NOAA caught in temperature fraud

SatelliteGate” will deliver a new blow to the AGW scam
US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced

UPDATE 8-10-2010: It would appear CoastWatch has removed the original image. Never fear, it’s shown here. Please see author’s addendum at end of article.

Global warming data apparently cooked by U.S. government-funded body shows astounding temperature fraud with increases averaging 10 to 15 degrees Fahrenheit.

The tax-payer funded National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has become mired in fresh global warming data scandal involving numbers for the Great Lakes region that substantially ramp up averages.

A beleaguered federal agency appears to be implicated in the most blatant and extreme case of climate data fraud yet seen. Official records have been confirmed as evidence that a handful of temperature records for the Great Lakes region have been hiked up by literally hundreds of degrees to substantially inflate the average temperature range for the northeastern United States.

The web pages at the center of this latest climate storm were created by NOAA in partnership with Michigan State University.

Disgraced Administration Mired in Another Climategate-style Data Fix

Someone under the pseudonym ‘Sportsmen’ anonymously tipped off skeptic blog, Independent analysts affirm the web pages as genuine.

In his email the faceless whistleblower explains that what precipitated the scoop was “a rather dubious report in the media that the Great Lakes temperatures have risen 10 to 15 degrees, I found it was downright laughable.”

He continues, “ Prior to this report I would frequent the ‘Coastal Watch’ temperature maps for northern Lake Michigan.  When this report came out it dawned on me that the numbers didn’t match what I had been reading on the Coastal Watch temperature page.”

Under a scheme called ‘Sea Grant’ NOAA collaborates with national universities to compile an official federal temperature record. In this instance, the partnersip is with Michigan University’s ‘Coastal Watch.’

Together the two institutions show temperature maps for northern Lake Michigan registering an absurd 430 degrees Fahrenheit -yes, you read it right –that’s four hundred and thirty degrees-and this is by no means the highest temperature recorded on the charts.

In the heated debate about Earth’s ever-changing climate you certainly don’t need to be scientist to figure out that the Great Lakes would have boiled away at a mere 212 degrees so something has seriously gone awry inside this well-funded program.

In addition to its civilian employees, NOAA research and operations are supported by 300 uniformed service members who make up the NOAA Commissioned Officer Corps. But don’t bet on anyone being court-marshalled over this latest global warming fiasco.

Paid for entirely from federal taxes, the shamed public body’s key responsibilities include warning of dangerous weather and protection of ocean and coastal resources, and conducts research to improve understanding and stewardship of the environment.

Michigan State University Also Complicit in Fraud? 

The worst evidence of hyper-inflated global warming data is on a web page entitled, ‘Michigan State University Remote Sensing & GIS Research and Outreach Services.’

While another web page identifies that Michigan State University’s ‘Coastal Watch’ site is officially connected to NOAA thus implicating both institutions in a climate data conspiracy. At the bottom of the web page mention is made of ‘Sea Grant’ that is described as a “unique partnership of public and private sectors that combines research, education and technology transfer for public service.“

The legend further boasts that such data is shared across “ a national network of universities meeting the changing environmental and economic needs of Americans in coastal ocean and Great Lakes regions.”

NOAA Makes it White Hot in Wisconsin

But our intrepid anonymous whistleblower wasn’t done yet. He pointed out that Egg Harbor, Wisconsin, really got cooking this July 4th around 9:59AM, according to NOAA and Coast Watch. It was there, at the bottom left row of the temperature data points, that the records reveal on that day a phenomenally furnace-like 600 degrees Fahrenheit.

Further analysis of the web pages shows that the incredibly wide temperature swings were occurring in remarkably short 10-hour periods-and sometimes in less than 5 hours. Strangely, none of the 250 citizens of the 78 families living in the village appeared to notice this apocalyptic heatwave during their holiday festivities.

Hidden Data Spike Hikes Heating Averages

But our sharp-eyed stranger comments, “ As I understand it, the current available Gif data maps are several for the latest dates, but the archives have less dates to choose from. It’s possible that in the past these numbers were incorrect but in the archive system you do not see the numbers that could have been in gross error.”

