A Further Perspective
Climategate: This Time It’s NASA
The politicized nature of climate science remains in permanent orbit.
The “Climategate” scandal, which broke in November 2009, revealed what many skeptics had privately suspected. Prominent climate scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) had collaborated to keep data out of skeptics’ hands, subverted the peer review process, and used questionable methods to construct the temperature record on which the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change (IPCC) based its recommendations.
Now a new “Climategate” scandal is emerging, this time based on documents released by NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in response to several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suits filed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). The newly released emails further demonstrate the politicized nature of climate science, revealing a number of questionable practices that cast doubt on the credibility of scientific data provided by NASA.
The emails reveal that GISS, like CRU, has done a poor job of preserving and managing its data. Although there is no evidence that GISS has destroyed its data, as CRU did in the late 1980s, Dr. Reto Ruedy of GISS admits in an email that “[The United States Historical Climate Network] data are not routinely kept up-to-date.” In another email, he reveals that NASA had inflated its temperature data since 2000 on a questionable basis. “[NASA’s] assumption that the adjustments made the older data consistent with future data… may not have been correct,” he says. “Indeed, in 490 of the 1057 stations the USHCN data were up to 1C colder than the corresponding GHCN data, in 77 stations the data were the same, and in the remaining 490 stations the USHCN data were warmer than the GHCN data.”
Unfortunately, it seems that the discrepancy privately highlighted by Dr. Ruedy was not coincidental, but part of a broader pattern of misrepresentation on the part of GISS. Between 2002 and 2005, GISS chief James Hansen issued press releases headlined “2005 Warmest Year in a Century;” “2006 was Earth’s Fifth Warmest Year;” and “The 2002 meteorological year is the second warmest year in the period of accurate instrumental data.” In other words, global warming is happening and that immediate action is necessary.
However, as Canadian researcher Steve McIntyre points out, these releases were inconsistent with other NASA documents that suggest that the warmest year in U.S. history was actually 1934. In response to McIntyre, Hansen emailed Dr. Donald E. Anderson, saying that, “If one wished to be scientific, instead of trying to confuse the public … one should note that single year temperatures for an area as small as the U.S. (2% of the globe) are extremely noisy.” In a similar email to Dr. Anderson on August 14, 2007, Hansen described the previously touted temperature “records” as “minor,” “negligible,” and “less than the uncertainty.”
In fact, further corrections revealed by the emails indicate that U.S. temperatures on average had only increased by 0.5 degree Celsius since 1934, rather than 1 degree, as originally claimed.
The released emails from both the University of East Anglia and NASA illustrate how far the “scientific consensus” on climate change has been politicized — to the point of unreliability. Dependent on an alarmist atmosphere for continued government funding, state-sponsored scientific organizations have a strong incentive to hire ideologically committed partisans.
Taken together, these revelations all show that we actually know much less about the workings of the climate than politicized scientists and advocates like Al Gore say we do. Yet virtually all calls to “action” to prevent climate change are based on the belief that the extent to which greenhouse gases have overwhelmed natural forces in affecting the climate is a settled question.
Despite all this, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is forging ahead with its politically motivated finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare and need to be expensively regulated. Thankfully, as the evidence of the bankruptcy of much of the “settled” climate science continues to accumulate, public outcry may help bring this politically motivated agenda to an end.
About the Author
Iain Murray heads the Center for Economic Freedom at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and is the author of Stealing You Blind: How Government Fatcats Are Getting Rich Off of You.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (135) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Iain Murray
More Articles by Roger Abbott
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/02/climategate-this-time-its-nasa
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
sdcougar| 3.2.10 @ 1:01PM
Guess this is what you need when global warming produces too much heat.
Jon B| 3.8.10 @ 10:48AM
Even if CO2 is not as significant of a factor as MMGW promoters think it is, it's still bad. And this is the problem I have with GW deniers. They overlook the overall impact to politicize it instead.
http://www.miamiherald.com/201.....ceans.html
MOS was 71331| 3.2.10 @ 1:43PM
This lingerie outfit has stepped in to replace the Chinese machine tool company that was posting in American Spectator blogs last month. At least the lingerie pictures are more attractive than the shots of machine tools.
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 7:31AM
The News Factor, an informative online Conservative News Magazine » Climategate: This links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Trackback| 3.2.10 @ 8:17AM
The American Spectator : Climategate: This Time It's NASA, on PunditKix, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
saleboter| 3.2.10 @ 8:33AM
The EPA will never be able to implement anything on AGW because first they will have to PROVE that it is harming humans right now. With all this fake data that will be real chore.
BTW Miami just had its second coldest December to March winter ever. Thanks Algore.
Jason Calley| 3.2.10 @ 12:49PM
Saleboter says: "The EPA will never be able to implement anything on AGW because first they will have to PROVE that it is harming humans right now."
I wish you were correct, but the truth is that the EPA and other governmental agencies will do whatever they think they can get away with, regardless of what ethics or regulations may say. The TRUTH is not going to derail these people pushing to micromanage, control and tax every aspect of your life. Remember that the 800 billion dollar TARP fund was rejected by 99% of the US population but was passed anyway. A mere lack of proof will not disuade the EPA.
