<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced</title>
		<description>Discuss US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced</description>
		<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 05:29:48 -0500</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/7479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Russ says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-14875</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well if he can't do the job properly then get someone else there who can! If you get paid to input numbers on a spread sheet you better F**king get it right, and not have someone else to F**king make up bull shit to cover for your F**king cherry picking bullshit either! Because someone will have some other kind of cherry picking to do with a Prick like you next time, you Warmist Jackass!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Russ</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2010 20:15:17 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-14875</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nij says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-14871</link>
			<description><![CDATA[****ing morons. Have you not heard of a typo? 600 degrees Fahreinheit converts to minus 14.4 degrees Celsius, and hey, what do you know! That's about a degree or two above the average November temperature for Hudson Bay! Exactly like the average around the world has increased by one or two degrees! You people are ****ing stupid for believing this cherrypicked bullshit. A guy missed out the point on his entering. It's called a mistake, we correct for them by either fixing the number or ignoring the data point as erroneous per se. You know what else? There's a perfectly reasonable explanation for that too. Just you try entering all of those numbers into a spreadhseet perfectly, without ever committing one typo, not once. Morons.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Nij</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2010 17:25:15 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-14871</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-12759</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Funny, I thought the defense department had ONE objective. Protect the US from attack. So why don't we compare the number of people and companies that have been convicted of fraud in the defense industry, and the number of fraudulent papers that have had to be retracted in the climate change industry. A quick google search overwhelmed my ability to even guess how to how many hundreds of fraud cases involving the defense department there have been in the last 30 years. and then I google climate change fraud and I don't find ONE scientific journal that has repudiated any peer reviewed articles supporting climate change. the only hits that come up are denier sites proclaiming fraud without any validation, except for their pseudo science and hysteria about Hockey sticks, and climate gate and huge conspiracies. "Gabe"@tony Duncan That comparison makes no sense. The defense department is much larger and encompasses many more objectives than "climate change research". Of course its budget would be much larger, dolt.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 21:19:44 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-12759</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Gabe says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-12756</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@tony Duncan That comparison makes no sense. The defense department is much larger and encompasses many more objectives than "climate change research". Of course its budget would be much larger, dolt.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Gabe</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 17:21:31 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-12756</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Andrew says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10978</link>
			<description><![CDATA[well said. i'd like to make a simple point that i believe adds support to your experience chasing these d-bags down. i learned at a very young age how beneficial lying can be. wether it was about my homework being done or being "full" when i didn't want to eat my veggies... in my mid 20's i realize how much that behavioral pattern has done to hurt me really. however people still can get away with lying for their benefit. and people without morals or any sort of ethical system, that are only self-interested, lie for a living. they lie for a living. because it is all too easy. how much money of yours have they used now?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:23:23 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10978</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Andrew says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10977</link>
			<description><![CDATA[or you don't recollect it having happened becuase the actually happening because when it did you were swimming and you were teleported into your bed with new superpowers do to .... well... global warming ha!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:16:20 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10977</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Andrew says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10975</link>
			<description><![CDATA[talk about the mindset of our generation.... no AC? NO PROBLEM! you all get to go home yay!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:55:14 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10975</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Andrew says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10974</link>
			<description><![CDATA[i thought good science was good observation... so why then is your system automated? it, according to you, is clearly providing false data and you don't even care enough to keep a careful eye on it yourself. this is why you have people like us who scrutinize your work and berate you for doing a lazy job with it. especially when it involves our money and i am willing to bet my life that your coastwatch program has recieved more than enough tax payer dough.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:42:37 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10974</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Andrew says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10973</link>
			<description><![CDATA[all of these pages have gone missing... i suspect there are people that don't want this information in front of your eyes are involved!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:37:44 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10973</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10335</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yup, they have already done it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 22:35:12 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10335</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10334</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Sorry Sapphire eyes, I forgot that the temp in Silicon valley exactly correlates with world temperature. No need for all those monitors on the rest of the planet I guess. So these 90° days in Vt in September are delusions on my part.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 22:34:17 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10334</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10333</link>
			<description><![CDATA[there is no reason to think that the flawed data has been incorporated into government statistics for the purpose of fraudulently gaming the temperature record. The only person who suggests that is the author of this piece of pure propaganda. I also write coastal watch and received a reply that explained in detail the whole situation in a way that was perfectly consistent with the facts. it included this statement. "To the best of our knowledge, none of these inaccurate data were used to inform other studies of climate change, nor estimates of long term average temperatures of the Great Lakes (which are based largely on in-situ temperature measurements)." of course you will never accept any explanation that goes against your ideology. But why don't you write to Lindzen and ask him if he believes that this was part of the conspiracy to steal your carbon dollars, Funny that NONE of the deniers who are actual skeptics have picked up on this story isn't it. Nothing from Lindzen, Spencer, Michaels etc. Obviously they have been bought off and the people on this site are the ONLY ONES LEFT who know THE TRUTH]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 22:27:42 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10333</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10094</link>
			<description><![CDATA[then surely you want to chop chop chop the defense department since the tens of billions of dollars that "disappear" there far outstrips the paltry millions the gov spends on climate change research]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 09:02:22 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10094</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10093</link>
