05-23-2018 10:30:41 AM -0700
05-18-2018 12:27:15 PM -0700
05-17-2018 08:38:50 AM -0700
05-11-2018 07:34:04 AM -0700
05-09-2018 10:17:16 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

Climate Data: Top Secret!

The chief British Climate Research Unit (CRU) at Hadley has begun to eliminate the daily temperature records from its public websites.

Yes -- the daily high in London is now a state secret!

Actually, this disappearance of temperature records has been going on for some time -- not only in Britain, but also in the United States. Why would American and British climate “scientists” not want outside scientists to see the raw data upon which their predictions of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) are based?

Why would Bernie Madoff not want outside accountants to see his day-to-day “earnings” data?

The raw temperature data is bad news for AGW. The United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has in the past provided the raw data from the temperature-taking stations in the U.S. Here is a graph of their raw data:

Not much global warming evident in the raw data, is there? This data set was originally available from a NASA website based at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York, but the data disappeared some time ago. Fortunately, the raw data set was archived by a Tasmanian(!), John Daly. The Australian Michael Hammer has analyzed this raw U.S. data. If the above data is smoothed over five years, the result is this:

Once again, not much global warming is present (vertical axis is degrees Fahrenheit.) As Hammer points out, one can make it appear that there has been some global warming by fitting the data to a line, which is shown in red. But if one wants to believe that there was a rise in temperature early in the twentieth century, followed by a decrease late in the century, one can make this appear by fitting the data to a parabola, which is shown in green. The latter belief is obviously more plausible than the former, given the pictured raw data, because the high temperature 1930s is clear even to the untrained eye.

To obtain global warming, the believers in AGW at GISS add “corrections" to the raw data pictured above, obtaining the following five-year smoothed graph:

Wow! Clearly there has been enormous global warming during the past century! Myself, I would say that the “warming” is in the “corrections” to the data, and not in reality.

But if the raw data is declared a state secret, and not shown to those scientists like myself who are not supported by government climatology grants, then no one can question graphs “proving” global warming.

We can compare the above graphs with the latest raw data for the average temperature for the lower atmosphere of the entire Earth, measured by U.S. satellites, and recorded by the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH):

Once again, there is not much global warming in the raw data. Once again, a linear fit to the data would show a slight upward trend. Or one could model the data by a flat line from 1979 to 1998, followed by a huge jump up in 1998, followed by a straight-line decrease since 1998. The very fact that there are equally plausible alternative ways to model the raw data -- most alternatives being inconsistent with global warming -- is another reason why those climatologists who believe in AGW want to perform a disappearing act on the raw data.