Despite documented proof that climate change has occurred over the years, a whistleblower is now claiming that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association is directly responsible for pushing the existence of man-made “global warming” by forgoing temperature data.
After retiring as a scientist at the National Climatic Data Center last year, John Bates emerges on the front of the “global warming” debate as a whistleblower to cool the heated battle on man-made climate change by calling attention to the NOAA.
Bates claims that he decided to speak out after reading an article done by the Washington Post titled, “Scientists Are Frantically Copying U.S. Climate data, Fearing It Might Vanish Under Trump.” Bates saw this as a huge joke, having worked for the NCDC.
He accused Thomas Karl, the lead author of the 2015 NOAA “pause buster” report of trying to “discredit” the temperature pause through “flagrant manipulation of scientific integrity guidelines and scientific publication standards.”
Bates told the Daily Mail that Karl did so by “insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximized warming and minimized documentation.”
“Gradually, in the months after the report came out, the evidence kept mounting that Tom Karl constantly had his ‘thumb on the scale’ — in the documentation, scientific choices, and release of datasets — in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy,” John Bates said on Climate Etc. blog.”
The June 2015 report shows “possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus,” which updated the ocean temperature record, was published six months before the UN’S Paris summit.
The chart that you will see below shows a gap of warming for 18 years and 9 months:
The land temperature dataset, on the other hand, was the victim of software bugs that rendered its conclusions “unstable,” Bates said.
Skeptics like myself have long insisted that scientists are susceptible to political and social pressures to produce the “right kind” of data to back up specific policy decisions. Dr. Duane Thresher, a climate scientist with a Ph.D. from Columbia University and NASA GISS, has pointed to a “publication and funding bias” as a key to understanding how scientific consensus can be manipulated.
Although scientists are held up as models of independent thinkers and unbiased seekers of truth, the reality is that they depend on funding even more than other professions, and will study only what they are paid to study.
“Government actions have corrupted science, which has been flooded by money to produce politically correct results,” said Dr. William Happer, professor emeritus of physics at Princeton University and a member of the National Academy of Sciences.
“It is time for governments to finally admit the truth about global warming. Warming is not the problem. Government action is the problem,” he said.
The knowingly buried data that did not fit their model; you can read 10 years worth of the leaked emails here at Wikileaks.
NOAA, the world’s leading source of climate data, not only produced a severely flawed study for political motives, it also mounted a cover-up when challenged over its data. Not long after the study’s publication, the US House of Representative Science Committee initiated an inquiry into its claims that no pause in global warming had existed. NOAA refused to comply with subpoenas demanding internal emails and falsely claimed that no one had raised concerns about the paper internally.