			<description><![CDATA[the program you would be cutting has nothing to do with global warming. if you read all the comments, it is used by fisherman and others to for practical reasons. Of course maybe you mean the entire NOAA]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 08:30:27 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10093</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10092</link>
			<description><![CDATA[they aren't. If you read all the comments, some temps on the lake itself show way below what would be normal.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 08:07:57 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10092</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sapphireyes says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10091</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The one which should be cut the deepest is the taxpayer-funded propaganda source which churns out flawed data. Here in Silicon Valley, 2009 was neither hot nor cold, and 2010 has been downright chilly. Only four days of swimming weather this Summer. Brrr! Seriously.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sapphireyes</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:53:08 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10091</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sapphireyes says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10090</link>
			<description><![CDATA[tony, The damning evidence is in the silence. At no point in all this has the most important question been answered, backed with proof: To what extent has the flawed data been incorporated into government aggregate statistics? Heads should roll. Congressional hearings cost taxpayers too much. Just cut the program's budget and be done with it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sapphireyes</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:38:14 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10090</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sapphireyes says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10089</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Chop that budget, chop, chop, chop!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sapphireyes</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:29:56 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10089</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sapphireyes says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10088</link>
			<description><![CDATA[After seeing SO MANY severely flawed images, and the lame mutterings coming from this tax-dollar-sucking academic, I want an accounting of tax dollars being wasted on this "fully automated" exercise in top-down propaganda. Looks like a good place for budget cuts. Chop, chop!!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sapphireyes</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:18:01 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-10088</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nemo paradise says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-9935</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yes. Also the Cardiff Giant deniers, the Easter Bunny skeptics, the Phlogisten Theory of Fire debunkers and the "Elvis is dead, get over it" folks. I understand, though. When the truth blasts your faith-based delusions into an alternate universe, the best thing to do is -- deny it? By the way, the laughter you hear is not your in your imagination.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nemo paradise</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 18:52:36 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-9935</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Alex says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-9530</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Why even allow these clowns post? Any post on Huffington that don't follow agenda get canned... This dude is clearly a green loon]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 23:06:29 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-9530</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Skip says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-9368</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We are everywhere Eric. Not just here. We walk among you. And after November 2nd, we will really set things straight.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Skip</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 00:22:17 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-9368</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Eric says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-9365</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Oh, so this is where all the global warming deniers hang out.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 28 Aug 2010 23:31:40 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-9365</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Regg says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8730</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hey dude, you have'nt found anything. That's a very old story. The data has since been corrected. Only one dataset did not included the corrections - has noted by A. Watts in 2009. And that last one has also been corrected since the issue was raised about the discrepency between the datasets. Why do you make stuff up like that ? Just look at all the events about those issues and other stuff about that range of satellite. ghrc.nsstc.nasa.gov/pub/data/m su/t2lt/readme.13Apr2010 The current subject is like the usual denial bs.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Regg</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 22 Aug 2010 03:03:15 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8730</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>r u kiding says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8651</link>
			<description><![CDATA[from the university website ""NOTICE (8/11/2010): Due to degradation of a satellite sensor used by this mapping product, some images have exhibited extreme high and low surface temperatures. Please disregard these images as anomalies. Future images will not include data from the degraded satellite and images caused by the faulty satellite sensor will be/have been removed from the image archive.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>r u kiding</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 21 Aug 2010 14:39:53 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8651</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Charles R. Anderson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8321</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Both higher altitudes and higher latitudes have been systematically removed from the measured temperature record with very poor and biased interpolated results taking their place.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Charles R. Anderson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:25:51 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8321</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>david hurst says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8232</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I looked at a few comments here and this site seems somewhat on top of things. As a scientist that has periferally followed global warming and climate change, I felt about five years ago that industry sponsored PR regarding cycles had gone on long enough and that it was basically generally regarded as reality in the scientific community. Looking around at news site commentary, I am surprised to see so many that feel this is bogus, it has really cought me by surprise. As a chemist and a biologist, I have an idea of the basics and it appears to be a slam dunk. What are the issues?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>david hurst</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 23:12:48 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8232</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Red Jeff says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8231</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Compared to Mike? Absolutely! Allthe best..... Jeff]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Red Jeff</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 23:12:34 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8231</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8226</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Red jeff, are you impugning my troll quality]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 21:59:09 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8226</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Red Jeff says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8216</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Mike I hope you read this! I wholeheartedly agree with Scott. I have been meaning to give you credit but my stubbornness (check out that word, 3 doubleconsonants!!! And my English teechur thought I was an eejit!!), wouldn't let me. About three weeks back you made a comment that actually included a contrary position and explanation... that's a first around here !!!! Me included!! :sigh: The fact you presented emails live without knowing where the answer was going to end up takes some cahones! I don't know if I would have taken that chance!! Thank you. It has been noted that the quality of Trolls around here rapidly deteriorates when you don't comment!! We're left defending funding, T. Bell, emails and the such... at least you make me think! So thanks for taking the ribbings in my books you're an OK troll!! All the best...