Barre| 3.2.10 @ 1:45PM
And Houston had the 5th coldest Dec. 1 - Feb 28th in its recorded history (which goes back to the late 1800's) according to a local news weather report this morning.
ApplegateRanch| 3.2.10 @ 2:07PM
BTW Miami just had its second coldest December to March winter ever.
-----
And Houston had the 5th coldest Dec. 1 - Feb 28th
----
And Rapid City, SD had its 10th coldest winter season, as measured down town; meanwhile, the R.C. AIRPORT had its 5th coldest.
Heat Island Effect in action?
Real American| 3.2.10 @ 6:18PM
Like most big government programs, the EPA doesn't need actual evidence or facts, just the will to enact its disastrous agenda.
Richard Baker| 3.2.10 @ 9:13AM
NASA has become a scientific joke. After the Moon program, Viking, and many other endeavors, NASA has become just another realm for the "Political Scientists." I wonder what the reaction within NACA would have been at this sort of fraud and deceit?
heidi D. Kline| 3.2.10 @ 11:25AM
Aha! Finally. FINALLY someone is questioning what these "scientists" has been up to. They cant even plot some data in an excel sheet without a fudge-factor here and there. You just cant thrust these people, can you?
Pete| 3.2.10 @ 12:38PM
What can be done to stop/slow down the AGW propaganda machine? There are billboards and flatscreens at DIA (Denver airport) about AGW, and how it "isn't a partisan issue" and how everything is melting, blah blah blah. It is maddening to see these lies being pushed on the public, but then, Obama is on TV every other day lying so I guess this is the new norm.
Philosopher | 3.2.10 @ 12:41PM
Here's one unbelievably blatant example I discovered of the issues (like the CRU) that we have with our own shoddy US data and the Orwellian government manipulation of it:
http://pracphilosblog.wordpres.....e-decline/
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 12:46PM
CRU Inquiry (Investigation) in the UK - Politics and Other Controversies -Democrats, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Michael Snow| 3.2.10 @ 12:52PM
People concerned about these issues and their lack of exposure in the MSM should send articles like this to the PBS Ombudsman, noting that the PBS NewsHour has routinely censored all such news.
http://www.pbs.org/ombudsman/feedback.html
[In the run-up to Copenhagen, the PBS NewsHour reproted that “this huge team of scientists from all over the globe issued these unanimous warnings about the really extreme danger to the planet.”]
Bob Freeman| 3.2.10 @ 12:55PM
I think this article got the wrong end of the stick in the middle.
This article tries to make out that Hansen (NASA) was issuing scary headlines (e.g. 2002 2nd warmest etc) while privately saying that the statistics were noisy and not robust, and that this was spotted and pointed out by McIntyre.
This was not the case at all.
The headlines issued by (2002, 2005 etc) were regarding GLOBAL mean temperatures.
Steve McIntyre then tried to confuse the public by saying that actually 1934 was the warmest year, but this was only *in the US* -not globally.
Hansen then pointed out in his email to Anderson that while a global statistic is reasonably robust, a statistic for a single year over just 2% of the Earth's surface (i.e. USA) is very noisy and not robust. Steve McIntyre, as a scientist, should know and understand this point very well.
So, the NASA headlines were valid. The statements by McIntyre were deliberately misleading and Hansen was discussed this point in an email to a colleague. Where is the scandal?
woodNfish| 3.2.10 @ 6:01PM
Hansen was lying when he said the global average temperature was robust. There is nothing robust about any of their research or data. If you haven't figured that out by now you must have your head in the sand.
iggi| 3.3.10 @ 11:55PM
The US might represent only 2% of Earth's surface, but has a much tighter and more homogenous network of measuring stations than the other 98%. Hence the record is not just a negligible 2% sample because temperature of the rest of the world is modeled and interpolated to a much larger extent.
Darrell| 3.2.10 @ 12:58PM
Only a complete idiot would take seriously any reporting that comes from a website which advertises:
"The Largest Selection of Liberal-baiting Merchandise on the Net!"
Sure, AGW is a fraud. But so is The "American Spectator."
woodNfish| 3.2.10 @ 6:02PM
Pay no attention to the moonbat who posted the comment above. He has nothing to add to the conversation.
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 1:20PM
New NASA Plan: Commercial Spaceflights, Climate Change Satellites, And Future Green J links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
layne| 3.2.10 @ 1:40PM
Iain,
We've got to STOP allowing Hansen to get away with this 2% BS claim. They're taking this 2%, and extrapolating across oceans with it. So IT ISN'T limited to the lower 48.
Charles Higley| 3.2.10 @ 1:48PM
I believe that even the GHCN data suffers some adjustments and then GISS and CRU make further adjustments. How far from reality are we by the time a paper or IPCC report contains the summary of the interpretation of the adjustments of the adjustments - all adjustments, purportedly to make the data more robust, effectively and consistently making the results warmer based no documented reasoning.
This is just really bad "telephone," where whispered gossip becomes grossly distorted, only everybody in the telephone chain has the same goal - to show warming.
Do worry about the EPA. They have a track record of not caring if their decisions are based on any real or imagined data.
The banning of DDT was a unilateral decision about which Ruckelshaus refused to proved any basis. Indeed, his decision followed 2-weeks of hearings on DDT, which produced the judgement that DDT was not a danger to man or environment.
