Oceans not acidifying – “scientists” hid 80 years of pH data

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Empir­i­cal data with­held by key sci­en­tists shows that since 1910 ocean pH lev­els have not decreased in our oceans as car­bon diox­ide lev­els increased. Over­all the trend is messy but more up than down, becom­ing less acidic. So much for those ter­ri­fy­ing oceans of acid that were com­ing our way.

What hap­pened to those graphs?

Sci­en­tists have had pH meters and mea­sure­ments of the oceans for one hun­dred years. But experts decid­ed that com­put­er sim­u­la­tions in 2014 were bet­ter at mea­sur­ing the pH in 1910 than the pH meters were. The red line (below) is the mod­els recre­ation of ocean pH. The blue stars are the data points — the empir­i­cal evidence.

James Del­ing­pole on ‘Bre­it­bart’:

NOAA­gate: ‘ocean acid­i­fi­ca­tion’ could turn out to be the biggest con since Michael Mann’s Hock­ey Stick

[CFACT] Mari­ta Noon:

The alleged fraud was uncov­ered by Mike Wal­lace, a hydrol­o­gist with near­ly 30 years’ expe­ri­ence now work­ing towards his PhD at the Uni­ver­si­ty of New Mex­i­co. While study­ing a chart pro­duced by Feely and Sabine, appar­ent­ly show­ing a strong cor­re­la­tion between ris­ing atmos­pher­ic CO2 lev­els and falling ocean­ic pH lev­els, Wal­lace noticed that some key infor­ma­tion had been omitted.

Mys­te­ri­ous­ly, the chart only began in 1988. But Wal­lace knew for a fact that there were ocean­ic pH mea­sure­ments dat­ing back to at least 100 years ear­li­er and was puz­zled that this sol­id data had been ignored, in favour of com­put­er mod­elled projections.

It has all the usu­al marks of mod­ern bureau­cra­tized sci­ence: sci­en­tists use a short stretch of data and com­put­ers to guessti­mate a long “dataset”. Then when asked, they get huffy, hide the data, and insult the ques­tion­er. The poor sod seek­ing access to pub­licly fund­ed data has to do an FOIA request, which in this case wasn’t suc­cess­ful, but then he got the data anoth­er way any­how.  Mon­ey was wast­ed hid­ing the data, it was wast­ed on bad poli­cies, it was wast­ed defend­ing an FOIA request, and dare I sug­gest, it was wast­ed train­ing and pay­ing the salaries of peo­ple who call them­selves sci­en­tists but don’t act like them.

[CFACT] Mari­ta Noon:

Feely’s chart, first men­tioned, begins in 1988—which is sur­pris­ing, as instru­men­tal ocean pH data have been mea­sured for more than 100 years — since the inven­tion of the glass elec­trode pH (GEPH) meter. As a hydrol­o­gist, Wal­lace was aware of GEPH’s his­to­ry and found it odd that the Feely/Sabine work omit­ted it. He went to the source. The NOAA paper with the chart begin­ning in 1850 lists Dave Bard, with Pew Char­i­ta­ble Trust, as the contact.

Wal­lace sent Bard an e‑mail: “I’m look­ing in fact for the source ref­er­ences for the red curve in their plot which was labeled ‘His­tor­i­cal & Pro­ject­ed pH & Dis­solved Co2.’ This plot is at the top of the sec­ond page. It cov­ers the peri­od of my inter­est.” Bard respond­ed and sug­gest­ed that Wal­lace com­mu­ni­cate with Feely and Sabine—which he did over a peri­od of sev­er­al months. Wal­lace asked again for the “time series data (NOT MODELING) of ocean pH for 20th Century.”

Sabine respond­ed by say­ing that it was inap­pro­pri­ate for Wal­lace to ques­tion their “motives or qual­i­ty of our sci­ence,” adding that if he con­tin­ued in this man­ner, “you will not last long in your career.” He then includ­ed a few links to web­sites that Wal­lace, after spend­ing hours review­ing them, called “blind alleys.”  Sabine con­cludes the e‑mail with: “I hope you will refrain from con­tact­ing me again.” But com­mu­ni­ca­tions did con­tin­ue for sev­er­al more exchanges.

In an effort to obtain access to the records Feely/Sabine didn’t want to pro­vide, Wal­lace filed a Free­dom of Infor­ma­tion Act (FOIA) request.

We were told that coral reefs would crum­ble, crabs and mol­luscs would be unable to build their pro­tec­tive shells, the ocean food chain would col­lapse, and there­fore the glob­al food chain would fall apart.

Clear­ly the ten year mov­ing aver­age of ocean pH since 1910 has a slight upward curve. This means that in fact the alka­lin­i­ty of the ocean has increased, not decreased. It has become LESS ACIDIC. The researchers Feely and Sabine would have known this. But it suit­ed their pur­pose to trun­cate the data to start in 1988 to allow them to show a falling pH lev­el over that rel­a­tive­ly short peri­od instead of the actu­al long-term increas­ing trend.

Wal­lace says: “Ocean­ic acid­i­fi­ca­tion may seem like a minor issue to some but, besides being wrong, it is a cru­cial leg to the entire nar­ra­tive of ‘human-influ­enced cli­mate change’.

He adds: “In whose pro­fes­sion­al world is it accept­able to omit the major­i­ty of the data and also not dis­close the omis­sion to any oth­er soul or Con­gres­sion­al body?

What we have here is one of the basic foun­da­tions of the cli­mate change scare, that is falling ocean pH lev­els with increased atmos­pher­ic CO2 con­tent, being com­plete­ly dis­missed by the empir­i­cal ocean pH data the alarmist cli­mate sci­en­tists didn’t want to show any­one because it con­tra­dict­ed their ‘increas­ing ocean acid­i­ty’ narrative.