(really!)... Jeff]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Red Jeff</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:15:31 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8216</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Scott Ramsdell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8214</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I find this interesting. I think Mike did the right thing by contacting Coastal Watch, and I find he's being rather reasonable for a cultist. I've not read all the comments (about half) and don't know that anyone else has stated this or not, so: There is another explanation for all the black in the diagram(s) in question rather than the explanation given by Coastal Watch that the program automatically blacks out cloud covered areas. The program also automatically draws temperature graduations in black. Given some of the temps vary by more degrees than there are pixels between them, the application would draw the area in black while attempting to draw the temperature gradient lines.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Scott Ramsdell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 19:16:04 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8214</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Albert Marinus says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8200</link>
			<description><![CDATA[... ever is uneven any changing but never was not even one changest unever, bey quadrate. Mean, all changes are always without theory because with practum is also not the real change ... Http://genastropsychicalst.blogspot.com/, titel 'codeglobal'.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Albert Marinus</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 16:43:05 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8200</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sharpshooter says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8175</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think you mean higher LATITUDES.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sharpshooter</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:57:47 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8175</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>david hurst says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8171</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Looks like a pretty minor data point in the overall picture. Perfect for conspiracy fruitloops. Yah, those NOAA guys just want to get that political message out and rake in the big bucks.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>david hurst</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:30:31 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8171</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AntiLieGuy says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8170</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The chemtrails are hiding Planet X. Thats why they spray ever day globally for over four years now. Planet X is causing the massive increase in seismic and volcanic activity and it's also the sign in the heavens warning of America's total destruction on 10-10-10. News here: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/6519605/WarNews]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AntiLieGuy</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:29:54 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8170</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8117</link>
			<description><![CDATA[John, you seriously believe that this was a premeditated attempt to fraudulently inflate the temperatures int he US in order to fullfill a political agenda? The explanation about cloud cover affecting readings and their being a technical problem seems like a cover up to you?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 15 Aug 2010 19:18:11 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8117</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8104</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Miss- spoke, you don;t hear much about the Ozone hole layer much anymore because you don;t follow climate science. it is still quite an important issue. the relevant info here is that something was done about the "hole" and now it is not such a big problem regarding burning to a crisp. And what miraculous new scientific research is it that you have access to which shows that greenhouse gasses are "escaping? Are they exscaping to North Korea where they might get political asylum? Or maybe Oklahoma, and Inhofe is hiding them in the state house? but maybe you meant the HEAT from the greenhouse effect that is escaping via the Tropical Iris hypothesis of Skeptic Richard Lindzen, which has been severely critiqued by the scientific peer review process]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 15 Aug 2010 13:57:12 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8104</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Brad says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8102</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hmmm, what is with the apparent satellite error message that comes up? Somebody blaming the satellites to cover their tracks?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Brad</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 15 Aug 2010 13:40:07 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8102</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Miss-spoke says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8094</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Mike is obviously not aware of the huge hole in the atmosphere that was supposed to scare the pants off us all - turn out it provides a place for the "dangerous" green houses gases to escape - you see one can not have a true greenhouse with a huge hole in the roof of the greehouse. Funny we do not here about the ozone layer hole anymore - it was supposed to burn us all to a crisp by now.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Miss-spoke</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 15 Aug 2010 09:29:09 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8094</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Derecho64 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8061</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Really. Prove your assertion.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Derecho64</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 19:59:44 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8061</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Derecho64 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8060</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Wow. All the denier memes in one spillage, accompanied with a staggering ignorance of the entire issue. Congratulations!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Derecho64</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 19:56:50 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8060</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ralph says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8059</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Mike - yes YOU - why don't you go and crawl back under your rock, away from the heat, as you clearly are too stupid to understand the following: "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt". People like you are timewasters to searchers of the truth, and you have NO credibility left, your 'reputation' is in tatters.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ralph</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 19:07:52 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8059</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Derecho64 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8049</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You're doing a fantastic job as a mole discrediting deniers. Keep it up, Malcolm!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Derecho64</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:14:00 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8049</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Red Jeff says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8045</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Pat! Yes quite sure water does indeed boil at 671.6 degrees Rankine. Perhaps you are thinking of that degrees Fahrenheit thingy... thats 212. Celsius.... 100 deg. Kelvin.... 373 degrees. But thanks for setting us straight anyway! Please post more often... you gave me more smiles than even Joker could!!! All the best..... Jeff]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Red Jeff</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 10:17:03 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8045</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Patrick says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8044</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You sure about that one? You absolutely certain it isn't in the... oh let's just take a stab... 212 degree range?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:41:52 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8044</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>jason says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8041</link>
