Climate scientists massage data to create illusion of ocean acidification


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

More climate fraud: NOAA scientists deliberately excluded huge swathes of the ocean acid dataset going back 100 years in order to create the false impression that there has been an increase in ocean acid due to increased CO2. More details here.

How did they do it? They cherry-picked when their dataset would begin, in 1988, rather than using the full dataset beginning in 1920. In addition, they also only used computer models that showed this correlation.

Below the fold I have posted the 2004 graph, produced by these so-called scientists, above a graph using the full dataset of real data. You will see that that the 2004 graph is utter crap.

False climate graph

actual data

Share

5 comments

  • Don

    Bob, thanks for all your work and for this blog.

    Merry Christmas!

  • Max

    It doesn’t surprise me. When the time is right for taking over peoples lives you need the right conditions that they will except. If there are no conditions, simply make it up and make it complicated enough that everyone will believe it without searching for the truth.
    Four instance, where I live the push is for better air-quality. So they put ozone detectors on the mass transit trains to show the masses how much pollution is in our air. There are two sources for ozone, the sun and electrical arc which is common on electric train motors. It’s no accident that they taint all the samples for political and economic reasons, the ends justify the means.
    I’ve read of a research paper where they took all the known carbon sources of gas, oil, and coal and calculated if burned,how much carbon dioxide it would make. Compared that to the known quantity of water in the ocean and the result was that “PH levels would fall from 8.3 to around 7.5 not reaching below seven to achieve an acid state”… There just isn’t enough carbon in the whole world.
    The second problem is calcium. The third most abundant ingredient in the ocean behind water and salt. Calcium reacts and neutralizes most acids and makes them inert. The antiacid people take for heartburn is made from calcium carbonate, limestone. which lies on the ocean floor with an average of 2,000 feet thick.
    The emperor has no clothes, and a lot of money is being spent to make sure he does not find out. The irony is we the people are the Emperor.
    We the sheep need help, thank you Sheep dog Robert for barking as loud as you are able.

  • jwing

    I have always thought the biggest weakness in the climate-change arguement was its not addressing the CO2 “sink” that are the oceans. The Henry’s Constant of CO2 gas is high allowing for CO2 (g) to be easily entrained into water solution as carbonic acid and to then be buffered by several chemical buffering systems.

    I once had a lengthy conversation with my neighbor, a University of Colorado – Boulder PhD professor who worked in the atmospherics lab. I mentioned my thoughts on the impact of the oceans’ ability to take CO2 gas into solution thereby acting as an enormous CO2 sink which the climate models didn’t correctly account for.

    Well, to my surprise, this genius didn’t know what the physio-chemical property called “Herny’s Constant” was. I had to expalin it to him. The consensus of scientists are ignorant of what they have settled on.

  • Don

    The use of the term acidifying is a lie. As the oceans are alkaline a reduction in their alkalinity is not acidification.

  • Max

    That’s funny. But you are correct, phytoplankton is a huge carbon sink in the ocean. Sometimes these small plants will turn a blue ocean green.
    If you extract a ton of this necessary part of the base of the oceans ecosystem, 400 pounds of this organism is calcium carbonate which will eventually end up on the bottom of the ocean as a permanent carbon sink.
    A recently released study on coral reef’s examined what would happen if too much carbon dioxide was in their environment. The earlier studies result was not good, but someone decided to continue the study. The new coral thrived in the environment and had more plankton to feed on. The conclusion said “coral reef’s or more resilient than they previously thought and can adapt to their environment.” (I’ve heard sunscreen on the other hand is deadly to coral. It was the primary cause of coral bleaching, people visiting the coral reef’s poison them accidentally.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *