The global warming fraud explained in one simple chart

American Thinker ^ | 07/12/2017 | Thomas Lifson

[SeekAndFind]

The global warming fraud is based entirely on the practice of “adjusting” data. Michael Mann’s infamous hockey stick graph was “adjusted” to “hide the decline,” most notably.  But every prediction of catastrophe, every ”hottest year ever” story depends on adjusting the actual data of surface temperatures.

A recent scientific study of global average surface temperature reports and the CO2 endangerment finding has produced a remarkable graph that says it all, very clearly.

James Delingpole of Breitbart spotted it and explains:

The peer-reviewed study by two scientists and a veteran statistician looked at the global average temperature datasets (GAST) which are used by climate alarmists to argue that recent years have been “the hottest evah” and that the warming of the last 120 years has been dramatic and unprecedented.

What they found is that these readings are “totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data.”

That is, the adjusted data used by alarmist organizations like NASA, NOAA, and the UK Met Office differs so markedly from the original raw data that it cannot be trusted.

This chart gives you a good idea of the direction of the adjustments.

The blue bars show where the raw temperature data has been adjusted downwards to make it cooler; the red bars show where the raw temperature data has been adjusted upwards to make it warmer.

Note how most of the downward adjustments take place in the early twentieth century and most of the upward take place in the late twentieth century.

It’s awfully incriminating.

[JimRed]

Adjusted...interesting choice of words. Adjustment = Lie.

[GraceG]

This is like what happened before the Copernican theory of the solar system, they basically had to make the observations fit their theory of circles within circles....

[Skooz]

bfl

[Delta 21]

Where is the un “F-ed” with chart?

[Huebolt]

But WAIT!!

The infallible GERMANS believe in it, and and bow and grovel to it!

/sark

[deadrock]

It reminds me of the loudness war regarding recorded music.

[Cobra64]

So something happened in 1940?

This chart is worthless.

[Mrs. Don-o]

If I had handed in a lab report like that as a Sophomore --- Sister Mary Rita, SSJ, would have got her Game Face on and had a very serious talk with me.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Excellent observation, GraceG. Now it’s algorithms.

[muleskinner]

So what happened around 1940. My theory - most of the temperature gauges are out side of urban areas, which are heat islands. During the war, most of the rural temp. gauges were ignored. The local folks taking the measurements were in the military or had more important things to do, like not get killed. So the temperature gauges in the cities, where it was more convenient to get the temperatures, were oversampled. Hence, the large warming bias in data.

Similar data manipulation has been taking place for the last 17 years, or since the Environmental Activists have takien over the Universities, NOAA and the rest.

[muleskinner]

So what happened around 1940. My theory - most of the temperature gauges are out side of urban areas, which are heat islands. During the war, most of the rural temp. gauges were ignored. The local folks taking the measurements were in the military or had more important things to do, like not get killed. So the temperature gauges in the cities, where it was more convenient to get the temperatures, were oversampled. Hence, the large warming bias in data.

Similar data manipulation has been taking place for the last 17 years, or since the Environmental Activists have takien over the Universities, NOAA and the rest.

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

muleskinner :" Similar data manipulation has been taking place for the last 17 years,
or since the Environmental Activists have takien over the Universities, NOAA and the rest" You failed to mention "The Weather Channel", the cable media darling of "GlowBull Warming"
who gives names to storms and weather tracks.