			<description><![CDATA[...no hacking? maybe because the US Government is not using his information to create a program that will cost the American taxpayer billions upon billions of dollars annually,....I'm just say'n]]></description>
			<dc:creator>jason</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 01:03:35 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8041</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8039</link>
			<description><![CDATA[oh, and as for bankers getting rich. Why would they bother with a few hundred billion in green, when there are tens of TRILLIONS in black gold! Follow the money boys!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 22:37:22 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8039</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8038</link>
			<description><![CDATA[malcolm, I read D'aleo's article. Didn't understand all of it, but I know that climate scientists are quite familiar with the ocean cycles and el niño/niña. he mentions nothing about particulates and their effect on masking CO2. Quite a few other things he ignores as well. As to your other statements, i know some top climate scientists, and have followed this issue for many years, intently since the climategate :scandal". I have over and over again looked at dozens of "proofs" acc is not happening and they all end up being wrong, most ludicrously wrong. Lindzen, Michaels, and Spencer, the three actual climate scientists I can think of that are skeptics all accept CO2 greenhouse theory. Are they just moles planted by Gore to throw off the ones who REALLY know the truth? I prefer to think you are delusional, since the scientists I know are all quite honest and very rigorous, and actual skeptics, in the way that scientists are supposed to critique theories based on actual information and generally through a peer review process, that even the climate gate conspirators weren't able to corrupt in one measly case. All of this being irrelevant to the topic of this article which is a piece of irresponsible propaganda. the title being "US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced". Now that title would cause most sane people to believe the author had uncovered some nefarious plot- i.e. emails between Soros, Gore, Van Jones and rev Wright discussing which scientist has not done enough to promote global warming, and deciding to use their magic decoder rings to corrupt a global satelite and and bring shame onto the knave who did not do his masters bidding with sufficient zeal. the actual reality is that a satellite has been degraded and is giving some nonsense figures when processing results over cloudy skies. You surely know of Occam's razor. Which one gets cut the deepest - conspiratorial hackers and/or decoder rings, or technological glitch that has no bearing on climate change. Oh, BTW in reading D'aleo's paper from 2007-8? he contends near future temps should be falling. Fail on 2009 AND 2010]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 22:26:50 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8038</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Joe Veragio says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8033</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If it's a faulty sensor , the AVHRR on NOAA-16 is showing fully operational, apart from" Operational with limitations (or Standby)" for its "scan motor". http://www.oso.noaa.gov/poesstatus/componentStatusSummary.asp?spacecraft=16&subsystem=4 I may have missed something, 'though one user of the service disregarding it's readings doesn't really deal with the problem, does it ?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Joe Veragio</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:28:31 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8033</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Schiller Thurkettle says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8031</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If the Coastal Watch program published its code, we'd know if the smoking hot temperatures were used to calculate temperatures over a larger area. So all we can do is twiddle our thumbs and maybe consider a FOIA.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Schiller Thurkettle</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:50:18 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8031</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Kevin says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8029</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Although I doubt this particular data is used for climate modeling, and I suspect the validity of climate models in general, they do in fact use temperature data...either directly for initialization, or temperature records for constraints or for statistical relationships to other parameters...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:59:09 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8029</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Kevin says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8028</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You people make most of us rational skeptics/scientists look bad by posting inaccuracies on something you know nothing about on these blogs. 1. These lake temps are not retrieved from microwave instruments, they use AVHRR, which is IR. This is the reason why cloud contamination is a problem, because emission from clouds at warmer/colder layers (relative to surface temp) influence the retrieval. Clouds are actually transparent to microwave, unless there is large ice or rain particles that scatter upwelling radiation. 2. This is relatively flawless science, as the surface temperature is directly proportional to the observed brightness temperature by the satellite sensor...again, without cloud contamination. These maps that you guys are up in arms about are only an issue if there is no quality control and the data have actually been used and contaminated long term averages, etc.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:41:39 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8028</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Harbinger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8007</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Wow, you believers will swallow anything, even plankton! Warmer oceans and more CO2 are beneficial to phytoplankton, as they are to all photo-synthesing life forms, hence plankton numbers are higher in summer than winter, leading to plankton blooms in some oceans in the Spring. I suspect that this sweeping generalisation of “40% decline in phytoplankton” will not stand close examination, but the agenda is being ramped up as all institutions are now seeking to nullify Climategate and prepare for Cancun. Mixing of data is a classic source of error as in the hockeystick and in ice cores. Homogenous data back to 1899? I don’t think so. Sampling methods are notoriously suspect: “Data recently collected in the northern Pacific Ocean shows two to three times more organic matter produced by photosynthesis than had been reported previously. Some biologists think that the open ocean has not been sampled often enough to catch periods of high productivity, resulting in !ow productivity assumptions. Others think that the sampling techniques themselves may have been responsible for erroneous results. Previous sampling methods and contaminated containers may be responsible for low estimates of productivity Phytoplankcton are delicate organisms that can easily be damaged by the collecting techniques” – Introduction to Marine Biology, by Karskint, Turner and Small.