John Coleman's TV special was 6 days ago (14th), this is the first report in the MSM I think.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2465231

Richard Foot, Canwest News Service Published: Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Call it the mystery of the missing thermometers.

Two months after "climategate" cast doubt on some of the science behind global warming, new
questions are being raised about the reliability of a key temperature database, used by the United
Nations and climate change scientists as proof of recent planetary warming.

Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature
trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly
those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

In the 1970s, nearly 600 Canadian weather stations fed surface temperature readings into a global
database assembled by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Today, NOAA
only collects data from 35 stations across Canada.

Worse, only one station -- at Eureka on Ellesmere Island -- is now used by NOAA as a temperature
gauge for all Canadian territory above the Arctic Circle.

The Canadian government, meanwhile, operates 1,400 surface weather stations across the country, and
more than 100 above the Arctic Circle, according to Environment Canada.

Yet as American researchers Joseph D'Aleo, a meteorologist, and E. Michael Smith, a computer
programmer, point out in a study published on the website of the Science and Public Policy
Institute, NOAA uses "just one thermometer [for measuring] everything north of latitude 65
degrees."

Both the authors, and the institute, are well-known in climate-change circles for their skepticism
about the threat of global warming.

Mr. D'Aleo and Mr. Smith say NOAA and another U.S. agency, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space
Studies (GISS) have not only reduced the total number of Canadian weather stations in the database,
but have "cherry picked" the ones that remain by choosing sites in relatively warmer places,
including more southerly locations, or sites closer to airports, cities or the sea -- which has a
warming effect on winter weather.

Over the past two decades, they say, "the percentage of [Canadian] stations in the lower elevations
tripled and those at higher elevations, above 300 feet, were reduced in half."

Using the agency's own figures, Smith shows that in 1991, almost a quarter of NOAA's Canadian
temperature data came from stations in the high Arctic. The same region contributes only 3% of the
Canadian data today.

Mr. D'Aleo and Mr. Smith say NOAA and GISS also ignore data from numerous weather stations in other
parts of the world, including Russia, the U.S. and China.

They say NOAA collects no temperature data at all from Bolivia -- a high-altitude, landlocked
country -- but instead "interpolates" or assigns temperature values for that country based on data
from "nearby" temperature stations located at lower elevations in Peru, or in the Amazon basin.

The result, they say, is a warmer-than-truthful global temperature record.

"NOAA . . . systematically eliminated 75% of the world's stations with a clear bias towards
removing higher latitude, high altitude and rural locations, all of which had a tendency to be
cooler," the authors say. "The thermometers in a sense, marched towards the tropics, the sea, and
to airport tarmacs."

The NOAA database forms the basis of the influential climate modelling work, and the dire, periodic
warnings on climate change, issued by James Hanson, the director of the GISS in New York.

Neither agency responded to a request for comment Wednesday from Canwest News Service. However
Hanson did issue a public statement on the matter earlier this week.

"NASA has not been involved in any manipulation of climate data used in the annual GISS global
temperature analysis," he said. "The agency is confident of the quality of this data and stands by
previous scientifically-based conclusions regarding global temperatures."

In addition to the allegations against NOAA and GISS, climate scientists are also dealing with the
embarrassment this week of the false glacier-melt warning contained in the 2007 report of the UN
Panel on Climate Change. That report said Himalayan glaciers are likely to disappear within three
decades if current rates of melting continue.

This week, however, the panel admitted there is no scientific evidence to support such a claim.

The revelations come only two months after the "climategate" scandal, in which the leak or theft of
thousands of e-mails -- private discussions between scientists in the U.S. and Britain -- showed
that a group of influential climatologists tried for years to manipulate global warming data, rig
the scientific peer-review process and keep their methods secret from other, contrary-minded
researchers.

On Jan 20, 8:17*pm, "Eric Gisin" wrote:
John Coleman's TV special was 6 days ago (14th), this is the first report in the MSM I think.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2465231

Richard Foot, Canwest News Service *Published: Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Call it the mystery of the missing thermometers.

Two months after "climategate" cast doubt on some of the science behind global warming, new
questions are being raised about the reliability of a key temperature database, used by the United
Nations and climate change scientists as proof of recent planetary warming.

Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature
trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly
those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

In the 1970s, nearly 600 Canadian weather stations fed surface temperature readings into a global
database assembled by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Today, NOAA
only collects data from 35 stations across Canada.

Worse, only one station -- at Eureka on Ellesmere Island -- is now used by NOAA as a temperature
gauge for all Canadian territory above the Arctic Circle.

The Canadian government, meanwhile, operates 1,400 surface weather stations across the country, and
more than 100 above the Arctic Circle, according to Environment Canada.

Yet as American researchers Joseph D'Aleo, a meteorologist, and E. Michael Smith, a computer
programmer, point out in a study published on the website of the Science and Public Policy
Institute, NOAA uses "just one thermometer [for measuring] everything north of latitude 65
degrees."

Both the authors, and the institute, are well-known in climate-change circles for their skepticism
about the threat of global warming.

Mr. D'Aleo and Mr. Smith say NOAA and another U.S. agency, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space
Studies (GISS) have not only reduced the total number of Canadian weather stations in the database,
but have "cherry picked" the ones that remain by choosing sites in relatively warmer places,
including more southerly locations, or sites closer to airports, cities or the sea -- which has a
warming effect on winter weather.

No surprise they'd incorporate the heat island effect to bolster their
case, then deny it has any merit! Unreal.

