NASA May Have Faked Climate Data: Retired Top UK Govt Scientist

Written by Andy Rowlands

London’s Big Ben to RING again – but it WON’T be on time ...

Retired Principal Scientific Officer (PSO) for the British Government exposes “discrepancies” in NASA’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN) which serve to make recent temperatures seem warmer.

The “mistakes” point to possible fraud intended to give scientific credence to tax raising UK and US climate policies.

The unnamed source, now retired from the UK Scientific Civil Service and speaking exclusively to Principia Scientific International (PSI), was so disturbed by the “tampering” of government temperature records, he performed his own verification tests and exposed a shocking anomaly that turns the global warming narrative on its head.

The highly qualified whistle blower reveals that he downloaded the raw station data from NASA/GISS gridded land anomaly products and compared them with the anomalies.

He told PSI:

“Having processed NASA GISS 250km T2m and 1200Km T2m global land anomaly data products I also processed Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN) daily mean temperature records from  the 1,045 stations that have been continuously operative since 1900.

 Since these 1,045 stations  form the backbone of the historical world meteorological network, and therefore NASA GISS  products, we may expect results to be largely similar, though with inflated variance within the GHCN-D data series (GISS anomalies are highly processed products). Not addressed in this study is the urban heat island effect which is known to contaminate the land-based record.

Prior to 1970 there is an inexplicable divergence in that NASA GISS products show historic global land temperatures to have been cooler than those recorded by the 1,045 GHCN-D stations; this difference being most pronounced around 1930 when extreme heatwaves were experienced across the continental US and in other parts of the world (a fact recorded in newspapers of the day).

The extremes of the 1930s/40s down to the cooler 1960s/70s prompted scientific discussion of a pending ice age.”

The retired top government scientist laments that he is old enough to remember the wild media scaremongering of the 1970’s about global cooling.

He spoke of how the very same scientists and government bodies that were warning of an impending ice in the seventies are the very same tax zealous advocates hyping global warming today.

At this stage, the evidence may support skeptic claims that governments have an agenda to promote climate scaremongering. Unlike the seventies, the only difference this time is the narrative is all about global warming, not the threat of an imminent ice age.

Our insider source reveals that global land temperature anomalies estimated as high as 1.23°C today were actually occurring routinely as far back as 1934. These temperatures were only surpassed again in 2015.

Persuaded by the raw data he examined, the former top UK government expert is adamant there is nothing abnormal about recent global temperatures.

GHCN-D data were used to identify discrepancies in NASA’s GISS gridded anomaly products; he affirms he’s found nothing amiss with the GHCN-D dataset.

He told me:

“I thus decided to run a few statistical procedures to highlight the improbability of these differences arising by chance. (slide #1)

“The period 1914 – 2018 was divided into seven 15-year periods and a difference series derived from NASA GISS 250km T2m and the GHCN-D Tavg 1,045 station series. Whilst a fair degree of  variation between the two series is to be expected the differenced series should theoretically  manifest itself as a normally or near-normally distributed variable with an overall mean value of  zero or near-zero.”

“Slide #2 is a snapshot of a repeated one sample t-test for each of the seven-year periods in which the mean value of the differenced series is tested against the null hypothesis. Only periods 1974- 1988 and 1989-2003 can be considered free of systematic bias with p-values of p=0.593 and p=0.070 respectively. Bias for the earliest three periods is particularly pronounced, where we may note inexplicable cooling of the NASA gridded product by as much as 0.612°C (1929-1943, p<0.001). We may also note an inexplicably warmer present than expected, with a bias of 0.317°C creeping into NASA gridded product for the period 2004-2018 (p=0.029).”

The pattern of bias over the seven data periods prompted the retired top UK scientist to produce slide #3, this being a time series plot of the differenced series for 1900 – 2018.

The whistleblower adds:

“There is no way that simple estimation error is going to produce a slope like this: we should see data points randomly scattered about the zero value of the y axis. In this chart the dark red line is an OLSR whose slope estimate was calculated at +0.1°C per decade (p<0.001), and the black line is an Epanechnikov (50%) smoothing function to guide the eye.