So it may reasonably be inferred climate fraudsters had a perfect opportunity here to fraudulently apply overcooked and overlooked data so that America’s Joe Public would be none the wiser that a few climate numbers vastly ramped up the national temperature averages.

Laughably, NOAA publishes a caveat at the bottom right corner of their web page warning about their data is “Not to be used for navigation purposes!”

The current head of NOAA is Dr. Jane Lubchenco, nominated by President Barack Obama and confirmed by the United States Senate on March 19, 2009 and is the first woman to serve as NOAA administrator. On her appointment Lubchenco declared that science would guide the agency and that she expects it to play a role in developing a green economy. You can say that again!

Readers now interested in doing their own detective work may wish to peruse the further data found here (")and here (

to further ascertain whether climate doomsayers have rigged more ‘real world’ temperatures in a shabby scheme to win support for green energy tax hikes.

Author’s Addendum:

Of major concern here is whether the false data has been fed into climate models ascertaining the broader temperature averages for the entire United States. The alleged response from NOAA as shown in the comments below this article, indicates evasiveness by Chuck Pistis, NOAA Program Coordinator, in answering the question. Why so?

I also applied due diligence and asked internationally renowned climatologist, Dr. Timothy Ball to take a look at the numbers. Here is what Dr. Ball observed:

“I have read your article and believe it is a very valid observation of the data as reported. At best the entire incident indicates gross incompetence, at worst it indicates a deliberate attempt to create a temperature record that suits the political message of the day.”

Moreover, I have written to NOAA but am still awaiting their reply. I specifically asked whether this extravagantly false data was fed into climate models to help ramp up the  U.S. climate numbers by “400%” as commented on by analyst, Jo Nova. The Australian researcher provides an excellent summary to an important paper that removes all doubt that climate models are utterly flawed. As Dr. Ball points out—perhaps we know why.

Official: Satellite Failure Means Decade of Global Warming Data Doubtful

US Government admits satellite temperature readings “degraded.” All data taken offline in shock move. Global warming temperatures may be 10 to 15 degrees too high.

Caught in the center of the controversy is the beleaguered taxpayer funded National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). NOAA’s Program Coordinator, Chuck Pistis has now confirmed that the fast spreading story on the respected climate skeptic blog is true.

However, NOAA spokesman, Program Coordinator, Chuck Pistis declined to state how long the fault might have gone undetected. Nor would the shaken spokesman engage in speculation as to the damage done to the credibility of a decade’s worth of temperature readings taken from the problematic ‘NOAA-16’ satellite.

‘NOAA-16’ was launched in September 2000, and is currently operational, in a sun-synchronous orbit, 849 km above the Earth, orbiting every 102 minutes providing automated data feed of surface temperatures which are fed into climate computer models.

NOAA has reported a succession of record warm temperatures in recent years based on such satellite readings but these may now all be undermined.

World-renowned Canadian climatologist, Dr. Timothy Ball, after casting his expert eye over the shocking findings concluded, “At best the entire incident indicates gross incompetence, at worst it indicates a deliberate attempt to create a temperature record that suits the political message of the day.”

Great Lakes Sees Unphysical Wild Temperature Fluctuations

Great Lakes users of the satellite service were the first to blow the whistle on the wildly distorted readings that showed a multitude of impossibly high temperatures. NOAA admits that the machine-generated readings are not continuously monitored so that absurdly high false temperatures could have become hidden amidst the bulk of automated readings.

In one example swiftly taken down by NOAA after my first article, readings for June and July 2010 for Lake Michigan showed crazy temperatures off the scale ranging in the low to mid hundreds - with some parts of the Wisconsin area apparently reaching 612 F. With an increasing number of further errors now coming to light the discredited NOAA removed the entire set from public view. But just removing them from sight is not the same as addressing the implications of this gross statistical debacle.

NOAA Whitewash Fails in One Day

NOAA’s Chuck Pistis went into whitewash mode on first hearing the story about the worst affected location, Egg Harbor, set by his instruments onto fast boil. On Tuesday morning Pistis loftily declared, “I looked in the archives and I find no image with that time stamp. Also we don’t typically post completely cloudy images at all, let alone with temperatures. This image appears to be manufactured for someone’s entertainment.”

