Blogging from Northern Virginia!

Modern Whig Party of Virginia

Friday, December 18, 2009

The Dominoes are falling after Climategate

The following article describes developments in the aftermath of the release of emails and papers and data manipulation software from the CRU in England.  One of the developments is:

A story is beginning to take shape. This story broke into the world media Wednesday. An article in RIA Novosti, the Russian state-owned news service, states:
On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office inExeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.
The article reports that the IEA had taken a new look at the data used in the Intergovernmental Panel for Climatic Change (IPCC) reports. These reports, which became the basis for warnings of dramatic human-caused global warming that led to calls for extensive regulation and to the current climate change conference in Copenhagen, are based on world temperature estimates using measurements from thousands of reporting sites throughout the world.
Novosti reported that the data used for temperature measurements in Russia appeared to have been carefully chosen from the warmest reporting sites. If an average were taken over all Russian reporting sites, then there was little or no warming to report.

The article goes on to report on the release of data from the UK:
While the Novosti report has gotten the most attention, it’s not the only such report. The Climategate files forced the UK Meteorological Office to make at least part of their raw data available. One of the first was Willis Eschenbach, at Watts Up With That. Read the whole discussion and also Eschenbach’s answer to a critique published in the Economist for the details, but here is the “money shot”:

In this figure, the blue line is the raw data. The black line is the adjustments that had been applied to that data, and the red line is the result following the adjustments.
As you can see the adjustments are what causes the increase in the red line.  The blue line shows no warming at all.  Next is from the US:

The next domino was a study by Dr. Richard Keen of the University of Colorado that was reported at the Air Vent blog. In it, Dr. Keen compares the raw data from the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) with data from the Global Climate historical network, the adjusted data as published in the IPCC report. Dr. Keen finds that the raw data does indeed show an upward trend of 0.69°C per century, which he believes is explained by the “Pacific Decadal Oscillator,” a well known long-term phenomenon.
The data used by the IPCC instead shows warming four times greater, 2.8°C per century, an adjustment of about 2°C.

All in all, these revelations result in this conclusion:

What can be said is this: We now have substantial evidence, from several independent sources, that the data used as the basis for the IPCC report has been adjusted in undocumented ways, and those adjustments account for nearly all the warming we are told has been caused by humans.

Until the data is re-examined, fully, openly, and transparently, it is impossible to conclude how much of a contribution to global climate change humans have made, or whether that contribution has been made by human-generated CO2. And without knowing that, attempts to “fix the problem,” through cap and trade or Copenhagen agreements, is misguided at best — and dangerous at worst.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-faster-and-faster-the-dominos-fall/

1 comments:

Anonymous said...

We have Al Gore to thank for all this nonsense. The lack of serious debate has allowed this scientific fraud to happen. The truely disturbing fact about this "climate-gate" discovery is that it doesn't seem to discredit the alarmist community argument enough. Instead, they and their supporters simply adjust their arguements. Global warming becomes climate change. Florenscent lightbulbs replace incandescent, despite their mercury content. One alarmist (and I can't remeber where I saw him) even went so far as to say, even if the science is only ten percent right, isn't that enough of a reason to take action. Ten percent right? I thought we were 100% right. Climate change is a lifestyle tax that will ultimately replace viable economic endeavors with less profitable ones in the name of saving the planet. But it will have to force people into compliance. Cap and Trade legislation will attempt this domestically, while Kyoto/Copenhagen will attempt it internationally. Of course internationally, these agreements will be non-binding. Why, because skeptical industrial nations (China, India, Brasil) aren't going to hamstring their economies in order to "save the planet." Unfortunately, the U.S. will. JS