Rewriting The Past At NOAA

The White House was unhappy that the world isn’t warming, so they told NOAA to alter the data, and make the hiatus disappear.

The apparent observed slowing or decrease in the upward rate of global surface temperature warming has been nicknamed the “hiatus.” The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report, released in stages between September 2013 and November 2014, concluded that the upward global surface temperature trend from 1998­­-2012 was markedly lower than the trend from 1951-2012.

Since the release of the IPCC report, NOAA scientists have made significant improvements in the calculation of trends

ScreenHunter_9878 Jul. 07 09.01

Science publishes new NOAA analysis: Data show no recent slowdown in global warming.

no slow down in global warming

This isn’t the first time they have done this. They have repeatedly altered  the temperature record, which now looks nothing like the 1974 NCAR graph

screenhunter_393-may-21-04-35 (1)

The overlay below shows the 1974 NCAR graph on top of the current graph. NOAA has created an almost completely fictitious temperature record, in order to suit the political agenda of the people who pay their bills.

ScreenHunter_9879 Jul. 07 09.13

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Rewriting The Past At NOAA

  1. menicholas says:

    OMG, this is totally out of hand.
    These liars are not only completely shameless, but are committing deliberate fraud.
    If this is not malfeasance, and misuse of taxpayer funds, I do not know what is.

    • omanuel says:

      Welcome to George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four”

    • omanuel says:

      The integrity of government science and mainstream research journals has declined gradually over the past seventy years (1945-2015).

      As noted below, as recently as forty years ago (~1975), mainstream research journals like Science, Nature, etc. would still publish and allow open debate of alternative interpretations of experimental findings.

      No more. We are living under a totalitarian one-world government that is worldwide and therefore even worse than that described by George Orwell in “Nineteen Eighty-Four.”

  2. Nothing about this surprises me anymore.

    Just look at what else of American History is being rewritten (yet again) by these so-called “experts”. The lies are getting so outrageous, yet – there are still a bunch of thumb-sucking idiots out there who believe all of it!

  3. Centinel2012 says:

    Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
    NOAA and NASA now have zero creditability in what they publish. The data tampering is so blatant they they don’t even try to hid it any more. They no that no real reporting will be now and so they are now just like the media a propaganda arm of the progressive government.

    • omanuel says:

      Yes, gator69, the “Ministry of Truth” is more correctly identified as the “Ministry of Consensus Scientific (UN)Truths”NASA. NOAA, etc.

  4. omanuel says:

    Thank you, Steven aka Tony, for having the courage “to call a spade a shovel, and allowing others to post information about events that changed the course of world history and the purpose of government science during a NEWS BLACKOUT in AUG-SEPT 1945 that initiated the seventy-year (1945-2015) decline in the integrity of government-sponsored science and constitutional limits on governments.

    Somehow, George Orwell recognized the signs and started writing “Nineteen Eighty-Four” in 1946.

    Forty years ago, mainstream journals, like Nature, Science, etc. still allowed a few new discoveries to be published and debated.

    1. Nature published our 1972 discovery that primitive meteorites formed directly from fresh supernova debris before xenon isotopes made by different nuclear reactions (the r-, p- and s-processes of nucleosynthesis)

    2. Science published a 1975 analysis on the Allende meteorite and a 1978 analysis on the Murchison meteorite that convinced University of Chicago scientists:

    _ a.) In situ superheavy element fission produced “strange xenon” in the Allende meteorite, and
    _ b.) The s-process (slow neutron-capture) of nucleosynthesis produced a mirror-image isotopic anomaly pattern in the Murchison meteorite.

    3. Science even published a 1977 open DEBATE on the merits of Local Element Synthesis in the Sun versus Superheavy Element Fission:

    “Strange xenon, extinct super-heavy elements, and the solar neutrino puzzle”, Science 195, 208-209 (1977):

    • omanuel says:

      1. Nature published our 1972 discovery that primitive meteorites formed directly from fresh supernova debris before xenon isotopes made by different nuclear reactions (the r-, p- and s-processes of nucleosynthesis) mixed.

  5. it’s like that embarrassing pause on Xmas day – half the people present have got the awful joke from the Xmas cracker, but there are still people like NOAA and the alarmists who just don’t get it.