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Harbinger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 08:24:11 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8007</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Alan Burkhart says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8006</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I just opened the sea grant web page. A message pops up stating that some images were corrupted by a faulty satellite sensor and showed higher temps. Those images they say, are being removed. So the question is - will data from this alleged faulty sensor be purged from the records for accuracy's sake?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Alan Burkhart</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 08:16:26 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8006</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>John Brookes says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8000</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, thanks to Tom, Mike and others who put in the effort to find out what was going on and let us know. For a second there I was worried that science and technology was in disarray, and the skeptics were right. But of course it proved not to be the case. Again.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>John Brookes</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:18:27 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-8000</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malcolm Roberts says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7999</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Lou, Mike, Tony: From previous post, there is no observational basis for the UN IPCC's core claim of human CO2 as causation. There is no theoretical basis. The UN IPCC's radiative back-warming theory is nonsense and contradicts the laws of Nature and physics. It was disproven over a century ago, 1909. Then, understanding the sources of CO2 production on Earth and the reabsorption of CO2 from the atmosphere and CO2's residence time in the atmosphere and basic math show there's no physical basis. It's impossible for human production of CO2 to even influence the atmospheric level of CO2. Remember, the UN IPCC and Al Gore did NOT get a Nobel Prize for science. They got a Nobel Peace Prize. The science prizes are awarded by panels of peer scientists. The Peace Prize is awarded by a panel within the Norwegian parliament and is open to serious lobbying. You fell for. And now you want, I suppose, to help bankers get rich by taking money from us all through carbon trading? Malcolm :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malcolm Roberts</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:16:31 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7999</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malcolm Roberts says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7997</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Lou, Mike, Tony: To disprove human production of CO2 caused Earth's latest modest, cyclic period of global warming all that's needed is for me to either: - prove no unusual warming occurred, or - show atmospheric CO2 levels are not correlated with global temperature. I can show both. Temperatures: - two meteorologists D'Aleo and Watts report on temperature measuring stations and corruption of database: Here's the link: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/policy_driven_deception.html Title: Surface Temperature Records: Policy Driven Deception? Look at their summary. By the way, Watts initially bought global warming. Then when a few things didn't fit he checked for himself. Now, with facts a strong sceptic. There are other records showing no net global warming since 1958 - including a paper by Phil Jones. Sent to me by a scientist - not available on web. CO2 not correlated with temperatures: - D'Aleo on temperature drivers Here's the link: http://icecap.us/images/uploads/US_Temperatures_and_Climate_Factors_since_1895.pdf Title: US Temperatures and Climate Factors since 1895 Another paper showing what clearly drives global temperatures, El Nino. Proven close correlation between temperatures and El Nino with seven month lag on El Nino. - McLean, de Freitas, Carter It was peer-reviewed and accepted. Then challenged and after the reviewing panel breached guidelines knocked out. Climategate e-mails included an e-mail mentioning they wanted to knock out de Freitas because his paper is so strong. E-mails show CRU gang had huge, unscientific influence over peer-review and publications. Then realise that scientific measurements of atmospheric CO2 including those by Nobel science prize winners during the last 180 years show that CO2 levels have often been as much as 40% above current levels. Yet the UN IPCC ignores those. Then there's the UN IPCC's own 2007 report and its 2001 report. Chapter 9 the sole chapter attributing global warming to human production of CO2 contains no proof. None. Read it for yourself at: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch9.html The UN IPCC's chapter 9 is nonsense. Cleverly written but scientifically nonsense. The equivalent chapter 12 in the 2001 report contains no proof. It's available on the web. If you find proof, let us all know. Correlation by itself is not sufficient as proof. Absence of correlation though is sufficient to show non-causation. Oh, by the way, when someone makes a new claim such as human-induced global warming, the onus of proof is on them. You cannot provide proof and yet expect me to knock it out. And I've done that. Malcolm :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malcolm Roberts</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:09:49 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7997</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7994</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Oh, and what Phil Jones ACTUALLY said is that from a statistical point of view the evidence for warming is only 92% over such a short period, and to be statistically significant it needs to be 95%. this year will probably make his statement false, since it will almost surely go over the 95% mark by then. I am also amazed that people talk of global cooling as being 9 of the hottest years on record. but you people have to make up your minds, has there been NO warming or is the warming part of a natural cycle, it can;t really be both. I am guessing mike left the fray because he was so aghast at the paranoia that is incapable of seeing anything but socialist scientists chortling over their domination of us poor helpless freedom loving americans.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 23:24:28 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7994</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony Duncan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7992</link>
			<description><![CDATA[amazing. Tom actually goes to the person who administers this, gets reasonable answers and he is attacked for being a fool. there is no evidence here that anyone did anything nefarious. no evidence of a conspiracy, no evidence that these numbers are used for feeding into climate models, no evidence the NOAA is involved in any way, no evidence that any humans had anything to do with these numbers. Aaron twice posts this long pseudo scientific proof of the idiocy of ACC, that is filled with half truths and bad science that has been dealt with quite extensively in the literature, most recently the faults in Lindzens tropical iris theory]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony Duncan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 23:18:37 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7992</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Skip says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7991</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Another worthy contribution, Lou. We are all so proud of you.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Skip</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 23:16:21 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7991</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Skip says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7990</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Funny coming from one who has not shown a shred of evidence himself in support of his failed theory.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Skip</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 23:14:21 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7990</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Skip says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7989</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Lou, you will find this interesting. The ocean has 3000 times more mass than the atmosphere and is heavily buffered with carbonates. Were all the CO2 in the atmosphere to dissolve in the ocean it would have virtually no effect since CO2 is only 0.000389 of the air and the pH scale is logarithmic. Truth be told, marine organisms would actually prefer a more acidic ocean. Marine organisms biochemistry is naturally acidid, ususally around 5.5 vs 8.2 for the ocen so these organisms must work very hard spending energy to expel hydroxides. Secondly, more acidic water actually helps organisms to build shells. Corrosion rates are so slow that the organism would be dead long, long before its shell dissolved in the impossible event that oceans became acidic. Imagine a coral reef with its productive shallow pools a few feet deep. Imagine a tropical storm that dumps a foot or two of water on that lagoon. Now that lagoon has been drenched with fresh water at pH 5.5 Guess what happens? Life explodes! These events happen repeatedly. Coral and shellfish love acidic water. Dissolved CO2 promotes marine metabolism to such an extent that aquaculturists raising shellfish actually deliberately acidify theirm water to enhance growth. Just like greenhouse operators do.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Skip</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 23:11:04 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7989</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>amirlach says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7987</link>