Fitted values for the OLSR trendline reveal that between 1900 and 2018 NASA has somehow systematically and inexplicably added +1.16°C to their 250 T2m global land anomaly gridded product when compared to GHCN-D data based on a sample of 1,045 stations. I cannot as yet explain this and encourage statistically- minded climate enthusiasts to pull down data and confirm  this extraordinary finding for themselves.”

Having studied the whistleblower’s calculations it is very evident they have a striking similarity to those of noted American climate skeptic, Tony Heller.

Many alarmists have criticised Tony Heller for either ‘cherry-picking’, misunderstanding the data he’s using, or deliberately tampering with data himself to produce his graphs and charts, so this independent verification of his work is, I would venture, rather important, showing past recorded temperatures are indeed being lowered, and present ones raised, just as Tony Heller says.

It’s difficult not to conclude we are looking at deliberate scientific fraud that accounts for most of the global warming claimed by the IPCC

Growing concerns are that ‘secret science’ used routinely by government -funded researchers may be the cover for unethical manipulation of the global temperature record. This is the strongly-held view of renowned Canadian skeptic climatologist, Dr Tim Ball after his epic court victory of over UN IPCC Lead scientist Dr Michael E Mann.

Mann is now being investigated for further legal action. Principia Scientific International is currently lobbying for a full RICO investigation into this mounting evidence of government climate fraud.

WWG1WGA


PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Trackback from your site.

Comments (12)

  • Avatar

    Joseph Olson

    |

    “Perplexing Apollo Questions for NASA” > FauxScienceSlayer(.)com
    50 years of great leap lies > NASA can no longer fashion lunar landers
    using cardboard mailing tubes and Reynolds wrap > we lost that technology

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Matt

    |

    Hi Andy.
    It is a shame the source remains unnamed as this does otherwise provide independent support and validation to Toto Heller’s work.
    Hearsay is hearsay.
    What is OLSR?
    Thank you for your otherwise clear writing as usual.
    Kind Regards
    Matt

    Reply

    • Avatar

      geran

      |

      “What is OLSR?”

      OSLR — Ordinary Least Squares Regression

      Reply

      • Avatar

        geran

        |

        “OLSR”, not the other one!

        Sorry, “first cup of coffee” error….

        Reply

    • Avatar

      Bonnie

      |

      It’s understandable that the whistleblower will not divulge their name as any pension or dependent
      could lose their earned funds. Could you set up the donations to go directly to the whistle blowers funds so they would be able to divulge themselves and give more credibility to their information?

      Reply

    • Avatar

      Bonnie

      |

      It’s understandable that the whistleblower will not divulge their name as any pension or dependent
      could lose their earned funds. Could you set up the donations to go directly to the whistle blowers funds so they would be able to divulge themselves and give credibility to their information?

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Andrew

    |

    Well no Matt.

    The data speaks for itself – the art of replication is ample here?

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Matt

      |

      Thank you Andrew and Geran.
      You will find there are others almost as simple as me.
      In fact, the common failure in good governance, group think, is a failure to ask the simple questions.
      Be happy
      Matt

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Andy Rowlands

    |

    Thanks for your thoughts guys. I happen to know the retired scientist, and he’s asked for anonymity for now. The article has also been revised slightly to reflect comments from him.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    John O'Sullivan

    |

    Andy, many thanks to you and the unnamed source for helping to show validation of Heller’s important work. Together we can move forward to expose errors by government researchers. Is it coincidence all such ‘errors’ go one direction – to support a man-made global warming narrative.?

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Andy Rowlands

      |

      Sorry John I didn’t see your comment yesterday for some reason! I think it’s no coincidence at all, the government-funded ‘scientists’ will produce exactly what their political masters tell them to produce, and unfortunately they have the ears of the majority of the world’s Press and politicians.

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Nikko

    |

    It’s all a big lie from the UN….the un is in need of money badly so they invented a climate crisis.

    Reply

Leave a comment