On Jan 20, 8:18*pm, Liberals are vermin wrote:
On Jan 20, 8:17*pm, "Eric Gisin" wrote:



John Coleman's TV special was 6 days ago (14th), this is the first report in the MSM I think.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2465231

Richard Foot, Canwest News Service *Published: Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Call it the mystery of the missing thermometers.

Two months after "climategate" cast doubt on some of the science behind global warming, new
questions are being raised about the reliability of a key temperature database, used by the United
Nations and climate change scientists as proof of recent planetary warming.

Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature
trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly
those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

In the 1970s, nearly 600 Canadian weather stations fed surface temperature readings into a global
database assembled by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Today, NOAA
only collects data from 35 stations across Canada.

Worse, only one station -- at Eureka on Ellesmere Island -- is now used by NOAA as a temperature
gauge for all Canadian territory above the Arctic Circle.

The Canadian government, meanwhile, operates 1,400 surface weather stations across the country, and
more than 100 above the Arctic Circle, according to Environment Canada.

Yet as American researchers Joseph D'Aleo, a meteorologist, and E. Michael Smith, a computer
programmer, point out in a study published on the website of the Science and Public Policy
Institute, NOAA uses "just one thermometer [for measuring] everything north of latitude 65
degrees."

Both the authors, and the institute, are well-known in climate-change circles for their skepticism
about the threat of global warming.

Mr. D'Aleo and Mr. Smith say NOAA and another U.S. agency, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space
Studies (GISS) have not only reduced the total number of Canadian weather stations in the database,
but have "cherry picked" the ones that remain by choosing sites in relatively warmer places,
including more southerly locations, or sites closer to airports, cities or the sea -- which has a
warming effect on winter weather.

No surprise they'd incorporate the heat island effect to bolster their
case, then deny it has any merit! *Unreal.

Isn't it amazing that even though there are still no news sources
reporting on a
cooling climate, there are people who believe it is happening?

Unreal.

On Jan 21, 6:03*pm, enigma wrote:
On Jan 20, 8:18*pm, Liberals are vermin wrote:





On Jan 20, 8:17*pm, "Eric Gisin" wrote:

John Coleman's TV special was 6 days ago (14th), this is the first report in the MSM I think.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2465231

Richard Foot, Canwest News Service *Published: Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Call it the mystery of the missing thermometers.

Two months after "climategate" cast doubt on some of the science behind global warming, new
questions are being raised about the reliability of a key temperature database, used by the United
Nations and climate change scientists as proof of recent planetary warming.

Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature
trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly
those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

In the 1970s, nearly 600 Canadian weather stations fed surface temperature readings into a global
database assembled by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Today, NOAA
only collects data from 35 stations across Canada.

Worse, only one station -- at Eureka on Ellesmere Island -- is now used by NOAA as a temperature
gauge for all Canadian territory above the Arctic Circle.

The Canadian government, meanwhile, operates 1,400 surface weather stations across the country, and
more than 100 above the Arctic Circle, according to Environment Canada.

Yet as American researchers Joseph D'Aleo, a meteorologist, and E. Michael Smith, a computer
programmer, point out in a study published on the website of the Science and Public Policy
Institute, NOAA uses "just one thermometer [for measuring] everything north of latitude 65
degrees."

Both the authors, and the institute, are well-known in climate-change circles for their skepticism
about the threat of global warming.

Mr. D'Aleo and Mr. Smith say NOAA and another U.S. agency, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space
Studies (GISS) have not only reduced the total number of Canadian weather stations in the database,
but have "cherry picked" the ones that remain by choosing sites in relatively warmer places,
including more southerly locations, or sites closer to airports, cities or the sea -- which has a
warming effect on winter weather.

No surprise they'd incorporate the heat island effect to bolster their
case, then deny it has any merit! *Unreal.

Isn't it amazing that even though there are still no news sources
reporting on a
cooling climate, there are people who believe it is happening?

Unreal.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Has everybody noticed how enigma posts a comment about a cooling
climate, every time he wants to divert people away from the current
topic. He is obviously very uncomfortable with any negative facts
about AGW. Any facts which he can not dispute get the diversion trick.
It has been happening more and more lately.

On 21/01/10 2:17, in article , "Eric
Gisin" wrote:

And you are using a selective article from a junk right wing publication

On Jan 21, 2:16*am, Earl Evleth wrote:
On 21/01/10 2:17, in article , "Eric

Gisin" wrote:

And you are using a selective article from a junk right wing publication

Your problem isn't the right wing publications outing you, it's your
old supporters like the BBC finally producing stories other than your
one-sided propaganda.

Wotta ****ing retard. Can't refute any of my posts.

"Earl Evleth" wrote in message ...
On 21/01/10 2:17, in article , "Eric
Gisin" wrote:

And you are using a selective article from a junk right wing publication

On 23/01/10 19:03, in article , "Eric
Gisin" wrote:

Wotta ****ing retard

Foul language translate as you lost the argument.
Publishing stuff out of the National Post is
intellectually disreputable. But you language
use sits your style.

On Jan 23, 1:37*pm, Earl Evleth wrote:
On 23/01/10 19:03, in article , "Eric

Gisin" wrote:
Wotta ****ing retard

[garbage flushed]

yeah, Wotta ****ing retard.
dead man coughing.
have another fag.

"Eric Gisin" wrote in message
...
Wotta ****ing retard. Can't refute any of my posts.

"Earl Evleth" wrote in message
...
On 21/01/10 2:17, in article , "Eric
Gisin" wrote:

And you are using a selective article from a junk right wing publication