Lisa Jackson indicated the other day that the decision on CO2 was based on the world's science and not the IPCC's - trying to vague-out the decision process. They might eventually cave to public pressure, but they sure will not cave based on not having any science behind them!
The EPA (snort), "We don't care!"
xiaobo| 3.2.10 @ 1:53PM
The more gas EPA can regulate, the more secure their jobs. How can carbon dioxide, a gas we breath in and out every, be bad to our health ? These bloodsuckers at EPA are just bloodsuckers.
Mike Allen| 3.2.10 @ 2:26PM
Hi there, first I's like to say 'Get rid of those flashing advertisements, they ruin the page!'. I have a theory on why the US of A is not heating as much as the rest of the world: Industrial Pollution. So keep that atmosphere nice and shady! It won't protect you from climate change but it will keep those pesky thermometers under control! I'm in Australia with less pollution and more heating.
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 2:42PM
Lead Generation Today in the Internet Marketing World | Network Marketer Professional links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Bob| 3.2.10 @ 2:53PM
This article continues to show the lack of intellectual heft here at AmSpec. Conflating U.S. temperatures with global temperatures and then having most of the AmSpec audience agreeing, is proof the right wing extremist lemmings continue to go off of the cliff. I encourage those of you who have a minimal education to actually look at the data from several sources. For those of you that want to look at the U.S. and then extrapolate that anecdote to the world, consider yourselves "flat earth" people who assume the world is flat because that is the way it looks to you on your street.
Why not go to Vancouver where they've had one of the warmest winters in their history (and snow problems for the Olympics)?
That said, I still have not seen any "proof" that humans have caused the bulk of these temperature increases. Just because we've seen a dramatic increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations (a certain fact), there is no proof that this isn't a coincidence rather than causal given the low overall concentrations of CO2. After looking at the data, I remain unconvinced that there is a strong causality there meaning. The outgrowth of that concern is that the environmental whackos shouldn't be allowed to ruin our economy without significant proof of causality.
Blackwatch| 3.2.10 @ 5:15PM
Uh bob, they fudged the data. they have been fudging the data for years. they have been hiring and training their replacements to fudge the data as well. the site temperature readings are suspect over time because of (a) the well documented heat island effect (b) the fact that equipment is placed incorrectly and is not maintained at hundreds of temperature installations in the us, russia, etc.
so asking anyone to "look at the data" is a self-serving argument for persons who have bought into the whole global warming scam.
c. j. acworth| 3.2.10 @ 6:14PM
What we are seeing this year is a typical El Nino pattern. Global warming/cooling/stasis has nothing to do with it.
Philosopher | 3.2.10 @ 6:48PM
Welcome to the realm of the shifting argument! All we heard in the past was how single years in the US in the late 90's and after 2000 were critical and significant proof of climate doom! Now that reality isn't playing ball, our cooling US temps are only 2% of the world's surface.
I mean, next you will have people saying 'global warming' will cause droughts until it suddenly causes super-saturated air...
Marc Jeric| 3.2.10 @ 2:55PM
First, let us not confuse climate with weather; second, this conspiracy is of long standing and went through successive stages:
1) Global cooling scam in the 1970's;
2) Global warming hoax of the 1990's;
3) Climate change flimflam of the 2000's; and
4) Cap & trade power grab now.
All acts of this long-term far-left conspiracy have one aim: world government with taxing power; nationalization of private industries; ultimate power in eco-nazi hands.
Fascist| 3.2.10 @ 3:01PM
Some words from Hitler:
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the *Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
* You may replace it with: leftist thoughts.
Conservative| 3.2.10 @ 8:53PM
Some words from God:
"For God so loved the *world He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life." Jn. 3:16.
*You may replace it with: Jew
*You may replace it with: Gentile
*You may replace it with: Fascist.
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 3:37PM
Research Experiences for Teachers (RET-PLUS) at Northeastern … | Aerospace Engineerin links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 4:19PM
CRU Inquiry (Investigation) in the UK - Politics and Other Controversies -Democrats, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 4:30PM
Gore will receive an honorary UT degree May 14. - VolNation links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Anthony| 3.2.10 @ 5:04PM
Al Gore, James Hansen and Phil Jones need to be placed on an ice floe along with a few hungry non-vegan polar bears. The elimination of these bloated carbon footprints will immediately re-freeze the oceans, hence the polar bears will not suffer the fate of drowning, as we are told daily by the MSM. Severe indigestion however, is a definite possibility.
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 5:14PM
A quick teaser « TWAWKI links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.2.10 @ 5:56PM
IT Corner » Blog Archive » The American Spectator : Climategate: This Time It's NASA links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
MTB| 3.2.10 @ 10:10PM
In the great words of the immortal Buford T. Justice: "Sumbitches!"
