Why NOAA Needs Whistlblowers

Exposed: How world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data

The Mail on Sunday can reveal a landmark paper exaggerated global warming

It was rushed through and timed to influence the Paris agreement on climate change

America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules

The report claimed the pause in global warming never existed, but it was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data

Actually there is no such thing as "verifiable" data in the global warming industry. The data cannot be replicated, ever, and therefore the entire "science" is not empirical. Further, the data has been manipulated; the data has been abused by urban heat islands, remote sensor adjustment to UHI false readings; deletions and extensions; the amoral preening of the "scientists" is obvious, including control of peer review; and the stated intent of the entire enterprise is to rob from Peter (developed western nations) in order to pay Paul (third world) with the communist redistribution being openly admitted.

Data Science,Climate and satellites Consultant John J Bates, who blew the whistle to the Mail on Sunday
The Mail on Sunday today reveals astonishing evidence that the organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.

A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015.

The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.

It was never subjected to NOAA’s rigorous internal evaluation process – which Dr Bates devised.

His vehement objections to the publication of the faulty data were overridden by his NOAA superiors in what he describes as a ‘blatant attempt to intensify the impact’ of what became known as the Pausebuster paper.

His disclosures are likely to stiffen President Trump’s determination to enact his pledges to reverse his predecessor’s ‘green’ policies, and to withdraw from the Paris deal – so triggering an intense political row.

IF: no AGW, THEN: no more massive funding.
Follow the money; that always works.