But later that day Chuck and his calamitous colleagues now with egg on their faces, threw in the towel and owned up to the almighty gaffe. Pistis conceded,

“I just relooked and (sic) the image again AND IT IS in my archive. I do not know why the temperatures were so inaccurate (sic). It appears to have been a malfunction in the satellite. WE have posted thousands if (sic) images since the inauguration of our Coatwatch (sic) service in 1994. I have never seen one like this.”

But the spokesman for the Michigan Sea Grant Extension, a ‘Coastwatch’ partner with NOAA screening the offending data, then confessed that its hastily hidden web pages had, indeed, showed dozens of temperature recordings three or four times higher than seasonal norms. NOAA declined to make any comment as to whether such a glitch could have ramped up the averages for the entire northeastern United States by an average of 10-15 degrees Fahrenheit by going undetected over a longer time scale.

Blame the Clouds, not us says NOAA

NOAA further explained that cloud cover could affect the satellite data making the readings prone to error. But Pistis failed to explain how much cloud is significant or at what point the readings become unusable for climatic modeling purposes.

As one disgruntled observer noted,

“What about hazy days? What about days with light cloud cover? What about days with partial cloud cover? Even on hot clear days, evaporation leads to a substantial amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, particularly above a body of water. How can this satellite data be even slightly useful if it cannot “see” through clouds?”

Top Climatologist Condemns Lack of Due Diligence

The serious implications of these findings was not lost on Dr. Ball who responded that such government numbers with unusually high or low ranges have been exploited for political purposes and are already in the record and have been used in stories across the mainstream media, which is a widely recognized goal.

The climatologist who advises the military on climate matters lamented such faulty data sets,

invariably remain unadjusted. The failure to provide evidence of how often cloud top temperatures “very nearly” are the same as the water temperatures, is unacceptable. If the accuracy of the data is questionable it should not be used. I would suggest it is rare given my knowledge of inversions, especially over water.“

How Many other Weather Satellites Are Also ‘Degraded’?

A key issue the government administration declined to address was how many other satellites may also be degrading. ‘NOAA-16’ is not an old satellite - so why does it take a member of the public to uncover such gross failings?

Climate professor, Tim Ball, pointed out that he’s seen these systemic failures before and warns that the public should not expect to see any retraction or an end to the doom-saying climate forecasts:

when McIntyre caught Hansen and NASA GISS with the wrong data in the US I never saw any adjustments to the world data that changes to the US record would create. The US record dominates the record, especially of the critical middle latitudes, and to change it so that it goes from having nine of the warmest years in the 1990s to four of them being in the 1930s, is a very significant change and must influence global averages.”

Each day that passes sees fresh discoveries of gross errors and omissions. One astute commenter on noted, “it is generally understood that water heats up more slowly than land, and cools off more slowly. However, within the NOAA numbers we have identified at least two sets of data that run contrary to this known physical effect.

The canny commenter added, “two data points in question are at Charlevoix, where the temperature is listed at 43.5 degrees – while temperature nearby (+/- 30 miles) is 59.2 degrees; and in the bay on the east side of the peninsula from Leland is listed at 37.2 degrees. These are supposedly taken at 18:38 EDT (19:38 Central, or 7:38PM). These are both taken in areas that appear to be breaks in the cloud cover.

With NOAA’s failure to make further concise public statements on this sensational story it is left to public speculation and ‘citizen scientists’ to ascertain whether ten years or more of temperature data sets from satellites such as NOAA-16 are unreliable and worthless.

Top Climate Scientists Speak out on the Satellitegate Scandal

In an escalating row dubbed ‘Satellitegate’ further evidence proves NOAA knew of these faults for years. World’s top climate scientists and even prior governmental reports cite underfunding and misallocation as the trigger for spiraling satellite data calamities. Key flaws with five satellites undermines global data.

Most disturbing of all is that it took publication of my article last week to persuade the authorities to withdraw the errant NOAA-16 satellite from service. But as Dr. John Christy indicates, the real Satellitegate is not about one satellite. The scandal is endemic with comparable flaws across the entire network; the scandal is also that it took a tip off from a member of the public and the widespread broadcast of my article before one of the offending junk boxes, NOAA-16, got taken down.

