NASA’s Great Peak Fake Swindle
Written by Geraint Hughes
I would like to draw some blatant phoney baloney manipulation by NASA and all the Climate Crisis Alarmists, to everyone’s attention. That being the graph above.
This is taken from NASA website as such https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_05/ Sorry to break the bad news to you all but this is just a Charlatan, mirror trick the entire graph.
I rate this graph quadruple D, for Deliberately Dumbly Deceptive & Deceitful. Anyone without knowledge of the manipulations which I am about to expose, would look at this graph and wrongly think to themselves that the Earth has maximum emissions at the 600 to 700 wavenumber wavelength, which roughly aligns with the 666.7 (15 micron) emission wavelength of CO2, which in turn can be used to falsely argue that we must do something, because that is like a really bad thing right? As I am about to show you, it does not and this graph, is deliberate manipulation to trick everyone into thinking that.
To understand what I am talking about, you need to see an un-manipulated graph so that you can see the differences between the two.
Here you can clearly see that the peak of emissions is 10 micron, the CO2 emission spectra is roughly around the 15 micron waveband, which is actually much lower down the peak than the GISS Faker Graph, which has been designed to fool people into thinking things which are not true. I spotted this error on a twitter argument with Climate Alarmists whom like to use the NASA graph to trick people, in order to help lend false credibility to the Climate Crisis argument.
I noticed it, because I already knew that the 15 micron, waveband (CO2 line) peaked at around 190K and not the 294 K graph which the Fake graph depicts.
So why does the other faker graph show something different?
They way it has been done, is quite clever, it’s a manipulation of data, nothing else. You can not manipulate data in this manner and not know that is what you are doing. Therefore it is a Con-trick.
Firstly, they are using wavenumbers and not wavelengths. This is the first step of the trick. A wavenumber is quite simply, the INVERSE of the wavelength. Yes, that right people, they don’t like what they see, so they just tip the data upside down to create the false impression they wish to create. For say 1 mircon, you do 1/( micron/1000000*100) to get 10,000 Wavenumber in inverse cm.
This represents the number of times a 1 micron wavelength could fit into one centimetre which as you see is the number on the Y Axis, inverse centimetres. As an alternative example, if you had an area of 0.5 m2 and you inversed it you get 2, you know 0.5 could fit into 1 metre square, twice. This is what they have done. Imagine if the investment community did this to its investors, there would be outrage.
“Well yeah, we simply inverted profit & cost numbers to give the impression we were after, what’s your problem? Were a good company, check out the graph.”
I have produced a table of data below for the un-manipulated data.
Table 1 Un-manipulated Data 294K Blackbody Emission
In the faker graph, what has happened is that the energy emittance’s of several wavebands have been bunched together. So that the 600 to 700 wavenumber contains 14 to 17 microns, 500 to 600 wavenumber contains the combined emissions of the 17 to 19 micron wavelengths and the 400 to 500 wavenumber contains the combined emissions of the 20 to 25 emission wavelengths.
By bunching the microns together, under the “wavenumber banner” you get a totally different picture of emissive output than what is happening. This example I have tabulated below.
Table 2 Manipulated Wavenumber Graph Data 294K Blackbody Emission
The graph, using the same data now shows a totally different picture than the true, un-manipulated graph before. The fake graph using the above manipulated data is shown below and matches what NASA has done.
I can hear the alarmist cackling calls already, oh but that’s what happens when you use wavenumbers, can’t be avoided. Hmmmmm, oh really.
This is what the graph should look like if the Inverse Relationship of wavenumbers when compared to microns has been correctly accounted for, so as not to give a misleading image, which is what scientists with integrity would be expected to do. Now think to your-selves, if I can do this, why can’t NASA? FAKERS, that’s why. They are lying to you all and they know it, now you do too.
You see the X-Axis, I have not used linear jumps of 100 per point for wavenumbers, I have simply aligned them to match the Wavelength bands so as to not create a false image, by my understanding that wavenumbers are an inverse and not taking that into account gives false data, which is what NASA should have done, but then, if they did that, things would not look as bad now would they from the Alarmist point of view and we can’t have that now can we?
I hope one day, Judicial Watch & Trump and the US Government take direct action against the fakers within NASA whom are corrupting the organisation and have removed all sense of integrity from its preaching proclamations on Climate & in particular on Fake Climate Crisis. Frauds such as this should not be tolerated.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.