  6. richard clenney says:

    I guess I’m a little slow; when I look at raw temperature data over the last 50 years, I come to the conclusion that adding CO2 to the atmosphere caused a little cooling of climate, not warming.The pause could be attributed to CO2 increase?

  7. Andy DC says:

    Once someone is caught so blatantly cooking the books, you have to be a very gullible idiot to every believe another word they say in the future.

    • Gail Combs says:

      At this point I now consider NOAA, NASA, the MSM and all branches of the US government as LIARS and a heck of a lot worse.

      The US government has lost ALL credibility. I just wish we could put the whole lot of them on trial but the rot is now so pervasive it has infected everything from elected politicians to judges and prosecutors.

      • What could possibly go wrong? says:

        It’s,not the US government alone and it is not only climate. There are very few remotely credible and remotely responsible governments in the world of the still young 21st century. This is partly due to the selection process of politicians in their respective parties, which is not really based on reliability or competence but mostly on mob compatibility and partly due to the selection process which is euphemistically called “elections”, which by now is a creepy variant of the prisoners paradox.

        1984 was wishful thinking by this uncanny optimist Mr. Orwell. He just couldn’t imagine how bad it will really get.

        • Gail Combs says:

          It has not been by happen stance see my <a href="My comment on the Karl Marx“>comment.

          This shows the ‘1%’ at work modifying the USA whether we wanted it or not. link The plan was conceived right after WWII and the last part was just put in place. When finished the Ag Cartel will own the food supply of most of the world. Right now for example four firms control over 80 percent of all the beef slaughtered. Nine firms control 80 percent of the grain trade…. (China and Russia are scrambling to get control of farmland BTW, no dumbies they.)

          Purdue University: Private International Cartels:

          …The sudden discovery of a global pandemic of international cartels in the mid 1990s, after a hiatus of a half century, is puzzling. That the greatest number and most injurious conspiracies should be clustered in the food and feed ingredients industries adds another element of mystery to the puzzle….

          it is not puzzling if you understand that it was in 1995 that the Ag cartel got the World Trade Organization Agreement on Agriculture written by Dan Amstutz, VP of the grain trader Cargill. (He was then in Reagan’s Admin.) And it was ratified by Congress with the help of Senior Foreign Trade Adviser to Bill Clinton, Robert Shaprio, CEO of MONSANTO!

      • Marsh says:

        Gail , you’re not alone on wishing those CC fraudsters could be put on trial. There are thousands behind bars for lesser forms of fraud ; AGW has become organised crime!

        The scale of the Crime needs something befitting the Nuremberg Trials but when the crazies are running the Asylum ; most will evade any real penalty…

        It’s morally bankrupt, when lawmakers perpetuate a crime, against its citizens.

  8. omanuel says:

    During a NEWS BLACKOUT of events that changed the course of world history, in Aug-Sept 1945, Stalin emerged victoriously in control of

    1. Japan’s atomic bomb plant at Konan, Korea
    2. The crew of an American B29 bomber that he held for negotiations

    To unite nations and national academies of sciences on 24 Oct 1945

    Formerly independent national academies of science, including the Royal Society, betrayed the public to “save the world from nuclear annihilation by expanding the boarder of the old USSR to encompass the whole world.

  9. Dave N says:

    Meanwhle, the CIA are called in to find the missing year marks..

  10. Peter Ellis says:

    Is there any particular reason you chose to overlay them such that ~1F in the old graph equates to ~2F in the new one?

    If you scale those two graphs to have the same Y axis, you’ll find a much closer agreement. Main difference is that the spike in 1945 is much larger in the more recent (whole Earth) measurement compared to the earlier (NH only) measurement. 1880-1890 don’t agree very well, but the oldest data will always be the noisiest.

  11. Gail Combs says:

    The past was cooled while the more recent was warmed

    Steve correlated the magnitude of the tampering with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and found almost perfect correlation – shown below. An R =1 is perfect correlation.

    Of course the CO2 measurements were ALSO tampered with link

    Why? Because that was the directive.
    UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was ratified by the USA on 21/03/94. Here’s the official definition of ‘Climate Change’: from the UN Framework Convention.

