Crime Trillions Spent on ‘Climate Change’ Based on Faulty Temperature Data, Climate Experts Say

[dirtypablo]

If the NOAA (a government agency) is corrupt and conducting trash science, we cannot trust their data when it claims we've had the warmest year on record, can we?

It delegitimizes the organization, and anything they're espousing based upon that faulty/manipulated data.

That's the issue.

But people in here just wanna keep throwing them money anyway (without getting to the bottom of it), it seems, despite that potential corruption. Why? Epoch Times.

The trash science is what's in your article. Here's an article detailing why. Seriously, does the fact that none of the people in your article are climate scientists not ring any warning bells for you? How about the fact that one of the meteorologists they're using as reference doesn't even have a bachelor's degree, much less a graduate degree in any form of science? How about the fact that the 'study' they're referring to was funded by the fossil fuels industry? None of these things signal to you that you might be reading bullshit?

Fact-checking claim about ‘corrupted’ climate change data

Global temperatures are rising, and there is ample evidence to support that fact. But that hasn’t stopped some people fr

www.politifact.com

 

[dirtypablo]

And by the way, the 'trillions' spent on climate financing most likely isn't what you think it is. That's not a trillion dollars of government spending, from what I can see it's the total amount of money spent on anything that could be related to addressing the issue, which would include government spending and private spending for things home and grid solar systems, possibly electric vehicles and so on, as well as private investment in companies seeking to address the problem.

For reference, the oil industry has made that much in profits, not just revenue but profit for the last several years.

 

[Ruprecht]

For sure money will have been wasted under this particular banner.

A fucking lot of it.

We only have to look at stories like the Baroness Mone one that broke here in the UK re: Covid/PPE to realize how much money will have been siphoned off by corrupt arseholes at every turn. They don't have to be involved in pseudo-science, even, pseudo-business is everywhere. It's inescapable. Politicians 'awarding' money to friends/businesses.

For real, the world over.

None of that de-legitimizes climate change or the need to act, though. It just underscores the world we live in.

The bad science here though is Anthony Watts' (who didn't actually graduate with a degree in meteorology before becoming a TV weatherman, he just had an AMS "Seal of Approval") exaggerated claims based on a study (funded by the Heartland Institute, straight propaganda) which they rehash every time something hits the news they don't like (2023 temperature record), regardless of how many times it's been debunked. Going back to at least 2009. It's the same with most of their talking points.
Heartland funding is mostly derived privately, with major donors such as the Koch brothers. So it's not public funds being spent on junk science aimed at influencing policy in this case.

 

[Loiosh]

If the NOAA (a government agency) is corrupt and conducting trash science, we cannot trust their data when it claims we've had the warmest year on record, can we?

It delegitimizes the organization, and anything they're espousing based upon that faulty/manipulated data.

That's the issue.

But people in here just wanna keep throwing them money anyway (without getting to the bottom of it), it seems, despite that potential corruption. Why? Epoch Times.

I'm not trying to be condescending here but that's how science works.

You develop a theory and everyone attacks it. If it survives and can be replicated, it's valid.

People are criticizing Epoch Time because they can't be trusted to provide a fair narrative based on the facts.

Of course there's corruption wherever there's a dollar to be made and plenty of bad actors have used the appearance of science as a shield (see tobacco, opioids), but digging to the truth is more effective if you have a neutral source. Epoch Times is anything but that.

 

[BearGrounds]

The trash science is what's in your article. Here's an article detailing why. Seriously, does the fact that none of the people in your article are climate scientists not ring any warning bells for you? How about the fact that one of the meteorologists doesn't even have a bachelor's degree, much less a graduate degree in any form of science? How about the fact that the 'study' they're referring to was funded by the fossil fuels industry? None of these things signal to you that you might be reading bullshit?

Fact-checking claim about ‘corrupted’ climate change data

Global temperatures are rising, and there is ample evidence to support that fact. But that hasn’t stopped some people fr

www.politifact.com

I'll read the article.

"Climate scientist" doesn't necessarily sway me, no. I've been around long enough to know that scientists can be bought, and are. But, yes, it does mean something to be a certified expert in a given field.

Certainty any fossil fuel funded studies should be approached warily.

Do you wholeheartedly trust the NOAA data?

 

[BearGrounds]

I'm not trying to be condescending here but that's how science works.

You develop a theory and everyone attacks it. If it survives and can be replicated, it's valid.

People are criticizing Epoch Time because they can't be trusted to provide a fair narrative based on the facts.

Of course there's corruption wherever there's a dollar to be made and plenty of bad actors have used the appearance of science as a shield (see tobacco, opioids), but digging to the truth is more effective if you have a neutral source. Epoch Times is anything but that.

Is the data correct and the money being well spent? Yes or no?

 

[Loiosh]

Is the data correct and the money being well spent? Yes or no?

How would I know? Do you think I'm qualified to make that determination? Are you?

I trust the consensus of experts. I know this probably sounds ignorant and naïve to you, but trusting my own ability to analyze this kind of data and trusting hyper partisan sites like Epoch sounds worse than that to me.

