The “science” of global warming has devolved into the following: if the data don’t prove it, change the data! The alarmists constantly invoke the “97% of climate scientists” argument. Any counterargument from a scientist is confronted by the statement, “That scientist is not a climate scientist.”
OK. Let’s go with that. But today’s post isn’t about “climate science.” It is about numbers and data analysis. Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a data computation expert. True he doesn’t study “climate.” However, he has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. So he is just looking at numbers – a subject for which he has great expertise.
His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.
[Source: German Professor: NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On ‘Unbelievable’ Scale, by James Delingpole]
A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented “global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records.
Using the NASA data from 2010 the surface temperature globally from 1940 until today has fallen by 1.110°C, and since 2000 it has fallen 0.4223°C. The cooling has hit every continent except for Australia, which warmed by 0.6339°C since 2000. The figures for Europe: From 1940 to 2010, using the data from 2010, there was a cooling of 0.5465°C and a cooling of 0.3739°C since 2000.
Activist scientists at NASA GISS began systematically adjusting the data for various spurious reasons using ten different methods.
The most commonly used ones were:
- Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
- Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
- Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
- Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
- Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
- With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.
Ewert’s findings echo that of US meteorologists Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts who examined 6,000 NASA weather stations and found a host of irregularities both with the way they were sited and how the raw data had been adjusted to reflect such influences as the Urban Heat Island effect.
Britain’s Paul Homewood is also is critical of NASA GISS’s data alteration. Here he shows the shocking extent of the adjustments they have made to a temperature record in Brazil which has been altered so that a cooling trend becomes a warming trend.
Unadjusted temperature record: shows cooling trend.
Adjusted temperature record: shows warming trend.
But, while any true scientist would stand to defend his/her data, computational methods, statistics, and conclusions (something that happens every day in the world of real science), NASA “climate scientists” are screaming bloody murder because Congress wants them to defend theirs. And the eco-terrorist crowd is backing them.
My friends, these are dark days in the world of science. The “science” is not only “NOT settled,” it is not science!