NOAA caught tampering with temperature data again

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.

A close look at NOAA’s temperature data for Maine has revealed that sometime between 2013 and 2015 the data was drastically adjusted to cool the past and warm the present.

No explanations for these changes has been offered. For some years they cooled the past as much as 4 degrees Fahrenheit, an adjustment that cannot be justified under any scientific method. As asked at the link, “Would someone please try to explain why this isn’t the biggest scandal in the history of science?”


  • wodun

    They want us to change economic systems, reject technology, turn down our standard of living, live like monks, and give up all control to governments on the possible rise in temperature of a degree over hundreds of years or the thousandths of a degree changed in a yearly average and NOAA is altering temperatures by as much as four degrees.

    So the altering of data by as much as four degrees, a far greater change than climate change is claimed to have caused, should lead to a proportional response on par with what they want to do to prevent a one degree change right?

  • Edward

    Wodun wrote, “should lead to a proportional response on par with what they want to do to prevent a one degree change right?”

    Are you suggesting what I think you are suggesting? That the government can prevent climate change merely by changing the past so that all past climates match the present climates? That should be a sure cure for climate change. We just might turn into king-for-life whichever president realizes that it is this simple to “cure” the climate change problem.

    It reminds me of doctors who diagnose cancer in a patient, charge an arm and a leg for a so called alternative treatment, then declare the patient cancer-free. “Hurray!” the patient cries, and he directs his friends and neighbors to the same heroic doctor.

    Oh, wait. You were suggesting that the conclusion would be that we needed four times as much government in order to prevent the projected four times larger than predicted change. Oh, well. That is what you get with corrupted government data: more corrupted government.

  • joe

    I think the model for this was the ozone hole scare and removing right guard and r12 refrigerant from cars, chicken little says the sky is falling, government says do this and now chicken little says all is good, never mind a population that is ignorant to the science of what really is going on.

  • Edward

    No matter the model, why does NOAA spend money on experiments and measurements when they will only make up different data later? NASA and NOAA spend a lot of money on Earth observation satellites, but the science that they produce is ignored and different science fabricated to make a political point.

    At the risk of answering my own question, the politicians spend our hard-earned money on these satellites in order to rationalize their power-grabbing policies, telling us how to live our lives and saving us from ourselves, as though we are not grown up but are adult children who cannot make our own decisions.

Leave a Reply

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