Prof Mörner was an expert reviewer for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This is what he said about the process which led the IPCC to make its predictions of alarming (if subsequently reduced) sea level rise:
Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in their [IPCCs] publications, in their website, was a straight linesuddenly it changed, and showed a very strong line of uplift, 2.3 mm per year, the same as from the tide gauge. And that didnt look so nice. It looked as though they had recorded something; but they hadnt recorded anything. It was the original one which they had suddenly twisted up, because they entered a correction factor, which they took from the tide gauge. So it was not a measured thing, but a figure introduced from outside. I accused them of this at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow I said you have introduced factors from outside; its not a measurement. It looks like it is measured from the satellite, but you dont say what really happened. And they answered, that we had to do it, because otherwise we would not have gotten any trend!
Game, set, and match.
Consider yourself *highly* commended, sir.
Cheers!
It's not science when a lie is needed to get the right conclusion.