom Baker

        Fact you are wrong on all accounts. But hey just keep on drinking the koolaid

        • Dano2

          You can’t back a single one of these claims you made.

          Best,

          D

          • Tom Baker

            I can its all on the Internet

            • Dano2

              No you can’t. You can’t back any of them.

              Best,

              D

              • Tom Baker

                Where do you think I got the info? Go to NASA’s own site and find their images of the polar caps. Google gore predicts polar ice cap gone by 2014. Google weather channel founder debunks global warming. It’s out there if you investigate. Oh and stop listening to main stream media. It is all propaganda

                • Dano2

                  Not backing claims, got it.

                  Best,

                  D

                  • Tom Baker

                    I backed them I’m not going to do the research for you

                    • Dano2

                      You haven’t backed squat.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • Tom Baker

                      Obviously you have not researched squat

                    • Dano2

                      I have, which is why I know you are full of it and can’t back a single claim you made.

                      You made all that up. Obviously.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • Tom Baker

                      Bull chit you have. I gave you references its up to you to look. Or not. I could care less

                    • Dano2

                      You didn’t give squat. Clearly you can’t back your false claims.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • Tom Baker

                      Ok I will type this slowly so even you can under stand it. Google NASA POLAR MAPS. And also Google weather channel founder talks about global warming

                    • Dano2

                      No. That is your job.

                      These are your claims, your burden of proof. It has been this way for 2300 years. These rules ensure that civil society knows that those who hem and haw and deflect and bumble and buffoon are lying, as they have done for 2300 years.

                      best,

                      D

                    • Navarre Packham

                      He backed up his claims in what is widely accepted as the best possible way to back up your claims; BY GIVING YOU THE SOURCES! Why is this the best way, because anything he says to back up his claims himself you could claim is a lie as you have done with everything he has said. He backed up his claims with sources, but I couldn’t help but notice that you have not backed up a single one of your claims that his are false. So, if sources aren’t the right way to back up your claims, as you seem to believe, then please back up your claims and show us how it’s done. If you can.

                    • Dano2

                      That’s good comedy! I LOLzed! It gave me THE SOURCES!

                      My compliments to the author of this performance art character.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • J T

                      What a pathetic attempt at rationality on your part. Worse than expected, even.

                    • Dano2

                      You can’t give sources either, got it.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • James Sullivan

                      Tom Thanks for trying some people are like this

                    • Dano2

                      Poor Tom didn’t lead anyone anywhere, he refused to. Are you capable of grasping it?

                      Best,

                      D

                    • MichealN

                      photo of wrong end of species Climate Equus Trollus

                    • peachnectar

                      You typed it slow enough for me! LOL

                    • J T

                      Don’t waste your time on imbeciles like Dano. He will only cover his ears and scream some more.

                  • Tom Baker

                    Watching main stream media is not research

                  • J T

                    The man told you everything you need to get the truth, but like the brain-dead imbecile you are, you’re too proud and stupid to try. What a coward.

                    • Dano2

                      Not backing claims either, got it.

                      best,

                      D

            • Li D

              Hahahahahahahaha

      • J T

        TRUE: You are a screaming baby, insisting on having its way.

        • Dano2

          You can’t show that he did. So you make up puerile tantrums to hide it.

          best,

          D

      • damorris

        http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/healthy-polar-bear-count-confounds-doomsayers/article4099460/

        You are merely repeating scaremonger’s claims.The truth is the polar bear population has never been higher since recording started, 15,000 in Canada.
        The Inuit,who LIVE there among the bears,have claimed for years the population was higher than they’d ever seen.The scientist/activists scoffed at them, but when studies were initiated by the Canadian government,they found the Inuit were absolutely correct.

        • Dano2

          Thanks for the link to a newspaper. The italicized statements are false.

          best,

          D

  • Dusty Koellhoffer
  • James Sullivan

    We need an investigation into the weather historical information being changed at NOAA and in private hands like weather.com . I will ask each of you That remember a date and place where you where when there was a record high or low reported go back @ NOAA.GOV and see if it has been altered many events have been and this data is saved with tax money it should be a crime to alter.

    • Dano2

      the weather historical information being changed at NOAA and in private hands like weather.com

      You have no evidence this is true. We need an investigation into the purposeful disinformation being spread by private parties and PR firm sockpuppets.

      Best,

      D

      • James Sullivan

        Dano2 you either can not read or doubled down on being stupid I asked people to go back and check the numbers against experience and memory . The reason i did that is so people can verify it with there own experiences that the data has been altered .

        • Dano2

          We’re talking about scientific evidence. Anecdata is not compelling, despite your wish for it to be so.

          Best,

          D

          • James Sullivan

            Discussion is a two way process i give you information and you deny that is only a sign of mental illness on your part.

            • Dano2

              Thank you soooooo much for your anecdata! It’s awesome! And not evidence for your statement above!

              Best,

              D

              • James Sullivan

                You too!

                • Dano2

                  Is your widdle froggy evidence for your statement the weather historical information being changed at NOAA and in private hands like weather.com ?

                  I can’t tell what it is you are flailing about for anymore.

                  Best,

                  D

      • peachnectar

        I’ve read that this has happened, too.

        • Dano2

          LoWatts or another low-functioning blogger typed some conspiracy ideation, we know.

          Best,

          D