Sentient| 3.2.10 @ 10:38PM
This report, and a large number of the comments, suggest that many may not understand the true science behind global warming. Al Gore actually got this right, but in a way I think few really appreciate. Beginning with his initial associations with climate science (from someone who later retracted their CO2 beliefs to a large degree) former VP Gore "got it" and I think we all owe him the credit that he is truly due. He is actually responsible for the evolution of the algorithm into what it is today, the ALGOREithm. The ALGOREithm represents a revolutionary leap forward in the calculus of polemics. Prior to the invention of the ALGOREithm, subterfuge and skullduggery were often found to be fraudulent and socially unnaceptable as a result (we cite recent rulings in SEC vs. Madoff, US DOL vs. Enron etc.). Also in the 1990's Dr. Michael Mann expanded on this new field with the elevation of the field of mathematics to a new level now defined as matheMANNics. MatheMANNics afforded a unique and previously unknown means of quantitatively integrating indeterminate quantities, ambiguous social constants, tunneling low energy IQ neurons, lost and deleted data, fashionable mixing and matching of incompatible data, pretzel peer(review)ing, plausible and reversible deniability and single variable gaseous processing with the constants of misprision and fraud that when matheMANNicly factored results in a complete and natural replacement for rational thought. The remarkable thing about ALGOREithms and matheMANNics is that they are quite difficult to deny even when disproved. Which means, of course, that instead of theory we now have a new paradigm called the pachauri.
AESj| 3.2.10 @ 11:11PM
You are soooooo wrong. The proof of the ALGOREithm method lies in the obvious fact that he had children by this method
Curly Howard| 3.3.10 @ 12:00AM
Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk.
FTM| 3.3.10 @ 4:35AM
ALGOREithm...
MathMANNetics...
Good, good. Please don't forget to hold the MANN made Global Warming theory up for public derision and ridicule as well.
NW Dude| 3.2.10 @ 11:22PM
Thanks for keeping us updated as the hoax continues to unravel. But for all the outrage of scientists suppressing raw data and discouraging debate, it seems that not enough focus has been put on their claims that human activity causes "climate change." We can accept that there have been and will be colder and warmer ages, but there is hardly a convincing case that we're at fault. Yet there are already countries and industries diverting significant resources to reduce, suppress, prevent, and bury an apparently harmless gas. Shall we have a "no exhale" Monday?
Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 2:40AM
Women Lawyers' Fitness Group: Wednesday Boot Camp cancelled | Women's Health Wisdom links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Jonathan | 3.3.10 @ 3:00AM
CARBON TAX IS THEFT, PLAIN AND SIMPLE,
http://www.facebook.com/group......amp;v=wall
Ziiex Zeburz| 3.3.10 @ 5:04AM
Global Warming , the REAL REASON !
Dr Richard North at 'eureferendum' has posted the reason for global warming ( at least in the UK )
EPSRC ( Engineering and Physical Science Research Council ) has given grants for 63,245,372 pounds sterling for climate change.
( \Google EPSRC grants )
NERC (Natural Environment Research Council )
has given
166,500 221 pounds sterling for research into climate change,
the British tax payer has payed $334,631,889 in 2009 to 'scientists' to prove that we are all going to fry/freeze to death !
Joe Geshel| 3.3.10 @ 6:12AM
Once again the real deniers are the global warming alarmists. As more and more facts about the manipulation of, and the sloppiness of gathering data is revealed, the warmists are in freefall to the ash heap of history. It is the internet, invented by Al Gore by the way, and the subsequent blogs, that hav brought Al Gore and his foolhardy minions to their knees. There is a God after all. Now you know.
Doc| 3.3.10 @ 6:51AM
Has chuckle head Hansen ever heard of the Hatch Act?
archer52 | 3.3.10 @ 7:34AM
You also should mention the process they used where they switched to weather station readings that supported their theories. I read either here or in another magazine that the scientists stopped using stations that showed decreases in temperature instead opting for those in urban and developing locations so they could "prove" the temperature was increasing. If I am not mistaken they even used one gauge that sat next to an air conditioning external compressor (heat exchange) on top of a roof in a city. Another location was on the side of a building in the middle of an airfield. (What could go wrong there?)
Senator Inhofe is looking to hang someone. As I said in my post, the question will be is there anyone on the globe willing to tell the truth with all of the governments basically in on the scam?
http://truthandcommonsense.com.....e-in-jail/
Good luck on that happening. Like I said, this will be an very interesting moment in history when the public is very much aware of the crime and the politicians are desiring to cover it up. They'll actually have to commit the offense in broad daylight. If they do, that is their way of saying they no longer fear or respect the people.
That's a bad thing.
Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 8:40AM
Militant Libertarian » Climategate: This Time It’s NASA links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 9:48AM
Buy Florida Lot/ Land Near Tampa, Orlando, Crystal River For Sale … | Citrus County F links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
John Roberts| 3.3.10 @ 1:02PM
James Hansen has fraudently used taxpayer dollars to promulgate a hoax.
Let's put him in a cell with a 300 lb guy named Bubba.
Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 3:13PM
XYZ - The Radical Middle - post-gazette.com links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 3:27PM
Dallas Blog, Daily News, Dallas Politics, Opinion, and Commentary FrontBurner Blog D links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 5:31PM
About Us links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 5:34PM
About Us links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 7:17PM
Joseph Francis Shea: Aerospace engineering, NASA, University of Michigan, Doctor of P links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Busbar Processor Machine | 3.4.10 @ 8:09AM
Fivestar Tools,Manufacture Busbar Processor Machine,With busbar cutting tool,bending tool and punching tool.