Readers who missed the details when this sensational story first broke can see here at

NOAA’s chief Program Administrator, Chuck Pistis, at first disingenuously tried to discredit my report and whitewash the matter with disinformation. Indeed, we may have a smoking gun of a cover up when we contrast and compare latest announcements with the offending satellite’s AVHRR Subsystem Summary.

The official summary shows no report of any ‘sensor degradation’ since its launch in September 2000. Yet on the advice of top climate scientists I’m reliably informed that such failures were made known to NOAA years ago.

Nonetheless, the U.S. agency continued to sell its flawed data products to numerous international institutions without making it public that satellite sensors were “degraded” and unreliable for assessing climate change.

NOAA-16 had been commissioned as a polar-orbiting satellite featuring AMSU, AVHRR and High Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS) measuring instrumentation which were discovered by a member of the public last week to have suffered catastrophic failure. Dr John Christy drew my attention to specific concomitant flaws he had uncovered and reported with the AMSU years ago.

NOAA in Fear of Rush of International Lawsuits?

The snuffed out satellite had been run continuously up until being taken offline soon after my article went viral (August 10, 2010) in which I exposed the full extent of how seriously degraded it’s sensors were. The automatic readings had been contaminated by hundreds, if not thousands, of false and absurdly high temperature readings, some as high as 612 degrees Fahrenheit (boiling point of water is 212 F.). We now know NOAA was aware of these outrageous anomalies at least since 2006 but they were not remedied ( see below).

Worryingly, as to how many of its users (mostly international meteorologists and climate researchers) were affected has not beent revealed by NOAA. But we know the automated numbers were sold throughout the world and it’s readings of land and ocean temperatures have been used by climate scientists in their models since the satellite’s launch in September 2000. As a consequence and without full disclosure by NOAA, it is feared innumerable scientific studies about rising global temperatures are now rendered entirely invalid.

It is open to speculation whether NOAA may have been hesitant to admit to long standing faults for fear of a rash of lawsuits from its customers, mainly national governments and university research institutes. Based on such data most scientists agree that our planet may have warmed by 0.6 degrees Centigrade during the 20th century (with a margin of error of 0.5C degrees-but this error margin now looks way off).

From analysis of the bogus online temperature data before NOAA removed it from view, it may be determined that almost all the false temperature readings were far in excess of expected averages—many by a factor of four or five – almost none of the bogus temperatures were lower than average.

US Government Foresaw Satelligate Failures Mounting

But it wasn’t just a handful of skeptical climatologists sounding the alarm. The National Academy of Sciences, in its 2007 455-page report concluded that because of degradation in the U.S. satellite network, the country’s ability to monitor the climate and severe weather was “at great risk.”

By coincidence, in the same week my article led to the shut down of NOAA-16, Susan Bohan published her excellent article here in which she exposes the broader systemic failures in the wider satellite network. Among the calamities Bohan reported, “the satellite, Landsat 7, is broken. And it’s emblematic of the nation’s battered satellite environmental monitoring program.”

The term ‘satelligate’ was coined by the blog after it diligently picked up on the piece.

At Least Five Climate Measuring Satellites Compromised

Crucially, Bohan’s article wasn’t based on any so-called unsubstantiated ‘big oil’ funded skeptic disinformation plot, a dying urban myth anyway, but on a US Government Accountability Office report (GAO). GAO concedes that nine new climate instruments on the latest generation of satellites were canceled or their capabilities scaled back in 2006. GAO is the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress.

As a consequence at least five such satellite programs have been identified as being either degraded or seriously compromised:

Perhaps its no accident that the current head of NOAA, Dr. Jane Lubchenco and hand picked by President Barack Obama, declared that her agency would play its role in developing a green economy.

Thus, despite the US Government spending in excess of $80 billion in climate research a failure to allocate sufficient funds to the satellite program has now resulted in serious damage to the credibility of the entire data set (note: the cost of a typical NOAA satellite is around $11 million and the network recoups the US government millions by selling data worldwide).

Evidence from Climate Experts Points to Conspiracy to Deceive

Dr. Roy Spencer commented, “Obviously, whatever happened to NOAA-16 AVHRR (or the software) introduced HUGE errors. We always had trouble with NOAA-16 AMSU, and dropped it long ago. It had calibration drifts that made it unsuitable for climate monitoring.”

