Skip to comments.Unwarranted Temperature Adjustments and Al Gore’s Unwarranted Call for Intellectual Tyranny
Posted on 09/25/2013 6:21:02 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
For researchers like myself examining the effect of local microclimates on the ecology of local wildlife, the change in the global average is an absolutely useless measure. Although it is wise to think globally, wildlife only responds to local climate change. To understand how local climate change had affected wildlife in Californias Sierra Nevada and Cascade Mountains, I had examined data from stations that make up the US Historical Climate Network (USHCN).
I was quickly faced with a huge dilemma that began my personal journey toward climate skepticism. Do I trust the raw data, or do I trust the USHCNs adjusted data?
For example the raw data for minimum temperatures at Mt Shasta suggested a slight cooling trend since the 1930s. In contrast the adjusted data suggested a 1 to 2°F warming trend. What to believe? The confusion resulting from skewing trends is summarized in a recent study that concluded their results cast some doubts in the use of homogenization procedures and tend to indicate that the global temperature increase during the last century is between 0.4°C and 0.7°C, where these two values are the estimates derived from raw and adjusted data, respectively.
(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...
Charts at link.
For researchers like myself examining the effect of local microclimates on the ecology of local wildlife, the change in the global average is an absolutely useless measure.
After so many ridiculous "scientific" articles about the effects of "global warming" on this or that local ecology..it is very refreshing to see.
Big ‘ol Sierra Nevada bttt!