    “Climate change” means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.

    The new meaning specifically excludes all natural climate change, and even excludes any caused by humans due to, for example, land clearance or city building, considering only atmospheric changes.

    The IPCC mandate is similar:

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established by the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to assess the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant for the understanding of human induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for mitigation and adaptation.

    So it never was about understanding the climate. It was really about ‘options for mitigation and adaptation. ‘ and this is the change wanted by the Globalists like the UN, the World Bank, and the WTO.

    The IPCC’s ROLE

    The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. IPCC reports should be neutral with respect to policy, although they may need to deal objectively with scientific, technical and socio-economic factors relevant to the application of particular policies.

    So there it is again. ONLY “human-induced climate change” is of interest and that is why you see very little work done on natural climate change.

    Worse it is the custom and practice of the IPCC for all of its Reports to be amended to agree with the political summaries. The facts are as follows.

    The Summary for Policymakers (SPM) is agreed “line by line” by politicians and/or representatives of politicians, and it is then published. After that the so-called ‘scientific’ Reports are amended to agree with the SPM. This became IPCC custom and practice of the IPCC when prior to its Second Report the then IPCC Chairman, John Houghton, decreed,

    We can rely on the Authors to ensure the Report agrees with the Summary.

    This was done and has been the normal IPCC procedure since then. It has even been adopted as official IPCC procedure for all subsequent IPCC Reports.

    Appendix A of the present Report (the AR5) states this where it says.

    4.6 Reports Approved and Adopted by the Panel

    Reports approved and adopted by the Panel will be the Synthesis Report of the Assessment Reports and other Reports as decided by the Panel whereby Section 4.4 applies mutatis mutandis.

    This is completely in accord with the official purpose of the IPCC.

    The IPCC does NOT exist to summarize climate science and it does not.

    The IPCC is only permitted to say AGW is a significant problem because they are tasked to accept that there is a “risk of human-induced climate change” which requires “options for adaptation and mitigation” that can be selected as political polices and the IPCC is tasked to provide those “options”.

    This is clearly stated in the “Principles” which govern the work of the IPCC. These are stated at

    The IPCC even admitted the models aren’t worth spit 15 years ago but that hasn’t stopped them from claiming the models show CATASTROPHIC WARMING if we do not change out ‘bad behavior’

    …in climate research and modeling we should recognise that we are dealing with a complex non linear chaotic signature and therefore that long-term prediction of future climatic states is not possible

    IPCC 2001 section page 774

  12. Gail Combs says:

    The next question is WHY has the UN/IPCC gone to all this trouble?

    French Socialist Pascal Lamy, European Union bigwig, former Director-General of the World Trade Organization tells us.

    …In the same way, climate change negotiations are not just about the global environment but global economics as well — the way that technology, costs and growth are to be distributed and shared. Can we maintain an open trading system without a more coordinated financial system?

    Can we balance the need for a sustainable planet with the need to provide billions with decent living standards? Can we do that without questioning radically the Western way of life? These may be complex questions, but they demand answers.

    At the same time, globalization is blurring the line between national and world issues, redefining our notions of space, sovereignty and identity…..

    The reality is that, so far, we have largely failed to articulate a clear and compelling vision of why a new global order matters — and where the world should be headed. Half a century ago, those who designed the post-war system — the United Nations, the Bretton Woods system, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) — were deeply influenced by the shared lessons of history.

    All had lived through the chaos of the 1930s — when turning inwards led to economic depression, nationalism and war. All, including the defeated powers, agreed that the road to peace lay with building a new international order — and an approach to international relations that questioned the Westphalian, sacrosanct principle of sovereignty — rooted in freedom, openness, prosperity and interdependence….

    So Lamy admits that world leaders back in the 1930s agreed to instituting a world government but “have largely failed to articulate a clear and compelling vision of why a new global order matters” to the general public.

    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” — H. L. Mencken

    So CAGW was the hobgoblin invented to menace the populace. But where do our ‘world leaders’ want to lead us?

    Rosa Koire a California bureaucrat (and a flaming lesbian Democrat -her words) did the digging to find out and it isn’t pretty. That of course is why a nasty hobgoblin is needed to scare the populace.


Leave a Reply