In their desperation to prove to everyone that the “science” is on their side, climate scientists have adjusted past temperature data down so that the more recent temperature readings form a warming trend.
Of course, they have their excuses for adjusting the data. Sometimes it is necessary to change data when there are errors present. That much is understandable.
But how convenient that their “errors” were all the same and required that everything be changed so as to reflect the proper warming trend that they need to blame catastrophic global warming on right-wing conservatives and the oil and gas industry.
Roy Spencer, a climate scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, said that the National Climatic Data Center made large adjustments to past summer temperatures for the U.S. Corn Belt, lowering past temperatures to make them cooler. Adjusting past temperatures downward creates a significant warming trend in the data that didn’t exist before.
“I was updating a U.S. Corn Belt summer temperature and precipitation dataset from the NCDC website, and all of a sudden the no-warming-trend-since-1900 turned into a significant warming trend,” Spencer wrote on his blog, adding that NCDC’s “adjustments” made the warming trend for the region increase from just 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit per century to 0.6 degrees per century.
NCDC temperature data downloaded by Spencer in March 2014 looked quite different from data he downloaded this month. That’s because NCDC constantly adjusts its data to correct for errors, but critics have said these adjustments seem to always increase the warming trend for the U.S. or globally.
“Being the co-developer of a climate dataset (UAH satellite temperatures) I understand the need to make adjustments for known errors in the data … when you can quantitatively demonstrate an error exists,” Spencer wrote.
“But a variety of errors in data measurement and collection would typically have both positive and negative signs,” Spencer noted, adding that he corrects for such errors when calculating satellite temperature data even if they tend to cancel each other out.
“In contrast, the thermometer data apparently need to be adjusted in such a way that almost always leads to greater and greater warming trends,” he added.
So, errors are going to happen. And as long as you can prove that an error exists, it should be corrected. But what you’ll find is that there are errors in both directions sometimes that cancel each other out, so it might have no real net difference. What are the chances that every single error had to do with the temperature not being low enough, requiring that they all be adjusted down, while leaving the more recent temperatures where they are? The net effect is the famous hockey stick graph that shows catastrophic global warming to be a recent phenomenon, correlating to rising carbon emissions.