Pingback| 3.4.10 @ 9:55AM
NASA/GISS has been adjusting temperatures since 2000 | Les Jones links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.4.10 @ 12:20PM
Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, March 4th 2010 « The Daily Bayonet links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
jiminmpls| 3.5.10 @ 7:40PM
Uhh....there's a difference between record global temp and record US temp. 1934 was the hottest year in the continental USA. 2005 was the hottest year globally.
Anyone with an IQ over 80 should understand that - unless of course you're a paid propagandist for the fossil fuel industry.
Pingback| 3.6.10 @ 10:04AM
…..Aaron's EnvironMental Corner….. » Blog Archive » Climategate: This Time It’s NASA links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.10.10 @ 12:12AM
The American Spectator : Climategate: This Time It’s NASA « harqueb.us links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.9.10 @ 9:16PM
Greenhoof » Blog Archive » CEI fails to manufacture its own ’stolen emails’ controver links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.9.10 @ 9:16PM
Greenhoof » Blog Archive » Media Outlets Falsely Reporting Scientific Fraud Should Ma links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.10.10 @ 1:41AM
Media Outlets Falsely Reporting Scientific Fraud Should Make Corrections « Global War links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.10.10 @ 1:43AM
Morgan Goodwin | Media Outlets Falsely Reporting Scientific Fraud Should Make Correct links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Captain Nader Jneid Syria | 11.2.10 @ 3:33PM
Kindly replay me is not The Earth is Standstill
From : Captain Nader Jneid Syria Damascus
Astronomist & Air Navigator
Theorist Of Earth Standstill Theory
Mobile: 00963 933813169
jneid101@hotmail.com
Good day Mr / Mrs
I'm sorry for my poor English
1. When you disconnect the geostationary satellite from carrier rocket at orbit astronomical allotted
Is the direction of rotation of the rocket with a clockwise or anti clockwise for the earth
2. when Russia decided to terminate the mission of Russian space station (Mir) and it wanted to throw it down in the Ocean
did the Russian dispatcher configure the movement of the earth around the itself or around the sun in space
3. Are there specific points of entry and exit of the space shuttle if so why
4. Is the space shuttle is nearly the same process approach to the aircraft visually, so we put the plane's nose toward the landing point
5. Through air navigation has been shown to me that space is going on in orbits anti-clockwise direction after the atmosphere
Then change the direction of rotation to clockwise for the earth Is this conclusion true or not
Is space turn around the earth or a static
if space turn What is the direction of rotation is clockwise or anti-clockwise
And at any altitude changes the direction of rotation
6. If the Earth revolves around the sun and left settle space the Earth on 21 June towards the sun and after 6 months on September 23
the earth will be back face to the sun and will not be able to see the earth on that day because of the large size of the sun and obstructing the view
This is contrary to reality, as the settle space orbiting the earth remains
This indicates that
The Earth is Standstill
It turns neither around itself nor around the Sun
You Can benefit from my theoretical re-satellites, which concluded its work to the ground for fear of colliding with each other or with and fragmented to thousands of parts and eliminate pollution
Kindly open attachment movie
http://www.naderjneid.com/files/earth.rar
your reply is highly app.
Warm regad
Twenty one (21) Convincing Scientific Evidences Throughout
Aviation Sciences – Physics -Mechanics
And Mathematics
That:
The Earth is StandstillIt turns neither around itself nor around the Sun
The First evidence:
Modern Physics and nuclear Physics based on Kipller rules that say all objects in the universe move and they have gravity and also the big object attracts the small one, consequently the Earth turns around the sun by the force of sun gravity, Moreover, the moon turns around the Earth by the force of Earth gravity.
Therefore, the sun gravity is bigger than the moon gravity.
Therefore, if the Earth had turned around the sun by the force of the sun gravity, the affects of sun gravity would have appeared on the Earth such as the ebb and tides.
Where we notice that the ebb and tides happens when the moon is vertical over the Earth, but we do not notice it when the sun is vertical over the Earth, consequently the moon gravity over the Earth is stronger than the sun gravity over the Earth.
As Astronomists said that the distance between the sun and the Earth is approximately (150.000.000) km, where (147.000.000) km in the winter and (145.000.000) km in the summer, consequently the difference of distance between winter and summer is (7.000.000) km.
In addition, Astronomists considered the distance between the spaceship, which turns around the Earth in space, and the Earth is stable, firmed by the centrifugal force, which equals the gravity of the Earth.
In addition, the gravity of the Earth that existed on the spaceship and did not exist inside the spaceship where we see the astronauts inside the spaceship and all objects around move freely.
Moreover, gravity of the Earth cannot isolate it from other things.
The Second evidence:
All Astronomists illustrated the movement of Earth – moon – sun hubs according to Copernicus theory with very strange, imaginative configurative way.
They made sun stable and they made the duration of the day (24) hours, they divided this duration into two parts:
- First part: the Earth turns around itself (360 °) during (23 hours – 56 minutes – 4 seconds).
- Second part: the Earth turns around the sun with (450.000) km during (3 minutes – 56 seconds) on the said ellipsoid rout of the Earth, so the speed around the sun (2.400.000.000) milliards km/h which is a very imaginative number. In addition, when dividing the distance of the Earth movement all day long (24) hours, then the average of the Earth speed around the sun will be about (100.000) km/h, which is very imaginative according to the Earth.
