Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Temperature Graphs: we are still being lied to

There's an interesting guest post, over at An Englishman's Castle, in which Willis Eschenbach analyses some of the temperature graphs and looks at the Parker et al. paper [PDF] that discusses the levels of... er... adjustments which have been made to raw temperature records in central England.

Much like Bishop Hill—who described his results, with typical understatement, as "a bit fishy"—Eschenbach has found some very strange anomalies.
Once again, questions arise. You would expect the UHI adjustment (which began in 1980) to be relatively smooth. Instead, there is an adjustment of about 0.3°C around 1980, and then no further adjustment until 1997. At that point, there is an abrupt adjustment of about 0.65°, followed by a steep climb. These adjustments seem quite odd.

Again, this is something of an understatement. I would say that the results are a little more than "odd": at best they are deeply incompetent. At worst, they represent a deliberate falsifying of the data to show that global warming is actually occuring.

Now, why one earth would anyone wish to do such a thing? I can't imagine...

1 comment:

Sir James Robison said...

Yes, just spent some time poring over that one and it's an interesting micro-climate study indeed, focussing on one of the many parameters of climate.

The thing is, of course, it has scarcely any relevance in the context of the reality of human induced climate change but still interesting for all that.

Oh yeah? So what has happened for the last ten years, exactly?

Over at the ASI, they are posting some of the winning entries of the Young Writers on Liberty. One does not want to put such keen minds off,...