#Climategate: How one human caused Darwin to warm

Same question kids - if the evidence for global warming is as strong as they claim, then why do they need to fudge the truth and to lie? From Andrew Bolt: We’ve already asked how New Zealand climatologists produced this iconic “proof” of global warming: ...from this raw data. Now Willis Eschenbach asks how the IPCC produced this ”proof" of global warming in Northern Australia: ... from this raw data: Professor Wibjorn Karlen had already raised the alarm about the IPCC’s graph to the IPCC itself - in fact, to Climategate scientist Kevin ”We Can’t Account For The Lack of Warming” Trenberth: Another example is Australia. NASA [GHCN] only presents 3 stations covering the period 1897-1992. What kind of data is the IPCC Australia diagram based on? If any trend it is a slight cooling. However, if a shorter period (1949-2005) is used, the temperature has increased substantially. The Australians have many stations and have published more detailed maps of changes and trends. Something is starting to smell about such recalculations by the people who gave us “hide the decline”. Says Eschenbach, after studying the crude manipulations to the Australian data: Those, dear friends, are the clumsy fingerprints of someone messing with the data Egyptian style … they are indisputable evidence that the “homogenized” data has been changed to fit someone’s preconceptions about whether the earth is warming. One thing is clear from this. People who say that “Climategate was only about scientists behaving badly, but the data is OK” are wrong. At least one part of the data is bad, too. The Smoking Gun for that statement is at Darwin Zero… Now, I want to be clear here. The blatantly bogus GHCN adjustment for this one station does NOT mean that the earth is not warming. It also does NOT mean that the three records (CRU, GISS, and GHCN) are generally wrong either. This may be an isolated incident, we don’t know. But every time the data gets revised and homogenized, the trends keep increasing. Now GISS does their own adjustments. However, as they keep telling us, they get the same answer as GHCN gets … which makes their numbers suspicious as well. And CRU? Who knows what they use? We’re still waiting on that one, no data yet … What this does show is that there is at least one temperature station where the trend has been artificially increased to give a false warming where the raw data shows cooling. In addition, the average raw data for Northern Australia is quite different from the adjusted, so there must be a number of … mmm … let me say “interesting” adjustments in Northern Australia other than just Darwin.

Posted via email from Garth's posterous