[ConservativeWarrior]

“Global average temperatures warmest on record” is the key phrase.

This is an easy stat to manipulate. All that’s necessary is to continuously add additional weather stations. The more stations you have the higher the “warmest average ever recorded” temperature you can claim, because the first year records for the stations are always going to be “the warmest ever recorded.”

They’ll also be the coolest ever recorded, but they won’t mention that.

[wbill]

Paging Captain Obvious. It's hot in the summer.

I will say that it's been a little warmer here in the SE than usual (low 90s instead of hi 80s), but, this was also a cooler than normal winter. And, the past few summers have been cooler than normal, too.

However, temps a little higher than normal, are obviously due to GW, while temps a little lower than normal get ignored.

[jimt]

This is an easy stat to manipulate. All that’s necessary is to continuously add additional weather stations. The more stations you have the higher the “warmest average ever recorded” temperature you can claim, because the first year records for the stations are always going to be “the warmest ever recorded.”

That's a good one, but the method they're using is simpler: they DELETE stations from consideration (more than half), picking only those that'll show the numbers thay want.

I used to trust NOAA, NASA, etc. Not any more.

[andy58-in-nh]

They also tend to place their weather stations in the middle of urban heat islands, as noted by more than a few professional meteorologists. NOAA has been in the bag for AGW for some time. Go back and look at their climate forecasts for the past two years (all wrong). Where they predicted large areas of above-normal temps for the US; the opposite happened. Gotta have that Federal honey to keep the machines humming you know...