 

[BearGrounds]

NOAA relates to one country.

If the US was the only country producing this data, that would matter more to me.

But they're not.

View attachment 1027091


JRA-55 is Japanese.
HadCRUT is British.
C3S (ERA5) is European.

China seem to be finding the same data.

You don't have to rely on NOAA or NASA if you don't like.

From @dirtypablo link, which I'm working on reading now:

NOAA publishes U.S. weather station data online, and groups such as Berkeley Earth, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the United Kingdom’s Met Office and the Japan Meteorological Agency use it to build climate records.

I'll have to look into the other ones, but the Japanese use data from the NOAA. Berkley Earth is also on your chart, and they do the same thing.

 

[BearGrounds]

How would I know? Do you think I'm qualified to make that determination? Are you?

I trust the consensus of experts. I know this probably sounds ignorant and naïve to you, but trusting my own ability to analyze this kind of dats and trusting hyper partisan sites like Epoch sounds worse than that to me.

No, I don't think that you are, hence why you shouldn't be so confident about dismissing reports solely based upon the source, without at all finding out if the data in question is correct and the money is being properly allocated.

 

[emefer]

So for all of the people attacking the source, was no money wasted on bad science, and are the readings taken by the NOAA legit and trustworthy?

I think money was wasted on your education.

 

[emefer]

My friend works for NOAA and is highly ranked in the organization. While it’s not his area of expertise (he does the oceanic stuff) I’ll see if he has any insight on this. I’ll ask him when he gets back from his meeting overseas and bump thread if anything interesting comes up.

Is your friend corrupt and engaged in pushing trash science?

 

[BearGrounds]

I think money was wasted on your education.

Student loan forgiveness!!

JK I paid off all of my student loans myself. But I'd agree that money was wasted. University is a scam in many ways. Least I got to wrestle.

And you didn't answer the question, educated person (not that you can).

 

[Roop Holstry]

Is your friend corrupt and engaged in pushing trash science?

Nope. I don’t think there is much benefit to being corrupt in ocean floor acoustics and surveying.

 

[BearGrounds]

Nope. I don’t think there is much benefit to being corrupt in ocean floor acoustics and surveying.

I wonder if he knows about this, and what his thoughts are on it:

The Eltanin Antenna is an object photographed on the sea floor by the Antarctic oceanographic research ship USNS Eltanin in 1964, while photographing the sea bottom west of Cape Horn.

Eltanin Antenna - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not that you have to ask him or anything, but I am curious.

 

[emefer]

The trash science is what's in your article. Here's an article detailing why. Seriously, does the fact that none of the people in your article are climate scientists not ring any warning bells for you? How about the fact that one of the meteorologists they're using as reference doesn't even have a bachelor's degree, much less a graduate degree in any form of science? How about the fact that the 'study' they're referring to was funded by the fossil fuels industry? None of these things signal to you that you might be reading bullshit?

Fact-checking claim about ‘corrupted’ climate change data

Global temperatures are rising, and there is ample evidence to support that fact. But that hasn’t stopped some people fr

www.politifact.com

I think that it appeals to him as he also has no expertise or education in any science yet knows that those that do are lying about it to get some of the money they are stealing from the climate change believers

 

[BearGrounds]

I think that it appeals to him as he also has no expertise or education in any science yet knows that those that do are lying about it to get some of the money they are stealing from the climate change believers

What a stupid post.

 

[Roop Holstry]

I wonder if he knows about this, and what his thoughts are on it:

The Eltanin Antenna is an object photographed on the sea floor by the Antarctic oceanographic research ship USNS Eltanin in 1964, while photographing the sea bottom west of Cape Horn.

Eltanin Antenna - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not that you have to ask him or anything, but I am curious.

I will if I remember. He has discovered new species of marine creatures, found lost ship wrecks and all that cool stuff. Honestly… I don’t ask him enough about all that stuff. Really interesting job.

 

[BearGrounds]

I will if I remember. He has discovered new species of marine creatures, found lost ship wrecks and all that cool stuff. Honestly… I don’t ask him enough about all that stuff. Really interesting job.

Cool, thanks! Definitely sounds like an awesome job.

 

[Roop Holstry]

I wonder if he knows about this, and what his thoughts are on it:

The Eltanin Antenna is an object photographed on the sea floor by the Antarctic oceanographic research ship USNS Eltanin in 1964, while photographing the sea bottom west of Cape Horn.

Eltanin Antenna - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not that you have to ask him or anything, but I am curious.

This was one of his recent discoveries. They sent it to a lab but I never followed up to see if they figured out what it is.

 

[emefer]

I wonder if he knows about this, and what his thoughts are on it:

The Eltanin Antenna is an object photographed on the sea floor by the Antarctic oceanographic research ship USNS Eltanin in 1964, while photographing the sea bottom west of Cape Horn.

Eltanin Antenna - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not that you have to ask him or anything, but I am curious.

It’s a sponge. It’s says it right there in the wiki.