			<description><![CDATA[http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=3516 Pretty big "IF".]]></description>
			<dc:creator>amirlach</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 22:36:24 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7987</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malcolm Roberts says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7986</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Lou: Your words and lack of data show us all where the blood is not flowing. I'm surprised you haven't fainted. Please provide one piece of specific, scientifically measured real-world data proving that human production of CO2 caused Earth's latest modest, cyclic global warming that ended around 1998. Just one. (By the way, Phil Jones actually stated publicly earlier this year that there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995. I doubt you label him a denier, do you?) Radiosonde (weather balloon) records since 1958 show no net warming since 1958. None. Malcolm :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malcolm Roberts</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 21:45:33 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7986</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Lou says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7985</link>
			<description><![CDATA[How many times should Mike have to tell you all that you're masturbating with a limp instrument?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Lou</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 21:36:29 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7985</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Lou says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7984</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Wipe your mouth--you missed a few flecks of foam.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Lou</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 21:33:27 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7984</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Lou says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7983</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yes, the anti-science propaganda of the creationists and the climate change deniers has taken a toll.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Lou</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 21:23:15 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7983</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Lou says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7982</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If "all the CO2 in the atmosphere was dissolved" in the ocean, corals and crustaceans would dissolve in the ocean as well. Increases in CO2 drive oceanic acidification: perhaps a local high school sophomore can explain the chemistry to you.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Lou</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 21:21:43 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7982</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Teh JC says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7977</link>
			<description><![CDATA[NOAA is a bunch of government cockholsters. Not a one in the bunch who isn't towing the government line. Come hell or high water they will lie to please big brother. You can email them with relevant true peer reviewed data and they will tell you your wrong. I guess narcissists love suck-ups that are the NOAA.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Teh JC</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 20:03:40 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7977</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bill Marks says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7955</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Funny. I just looked at the June 30 gif. It may be at night, but are you seriously telling me it was 32 degrees at 9pm? That's more like a November temperature. I think those who have derided your pathetic scientific skills were correct. Logic is not one of your strong traits either if 'they were at night' is the best explanation you can offer.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bill Marks</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:09:05 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7955</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ian says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7930</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Tom: I have to agree. There is nothing to suggest that this data is actually used as input to any of the GCMs. There's nothing on the Coastwatch website that would indicate it forms the basis for other researchers: rather, it seems aimed at boaters & fishermen. Clearly, the satellites can't handle clouds and produce figures which are too high or two low. Whether someone else is using that same (corrupted) data without checking it is a fair question - but not one for Coastwatch.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:34:22 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7930</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deuce says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7929</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Or you are a superhuman who can walk through fire and not be burned. In either case, I'm glad you lived to tell about it...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deuce</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:35:37 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7929</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deuce says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7928</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Turbolocke. Deny Deny Deny. Then call the other guy Denier. That's the playbook isn't it? You could be Vice President. My question to you is WHY THE MODELS, statistical treatment of data, or any other fabricated hooey? Why can't the "Best Climatologists in the World" bear the same burden that, say, the FDA puts on the average bench scientists: DIRECT VERIFIABLE MEASUREMENTS FROM VALIDATED AND CALIBRATED INSTRUMENTS? Whatever you believe is the value of these models is the strawman. The singular purpose of GCMs is to cheat. To cheat direct and observational measurement. Do cheat validation and calibration. And to thus cheat the entire scientific method as a whole. And you can save me the "it would be too hard to keep all the temperature stations in the world in calibration". That's the con. So in lieu of doing what a good scientist would do, they come up with statistical fabrications to "adjust" the tempeartures to what they "think are more accurate". There is not a shred of anything that can be called science or reality in that. If determining or predicting global temps can't be done for real, then IT IS WORTHLESS FOR IT TO BE DONE IN MAKE BELIEVE. Or more apporpriately, WHAT IS DONE IN MAKE BELIEVE IS WORTHLESS. There is no greater proof of that than 600F temperature readings in Lake Michigan. But of course given that you shamelessly claim that nobody is making predictions based on the models, it is clear that you LIVE in a world of make believe.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deuce</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:32:40 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7928</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deuce says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7927</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Has anyone noticed how fast that ultra apologist Mike dude disappeared as more details surfaced. The same **** that had the nerve to liberally throw the term "denier" around, suddenly disappears when the truth becomes too clear to wash away with predictable excuses. The science deniers are and always have been the same people who can't defend data without proprietary statistical algorithms and appeals to authority. These are the cop-outs of the non-scientists. Even the ones who win Nobel Prizes and disgrace the office of Vice President by propositioning massage therapists 30 years their junior. Of course Mike would probably have an excuse for that too if he hadn't tucked his tail and ran....]