The Earth turns around itself (0.98) of the degree to conserve of the numbers of the calendar year (365.25) days.
Moreover, they made the moon turns around the Earth once and once around itself every (28) days, the moon moves around the sun (along with the Earth) during its rotation around the Earth during (1 day – 14 hours – 40 minutes to complete the hegira month. As the Earth was turning around itself (360.98 °) and the moon was turning (12 °) during (24) hours, so according to the Mechanics rules, then the shape of the moon face according to the watcher from the Earth would be changed according to the watching angle from the Earth, which is contradicted to the fact; where we see just one shape of the moon face, from moon rise to moon set permanently, clearly shown especially in the night of the middle of the hegira month. This is impossible unless the Earth is stable, firmed and the moon turns around the Earth and around itself with equal angled speed.
The Third evidence:
According to NASA, they considered the Earth and the Moon turn around one mutual centre in the Earth called (Central Bar) counter-clockwise with different angled speed (the angled speed is the performed degrees during certain time), where the angled speed of the Earth around its centre is (15 °) per hour, where it is for the moon around the Earth center (14, 50 °) per hour.
So if the Earth was turning around itself, then its speed would be at the equator about (1667) km/h (because the Earth circumference equals (40.000) km it takes in just one course during 24 hours).
Moreover, the speed of the moon rotation around the Earth center about (80.000) km/h, where the moon is away from the Earth with (350.000) km.
In addition, according to the air navigation rules, the reaching point on the moon surface moves and turns with the moon movement around the Earth; consequently, any spaceship cannot descend on the moon surface when it was closed of its back, because the maximum speed of any spaceship is (27.000) km/h, and then it will collides with the moon and it will explode when it closed to descend on besides its movement.
Thus, America has cheated the whole world when it said that it descends on the moon surface. However, all photos distributed are made in the cinematic Hollywood city.
But the if the Earth is stable, firmed neither turns around itself nor around the sun, so the flight and descending on the moon surface possible according to the air navigation rules, and America has factually descended on the moon surface. This proves the fixation and stability of the Earth, thus it turns neither around itself nor around the sun.
The Fourth evidence:
If the Earth was moving around the sun with speed (100.000) km/h, and the moon was turning with speed (80.000) km/h, consequently the position of the moon and all satellites would Changed according to the Earth, this leads to the moon speed becomes (100.000) km/h when it is behind the Earth.
Moreover, the moon speed will increase to (180.000) km/h when the Earth becomes between the moon and the sun.
In addition, its speed will decrease to (100.000) km/h when the moon becomes before the Earth.
Moreover, its speed will decrease into (20.000) km/h when the moon becomes between the Earth and the sun.
In addition, its speed will increase into (100.000) km/h when the moon becomes behind the Earth.
This study is performed based on that the Earth moves around the sun by a fixed speed of (100.000) km/h. However, according to Astronomists, the Earth moves around the sun by variant speed, therefore this makes the moon and all satellites to change their moving speed permanently, to conserve its position according to the Earth.
It has been assured that the moon and all satellites do not have self-force enables them to increase or decrease of their speed, and the gravity of the Earth cannot control all satellites at the change of the Earth movement. Thus, this proves that the Earth does not turn around the sun.
The Fifth evidence:
According to Copernicus theory, if the Earth was moving around itself and around the sun, then the atmosphere is considered a piece relating to the Earth, consequently this atmosphere and the Earth will move with each other around the Earth center and around the sun. So if we have two planes:
- The first one is normal inside the atmosphere.
- The second is a spaceship outside the atmosphere.
The two are flying from Los Anglos into Damascus by the same speed and direction of the Earth over that height of each plane flies by (when the Earth is turning) and after (12) hours: the first plane inside the atmosphere has been arrived to Damascus. However, the second one outside the atmosphere has been remained over Los Anglos.
Alternatively, if we have two fixed planes over Los Anglos:
- The first one is helicopter inside the atmosphere.
- The second one is a spaceship outside the atmosphere (the satellite). So to remain the two planes over Los Anglos, the helicopter speed must be zero (0) km/h.
Moreover, the spaceship speed must be equal to the Earth turning speed over that height (when the Earth is moving), as the satellite of T.V. such as Nile sat and Arab sat.
This evidence asserts that the Earth and the atmosphere are separated from the space according to the All-Mighty Allah who quoted in (Surah Al Anbiya-30):
" ) أَوَلَمْ يَرَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنَّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضَ كَانَتَا رَتْقًا فَفَتَقْنَاهُمَا وَجَعَلْنَا مِنَ المَاءِ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ حَيٍّ أَفَلا يُؤْمِنُونَ ) (الأنبياء30 )
Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth Were joined together (as one Unit of Creation), before We clove them asunder? we made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
Moreover, according to this truth, the maximum speed of any spaceship, which gets outside the atmosphere (27.000) km/h plus the speed of the Earth movement around the sun at the moment when it gets out of the atmosphere as Astronomists saying.
