Article:  The world has never seen such freezing heat

There is a problem when the scientific community takes a theory (and yes, Global Warming is just a theory) a declares it to be fact.

The scientists then will set about stating “facts” that support their theory, and will ignore “facts” that would tend to destroy their theory.  Is the “scientific method” dead?

“A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by Al Gore’s chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record.”

Please note that the “scientific body” that declared that October was the hottest on record is led by a man who has a clear bias.  His career (and his money) is supported by the myth of Global Warming.  He has a vested interest to prove that the myth is fact.

“This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China’s official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its “worst snowstorm ever”. In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.”

Gee, that’s odd.  Record snowfalls across the world during the hottest October on record. 

“So what explained the anomaly? GISS’s computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running.”

Wow, that must have been embarrassing to the scientists.  Using September temperature readings for an October assessment.  But, no, not if you are a Global Warming Scientist.  Because then, all you do is find another fact that will support your myth.

“to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new “hotspot” in the Arctic.”

So, when their first set of facts fall through, they suddenly find another set that supports their theory.  Odd, don’t you think?  Especially odd when you realize that they made this new claim about the Arctic:

“in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year.”

And here is the problem:

“A GISS spokesman lamely explained that the reason for the error in the Russian figures was that they were obtained from another body, and that GISS did not have resources to exercise proper quality control over the data it was supplied with. This is an astonishing admission: the figures published by Dr Hansen’s institute are not only one of the four data sets that the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies on to promote its case for global warming, but they are the most widely quoted, since they consistently show higher temperatures than the others.”

The scientists are using data given to them by another source and they have no way to verify or ensure the accuracy of the said data.  Heck, they could be using the data that I collect from my outdoor thermometer – the one that is in the full sun all day long…

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

View Technorati blog reactions.

Related Posts