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deuce</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:22:35 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7927</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deuce says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7926</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Sure, they'll edit them out of the IMAGES. But do you think they'll edit them out of the dataset that represents their mealticket to the federal funding? Not if they can get away with keeping it. Carol Browner and Jane Lubchenko aren't shelling out this kind of money for there to be NO Global Warming, and thus no career and power trajectory for them to pursue. I mean how much more blatant corruption needs to be exposed from the Global Warmers before we round them up, strap them to a rocket, and launch them into space. Maybe in their last conscious seconds in the frigid, absolute zero vaccuum of space, they'll finally realize how absurd the idea of our planet overheating really is.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deuce</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:17:23 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7926</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Cathie Heath says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7924</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thank you for pointing this out, Malcom. I appreciate you. :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Cathie Heath</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:12:27 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7924</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7919</link>
			<description><![CDATA[jibberdribble....from the IPCC 4TH REPORT "World temperatures could rise by between 1.1 and 6.4 °C (2.0 and 11.5 °F) during the 21st century " you are an ignoramus]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 09:05:57 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7919</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Turboblocke says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7915</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The climate models don't use temperature data as they are constructed from first principles. That's why they don't give predictions, but projections. Hence the comment about the data being used in models is a strawman.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Turboblocke</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 06:10:25 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7915</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jim Davidson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7900</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It doesn't explain the inconsistencies, but water boils at 671.6 degrees Rankine. So water *could* be measured at 604. Not that it matters.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jim Davidson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:39:03 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7900</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jim Davidson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7898</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yes, coastwatch.msu.edu I have some questions. First off, no wonder it is cloudy in all the surveyed area - that much superheated steam has to go somewhere. Second, please explain to me how your instruments recorded 604 degree water? That's at one standard pressure? Third, how am I supposed to navigate through this incredibly hot stuff, whatever it is? Oh, wait, chart not to be used for navigation purposes. Well, no wonder!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jim Davidson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:35:36 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7898</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>amirlach says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7897</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Just wondering why the errors always seem to be biased towards warming?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>amirlach</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:06:08 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7897</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>DJmoore says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7889</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Just out of curiosity, I tried converting 430 degrees Fahrenheit to the Rankine scale, which uses Fahrenheit-sized degrees but starts at absolute zero. It comes out to about minus thirty degrees. Same with Kelvins. However, even this does not account for a temperature of six hundred degrees. Worth a try, but no.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>DJmoore</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:17:03 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7889</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7888</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ooops initiated!!! :-|]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:57:44 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7888</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>tony says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7887</link>
			<description><![CDATA[one of the best concise presentations my add 1)The IPCC GCM'S are TO THIS DAY remain Unvalidated... 2)Natural Process's such as conduction/convection/advectio n and other's iniated by the sun, drive our planet's temp.s 3)finally as i point out to so many people GAT is not a measurement-it is a mathematical construct-and as we know now-subject to bias manipulation . as a meteorologist my 2 bits--Man does not /never has/never will control the Weather Machine.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tony</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:55:49 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7887</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Harold says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7886</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Minor nit-pick Court-martialed, not court-marshalled]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Harold</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:54:17 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7886</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>John OSullivan says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7885</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Today we have the official government word on it: by their admission NOAA-16 satellite data is discredited and unreliable. Smart detective work by unassuming 'citizen scientists' who frequent this excellent blog has seen to it that that tardy GIGO has now gone. My personal view is as someone who has spent over a decade litigating against government corruption in the New York State and federal courts. I see yet again faceless jobsworths crawl under their stones and hide when caught. That same old tired 'plausible deniability' gambit is trotted out- they tell you always the same thing: it was just a ‘mistake’ because 'shit happens in government work.' But as taxpayers we have the right to remedy this malfeasance/nonfeasance. Don’t buy their trite excuses. Don’t let this disease spread further and eat deeper into your tax dollars. To all you bloggers, you sentinels of liberty prepared to stand shoulder-to-shoulder to protect the freedoms that belongs to us all, any glory here is yours not mine. Thank you one and all.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>John OSullivan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:23:36 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7885</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malcolm Roberts says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7882</link>
			<description><![CDATA[John; Much appreciated. Mike: Check this: http://www.climatechangefraud.com/climate-reports/7491-official-satellite-failure-means-decade-of-global-warming-data-doubtful When you commit to stop exhaling what you term 'pollution', then I'll take notice of you. CO2 is a harmless, colourless, odourless, invisible, natural gas essential to all life on Earth - just like oxygen. The difference is that while oxygen is plentiful, CO2 is a trace gas. Malcolm :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malcolm Roberts</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 17:32:27 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7882</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>J N Smith says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7880</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This seems pretty clear: "NOTICE: Due to degradation of a satellite sensor used by this mapping product, some images have exhibited extreme high and low surface temperatures. Please disregard these images as anomalies. Future images will not include data from the degraded satellite and images caused by the faulty satellite sensor will be/have been removed from the image archive."]]></description>