So if the speed of the Earth movement around the sun on the ellipsoid orbit with minimum at the moment when it gets out of the atmosphere, and the speed around the sun increased, so the spaceship will face big difficulty at returning back to the Earth.
Regarding that, all spaceships get out and return to the Earth through the atmosphere easily, when the travel into the moon took six days.
Thus, this proves the non-rotation of the Earth around the sun.
The Sixth evidence:
The moon is global in shape and after mechanical study, we noticed it has three courses, not two courses as Astronomists described it and that the sunray covers the semi-moon permanently except the eclipse time.
- The first course of the moon is around itself, and its angled speed around itself equals to its angled speed around the Earth. Therefore, we always watch the front face of the moon.
- The second course of the moon is around the Earth, where the moon turns around the Earth every (24 hours) (348 °), or traversed (348) longitude; or the course of the moon decreases about (12 °) or (12) longitude every (24 hours).
- The third course is the outer course of the moon from which we watch the enlightened amount on the moon face, as Allah quoted in (Surah Yasin- 39):
(In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the most merciful)
(وَالقَمَرَ قَدَّرْنَاهُ مَنَازِلَ حَتَّى عَادَ كَالعُرْجُونِ القَدِيمِ) ( يس 39)
And the Moon, we have measured for her mansions (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date stalk.
This course is performed every (29 days – 14 hours – 40 minutes), or (29.6) days which equals one hegira month.
Although, the sun turns (360 °) , and the moon turns (348 °) around the Earth during (24 hours); so this will lead to the retreating of the moon position from the position of the sunset with (12.15 °) daily.
The lighting of the front face of the moon increases but it decreases on the rear face, so we watch the full moon when the angle difference between the sun and the moon (180 °).
Then the lighting decreases on the front face and increases on the rear face until the crescent moon disappears after passing (29 days – 14 hours – 40 minutes).
The sun and the moon are turning around the Earth clockwise with (a half degree) as an angled speed.
In fact, we notice that the position of the moon gets far away from any position on the earth by (14.5) longitude or degree per hour. So at the full moon it begins to appear at six from the east side, after passing 12 hours it begins to disappear at the west side, or it traversed (180) degree or longitude according to the earth.
The Seventh evidence:
At the equator, the hours of the night and the day equal yearly. Pursuant to that, there found the typical for studying crossing point of the equator and the longitude (Greenwich) because all the cities that locate on the equator, the sunrise and sunset time equals to (12 hours).
Therefore, the full moon will appear at the middle of hegira month at Greenwich at six p.m. from the east, the moon will move toward the west and at six a.m., and after (12 hours) it will disappear from the west.
This is another proof that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun.
The Eighth evidence:
There is in each second four main locations to the sun according to the earth during its rotation around the earth are:
(Sunrise – Sunset – Midday Sun “Noon Athan” – Midnight Sun).
The Midday sun times have been loaded over Mile metric papers according to Greenwich between tropic of cancer and tropic of Capricorn.
In addition, through one calendar year, we noticed that the movement of the sun between the two tropics according to the midday time: it drew the shape of number (8) in English
, and the day duration increases and decreases with (14.5) minutes during a calendar year over its average duration (24) hours.
Thus, the movement of the sun during one calendar year between tropic of Cancer and tropic of Capricorn draws the shape of the number (8) in English
not as said with ellipsoid shape.
The Ninth evidence:
The T.V. satellites are stable according to the earth with a fixed distance from the earth. Within tracks that make the gravity of the earth and the centrifugal force equal as the said thought.
However, if this satellite moves from its track just one meter, so the gravity of the earth is unable to get it back into its location. Therefore, if the earth moves around the sun by speed (100.000) km/h, then the moon and all satellites will leave the gravity of the earth.
The Tenth evidence:
In the vans that convey the liquid oil and water there are bars in their tanks to cool off the violent movement of the water during the varying speed of the van to conserve its balance.
If the earth moves around the sun with ellipsoid orbit by the gravity of the sun according to Kipller, so its movement speed will be changed between acceleration and slowness and the ocean water will then be affected between action and reaction.
Moreover, the wave and the violent movement of the water of the oceans more than (Tsunami).
Notwithstanding, the oceans do not have coolers to ease the movement of the water vibration.
The Eleventh evidence:
According to the scientific facts that planes are solid objects when they are on the earth as piece of it. When they fly in the atmosphere, they displace the air out of their front during their moving on.
So if the earth moved like the plane in the atmosphere, it would displace the air from its front and it would overpass the atmosphere within (3.5) seconds.
If the earth turns around itself by speed (1667) km/h, so the outer speed of air will be equal to the earth turning speed (1667) km/h but counter clockwise of the earth rotation. Here is evidence that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun with an ellipsoid orbit.
The Twelfth evidence:
The atmosphere around the earth is gaseous object and it is variant and compressible, we cannot grasp it unless we seize it.
Therefore, if the atmosphere moves with the earth as said, then the thickness of the atmosphere before the earth movement around the sun on the ellipsoid orbit will be less than at the rear position of the earth.
Moreover, the fact this thickness is equal and harmonised.
This is another evidence that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun with ellipsoid orbit.
The Thirteenth evidence:
When the plane overpasses the speed (1200) km/h, so the plane then penetrated the sound wall and a very powerful explosion will be heard
Therefore, if the earth moves around the sun with speed (100.000) km/h, then we will hear very powerful sounds at penetrating the sound wall.
