Category Archives: Climate Data Falsified

Climate Science Magic

Climate Science Magic: Data “Adjusted” to Make Warming Pause Disappear from Record

Posted on June 6, 2015 by Philip Hodges

Climate science consists in the ability to shamelessly manipulate information in order to substantiate already-decided conclusions.

Now, if you ask scientists over at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) about the dreaded “hiatus” in global warming we’ve experienced over the past 20 years, they’ll say, “What hiatus?” Until very recently, this pause in warming existed and was public knowledge.

It was also a thorn in the flesh of many climate scientists who were baffled as to why this phenomenon was observed. If our global carbon emissions have not decreased – in fact, quite the contrary; they’ve increased – then there should be no pause in warming. There should be a marked increase in warming that correlates with rising carbon emissions.

That’s of course assuming that their presuppositions about what exactly causes the global temperature to rise are correct.

Scientists don’t have to be baffled or bothered by this inconvenient truth anymore. They simply and conveniently “edited” it out of the record. Sounds like racketeeringdoesn’t it? The Daily Caller reported:

New climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years.

“Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus,’” wrote NOAA scientists in their study presenting newly adjusted climate data.

To increase the rate in warming, NOAA scientists put more weight on certain ocean buoy arrays, adjusted ship-based temperature readings upward, and slightly raised land-based temperatures as well. Scientists said adjusted ship-based temperature data “had the largest impact on trends for the 2000-2014 time period, accounting for 0.030°C of the 0.064°C trend difference.” They added that the “buoy offset correction contributed 0.014°C… to the difference, and the additional weight given to the buoys because of their greater accuracy contributed 0.012°C.”


NOAA’s study, however, notes the overall warming trend since 1880 has not been significantly changed. What’s increased is the warming trend in recent decades.

So now, temperatures in the more distant past are cooler than were previously reported, and temperatures in the more recent past are warmer than were previously reported. That’ll help yield that hockey stick graph they were looking for. And it will also erase any “pause” in global warming.

Science is supposed to be about questioning things. But something these scientists will never do is question their own presuppositions. It seems to be the most obvious thing to do. But instead, they assume their presuppositions are correct and adjust the data to fit their pre-determined conclusion.


The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever

The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever

New data shows that the “vanishing” of polar ice is not the result of runaway global warming


The “vanishing” of polar ice (and the polar bears) has become a poster-child for warmists. Photo: ALAMY

10:15PM GMT 07 Feb 2015

When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records – on which the entire panic ultimately rested – were systematically “adjusted” to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.

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.

Watch: Climate change explained in 60 second animation

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.

One of the first examples of these “adjustments” was exposed in 2007 by the statistician Steve McIntyre, when he discovered a paper published in 1987 by James Hansen, the scientist (later turned fanatical climate activist) who for many years ran Giss. Hansen’s original graph showed temperatures in the Arctic as having been much higher around 1940 than at any time since. But as Homewood reveals in his blog post, “Temperature adjustments transform Arctic history”, Giss has turned this upside down. Arctic temperatures from that time have been lowered so much that that they are now dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.

Homewood’s interest in the Arctic is partly because the “vanishing” of its polar ice (and the polar bears) has become such a poster-child for those trying to persuade us that we are threatened by runaway warming. But he chose that particular stretch of the Arctic because it is where ice is affected by warmer water brought in by cyclical shifts in a major Atlantic current – this last peaked at just the time 75 years ago when Arctic ice retreated even further than it has done recently. The ice-melt is not caused by rising global temperatures at all.

Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record – for reasons GHCN and Giss have never plausibly explained – has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.