			<dc:creator>J N Smith</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 16:27:43 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7880</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>I R A Darth Aggie says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7877</link>
			<description><![CDATA[DEER LORD! Doesn't anyone do quality control prior to releasing their data, or at least caution that this is raw data?? Now, let's not ascribe this to fraud or other purposeful mischief when laziness and incompetence explain the observed data pretty well. Sea surface temperature has a nominal range of -5-40C, anything above that should be flagged as "erroneous" and passed to a human for final disposition. Caveat: I used to make a living doing quality control on surface meteorlogical measurements from ships.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>I R A Darth Aggie</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:48:58 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7877</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deuce says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7875</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Not ironic at all. You must be near Lake Michigan. Its a boiling plasma you know. And you clearly know because you're defending it in defiance of all logic, reason and credibility. Bwahahahahaha. What a joke and your defense of the indefensible are. You brainwashed dolt. What's the matter? Do you have to take ownership of all the failures in your life if you don't have corporations and Global Warming to blame? Pretty obvious to the rest of us...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deuce</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:27:54 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7875</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deuce says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7874</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Long story short, the readings are simply garbage. Microwave readings are garbage and rely on assumption laden statistical algorithms to interpolate them. Clearly Chuck believes that his assumptions are infallible in the small percentage of cases where the algorithm actually returns any remotely possible number. I totally think this is flawless science and we should continue to commit billions of dollars to perpetuating it, and its use against us. Don't you? Its all clear as mud according to Chuck "The Government Welfare Leech" Pistis.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deuce</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:24:03 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7874</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deuce says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7873</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So first these readings were just errors from clouds. Then the image was a total forgery. Then, oh wait, the image was real. Then, oh wait, it was active in their archive. Now you have found more such photos that MSU was oblivious to so you doubly ben over backwards to give MSU a pass and avoid asking any more damning questions. And you throw the term "denier" in there for good measure Great stuff Mike. You showed us. Regardless of what the facts are you have proven yourself incapable of making fact based and impartial assessments. Please do not soil the good name of science with any more inane comments. Regardless of what the facts, it is clear that we will never get an honest, untainted communication of them from you. Your "decision driven fact making" is the same disgrace as all of these junkscientists. Except you're not even good enough at it to have made a name for yourself. Go away...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deuce</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:17:16 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7873</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>theCork says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7870</link>
			<description><![CDATA[co2hound, That phytoplankton study is bunk. The authors deliberately avoided corroborating with sattelite data and extrapolated from Secchi disks numbers. Pretty suspicious. Besides that, phytoplankton growth isn't effected by by slight temperature increases, but by nutrient availability. They thrive in the tropics. If phytoplankton were down 50%, so would the whole food chain of the ocean, since ultimately they are the most common food source. I think someone might have noticed, don't you? This is another eco-scam, just like all the other calamaties that never quite happened.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>theCork</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 14:08:42 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7870</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Hucklebuck says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7869</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Odd. I was within 20 miles of Egg Harbor, WI, on that very day. I must have been napping.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Hucklebuck</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:38:16 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7869</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jeff says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7868</link>
			<description><![CDATA[look outside ... see anything green ? what is it main source for carbon to grow with ? thats right, the "pollutant" CO2 ... CO2 rose faster than ever from 1940 - 1970 but what did temperature do ? gee, Mr. Wizard it must has risen as well right ??? right ? everyone can agree that correlation does not equal causation ... well guess what the other side of that coin is ... for you to have causation you MUST HAVE correlation ... face it, there is no correlation between CO2 and temperatures over the last 100 years, none, zero, zip, nada ...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:28:03 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7868</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Neo says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7867</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Egg Harbor must be "hard boiled" by now]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Neo</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:27:13 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7867</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>rdbrewer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7866</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There should be congressional hearings and criminal charges.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>rdbrewer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:22:27 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7866</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>GunRunner says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7864</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Get them all, cuz they have been scrubbed! These men shame me. And to think I want my son to be a scientist (nuclear). Soon the name "Scientist" will mean the same as "Witch Doctor".]]></description>
			<dc:creator>GunRunner</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 12:49:29 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7864</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>GunRunner says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7863</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Lair. Microwaves from a sat in orbit would not "warm" anything. Further, it is interesting that these "Temp Anomalies" always appear in remote areas, like Siberia or the middle of a lake. Even further, if the program eliminated the numbers, how do they get to the media (shown in stories YOU linked to for verification)? Why would not reporters questions cause the scientists to question the data and discover the mistake? Liar. The]]></description>
			<dc:creator>GunRunner</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 12:38:32 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7863</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>sis51 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7861</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This is sooo Polotical. No wonder they're trying to take OUR internet away.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>sis51</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 12:07:49 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced#comment-7861</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