When we prepare to the flight we account the fuel quantity needed to complete the flight as the active distance and according to the direction of the wind speed.
The fourteenth evidence:
If the gravity of the earth had been able to hold and fix the atmosphere during its rotation around itself and around the sun, then it would have prevented the wind especially the tornado wind of the fifth level which its speed reaches to (250) km/h .
Where the disasters happen by the breaking down of the trees and by the spreading and splashing of the water and the soil and the sand and the cars due to the velocity of the wind.
The atmosphere is considered as a set of gases with lightweight that encircle the global earth, but not as a solid object fixed and firmed on the earth, which consists of different gases:
Nitrogen by (78 %) – oxygen by (21 %) – carbon dioxide and water vapour and the Ozone gas by (1 %). These gases do not relate to the earth mechanically; this is another proof that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun with an ellipsoid orbit.
The fifteenth evidence:
That all constellations and comets or even moving meteors, which we watch in the space at night, are due to the reflection of the sun light over them.
In addition, the tail behind is due to the light succession by the eye, or the sand particles that reflect the sun light. Moreover, when entering into the atmosphere, then its heat will rise and then it will burn due to the friction with the air. Therefore, if the earth had moved around the sun by speed (100.000) km/h, then the temperature of the earth would have risen, the water would have evaporated, and the earth would have burnt. This is evidence that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun.
The sixteenth evidence:
If the earth had moved around the sun by speed (100.000) km/h, then we could have seen the comet of the earth.
By astronauts who flew out of the atmosphere; and the satellites would have taken photos about the movement of the earth around the sun. When NASA asked about such matter but it responded with none. This is another evidence that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun with an ellipsoid orbit.
The seventeenth evidence:
If the earth turned around itself with speed of (1667) km/h at the equator.
In addition, your weight was (80) kg, then your weight would increase gradually whenever we direct toward each poles:
Due to the decreasing of the earth rotation speed around itself and the decreasing of the centrifugal force resulting from the earth rotation. Moreover, your weight would have become more than (160) kg over the poles and the fact that your weight varies between the pole and the equator by just grams.
This is another evidence that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun with an ellipsoid orbit.
The eighteenth evidence:
Through meteorology and the high aviation, we notice that whenever we ascend up over the earth, so the pressure and the air condense decreases with the height, while the wind speed increases to direct west.
Moreover, the air speed between (80 – 250) km/h according to wind map issued from department of meteorology. Therefore, the duration of the flight increases toward the west and decreases toward the east.
So if the earth turns around itself by speed (1667) km/h anti-clockwise, then the duration of the flight from Damascus to Los Anglos less than from Los Anglos to Damascus due to the contradiction of the two movements.
Therefore, the flight duration from Damascus to Los Anglos increases not decreases. This illustrates the very strong high
wind from the west called “jet stream”. This is another evidence that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun with an ellipsoid orbit.
The nineteenth evidence:
If the earth turns around itself counter clockwise, then the angled speed and the direction of the satellites must be as the earth rotations around itself with counter clockwise.
In fact, the rocket that holds the satellite to convey and put it in the certain orbit, clockwise by a speed equals approximately to the orbit speed, which turns counter clockwise. Then the satellite will be released from his holder rocket, with little engines to make the result of the orbit speed and the satellite speed zero (0). Thus, the satellite is as if it is linked to the earth. This is another evidence that says that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun.
The twentieth evidence:
Furthermore, when Russia decided to terminate the mission of Russian space station (Mir) and it wanted to throw it down in the Ocean,
so the Russian dispatcher in space conveyers did not configure the turning of the earth around itself or around the sun, if they did so, then my theory is then wrong. Being that when conveying the planes by the air conveyer and the pilot, so they do not configure the movement of the earth around the itself or around the sun. whereas, there has been a plan for the flight by configuring the fuel quantity needed to complete the whole flight according to the active distance and the speed of the plane and also according to the direction and the speed of the of the wind only. Moreover, this is the last evidence proving that the earth turns neither around itself nor around the sun.
The twenty one evidence:
Solar eclipse occurs on the ground when the moon between the sun and the earth and the movement of the eclipse on the ground towards the east, where he began to eclipse over Africa in 2010 and ended Lvov Asia. If that the earth revolves around itself and around the sun clockwise direction to the movement of the shadow of eclipse of the sun westward and not eastward In other words, if the earth revolves counterclockwise direction and began to eclipse over Africa, the eclipse will end up on America rather than Asia and this evidence of the error theory of Copernicus .
In this scientific evidence, the twenty-first proved the theory that: the earth fixed
firmed in its position, it turns neither around itself nor around the sun.
In addition, to negate my theory and going back to the theory of Copernicus and Galileo needs to negate the nineteen evidences above mentioned.
Notwithstanding, each evidence is enough to prove my theory. If they cannot negate those evidences, this indicates that they are wrong about counting and configuring the angles of the dawn and also the prayer times which is the main target of this study.
The main thought of counting and configuring dawn angles and the principles of crescent moon configuration and the relationship between
Explosion Proof Light | 11.4.10 @ 2:07PM
The time it's google.