Dr Christy particularly addressed faults exclusively with the AMSU instrumentation and not problems with the AVHRR system. He advised me, “We spent a lot of time in 2006 trying to deal with the issues of NOAA-16, but the errors were so erratic, we ended up eliminating it as one of the backbones of our dataset.”

As many such analysts have long been advising, these failures go way beyond the shockingly absurd numbers of 604 degrees recorded at Egg harbor, Wisconsin.

Dr. Timothy Ball, climate consultant to the military and lead author of a new book debunking the greenhouse gas theory, observes, “At best the entire incident indicates gross incompetence, at worst it indicates a deliberate attempt to create a temperature record that suits the political message of the day.”

Mainstream Media Turn Blind Eye to Another ‘Gate’ Scandal

In 2006 Christy and Spencer had sought to complete a technical analysis on NOAA-16’s AMSU but Christy reveals that it, “was very tedious and we chased a lot of rabbits that turned out to be dead ends.”

Such appalling facts just don’t appear in the ‘on message’ mainstream media and all the while researchers have been struggling in vain to keep pace with the ever-increasing numbers gap due to ongoing sensor degradation. For example, each month Dr. Christy works with Dr. Spencer trying to piece together the faltering patchwork of global temperature datasets given by a total of eleven instruments flying on eleven different satellites since 1979.

Over such a long time period it has been suggested that cosmic rays or particle impacts may be deteriorating the highly sensitive instrumentation on board the crafts.

Spencer publishes his findings on his blog while a fuller assessment of the satellite problems found by Dr. Christy is found here

Will Systemic Measuring Failures Cost Even more Lives?

Respected internationally for his world leading weather forecasts, Piers Corbyn, of is another expert lamenting the scandalous failures in the satellite network.

Piers thundered on the Climate Realists blog, “This revelation further confirms something I and Tom Harris said on Russia Today TV Feb (5th) 2010 namely that WE JUST DO NOT reliably KNOW what world temperatures are and have been doing over the last decade or century.”

Corbyn had correctly forecast this summer’s West Russia heatwave and a general increase in VERY extreme events (evidenced by Pakistan & China horrendous floods and “super cold” in parts of S hemisphere) weeks and months in advance.

A Growing List of Global Warming Satellite Measuring Failures

Satelligate points to yet another infuriating government cover up of fudged global warming numbers. Despite the clamor for years from scientists from all sides of the global warming debate for more transparency and better access to such data, zealous gatekeepers within NASA and Britain’s CRU have refused such requests and unlawfully defied Freedom of Information (FOIA) demands.

As indicated on WattsupWithThat such errors and deficiencies along with plain old-fashioned data fraud have long been swept under the carpet with ever more lives put at risk.

Indeed, public confidence in the reliability of official warnings of apocalyptic doom from purveyors of NOAA’s trumpeted fake data has been met with increasing cynicism. A growing number of taxpayers are voicing opposition to the zealous rush towards crippling tax hikes dismantling first world standards of living without first having ascertained the proper facts.

Questions NOAA Refuses to Answer

In light of concerns that NOAA has officially admitted to only withdrawing “images” from its archives without confirming all bogus data has also been dumped, I posed the following and yet unanswered questions to NOAA’s Dr. Jane Lubchenco:

Until Lubchenco comes clean I fear we may be witnessing another ‘Phil Jones’ in the making. For without full transparency and frank answers then the endless media hype about the dangers from the so-called ‘greenhouse gas theory’ remains just that—hype.


Now this is very important so make sure you read it clearly..this is equal to climategate..and i bet you have not heard this story on your nightly tv news..NOAA has been using faulty satellites to record temperatures..temperatures have been recorded that cannot possibly be true..and yet these figures have and are used to frank their claims of the world heating up..can you see a problem arising here?..and then this information is used thoughout the world as a sort of peer reviewed confirmation of temperatures..NOAA is complicit becuase they have known this but because of the fear of being found out and ruining the AGW scam they have hidden it..until now..and the main investigator of this story should get a knighthood..this is just purely criminal..and the fact no mainstream is covering it is also damning..pass this on to as many people as you can..they are ripping us off with lies and looking to create a green world using us as the cannon fodder..maintain the rage..