Over the years, in these GEITP pages, we have reported on, and tried to confront, scientific fraud and corruption. As you can see [from email by Chuck Wiese below], not only has this become rampant in the basic-science and clinical fields of research, but it has been exploding in the areas of meteorology, climatology, and (sadly) public policy resulting in enormous amounts of taxpayer money being squandered uselessly.
If anyone can find the time to view this Youtube seminar by Tony Heller –– you will be thoroughly disgusted with the amount of fraud and corruption going on in the field of meteorology. Please, just watch THE FIRST TEN MINUTES of the video [see URL below] and you won’t be able to stop. 🙂
It comes from the audits done of NOAA and shows how the MARS (modernization and restructuring program) changed many of the observational components of the National Weather Service.They started dumping actual temperature measurements from rural station sites but left the ID’s within the database and started backfilling the vacant ID’s with urbanized data they claim represents those stations.
That is called “homogenization” in their dress-up nomenclature, but it really is just a kinder, gentler word for fraud. Tony Heller talks about data manipulation being done by NOAA to cook the instrumental record books. I recommend watching this video to any that have ever seen it, You may find additional graphs that you might want to use in your upcoming presentation.
Mark Albright has given us many examples of how temperature trends in the rural stations, still online, do not represent the warming “artifically created” by NOAA and NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) that have been switching out these stations for the warmer ones in urban settings that have a UHI bias in them –– and deliberately cooling the earlier records to erase important cooling trends in the original records so as to make the temperature trends look as though they have a perfect correlation with increasing atmospheric CO2. That way, they sharpen the linear trend line slope to keep their failing hypothesis about CO2 and temperature alive.
In my mind, this is scientific criminal behavior and all those responsible should be prosecuted and punished.
COMMENT: Meteorologist: Does anyone know where this data set came from?