Global Warming Helped by “Adjusted” Data

It is pretty easy to show global warming if you change the recorded temperatures upward.


We’ve commented many times on the “Jonathan Gruber” nature of global warming “science,” like here and here where we point out the evidence that sun shifts are responsible for global temperature change and that extreme weather is fading rather than increasing.

Now there is more evidence of even more gratuitous lying (or “gruberizing”). The data seems to be often adjusted. Consider Christopher Booker’s column in the Telegraph: “The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever.”

Two weeks ago, under the headline “How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming”, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.

This was only the latest of many examples of a practice long recognised by expert observers around the world – one that raises an ever larger question mark over the entire official surface-temperature record.

Following my last article, Homewood checked a swathe of other South American weather stations around the original three. In each case he found the same suspicious one-way “adjustments”. First these were made by the US government’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN). They were then amplified by two of the main official surface records, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss) and the National Climate Data Center (NCDC), which use the warming trends to estimate temperatures across the vast regions of the Earth where no measurements are taken. Yet these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in “global warming”.

Homewood has now turned his attention to the weather stations across much of the Arctic, between Canada (51 degrees W) and the heart of Siberia (87 degrees E). Again, in nearly every case, the same one-way adjustments have been made, to show warming up to 1 degree C or more higher than was indicated by the data that was actually recorded. This has surprised no one more than Traust Jonsson, who was long in charge of climate research for the Iceland met office (and with whom Homewood has been in touch). Jonsson was amazed to see how the new version completely “disappears” Iceland’s “sea ice years” around 1970, when a period of extreme cooling almost devastated his country’s economy.

Have we ever seen a scandal break out in the media about global warming skeptics being caught fudging the data? If anyone ever did such a thing, we can trust it would be front page news. So it looks like, thus far, only man-made climate change advocates are forced to resort to fraud!

Yet this is now being pushed by the Federal government as part of our national security.