What is purported to be global warming evidence actually comes from “adjustments” made by climate change advocates.
A new study reviews the alleged global warming evidence and found it almost all came from human adjustments. Furthermore, these adjustments led to temperature records that were hotter than any other records. The fact is, for all the pretense of scientific measurement, determining the average temperature of the earth involves a lot of subjective judgment that can be affected by the observers’ expectations.
The Daily Caller reports, “EXCLUSIVE: Study Finds Temperature Adjustments Account For ‘Nearly All of the Warming’ in Climate Data.”
Climate scientists often apply adjustments to surface temperature thermometers to account for “biases” in the data. The new study doesn’t question the adjustments themselves but notes nearly all of them increase the warming trend.
In fact, almost all the surface temperature warming adjustments cool past temperatures and warm more current records, increasing the warming trend, according to the study’s authors.
“Nearly all of the warming they are now showing are in the adjustments,” Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo, a study co-author, told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an interview. “Each dataset pushed down the 1940s warming and pushed up the current warming.”
“You would think that when you make adjustments you’d sometimes get warming and sometimes get cooling. That’s almost never happened,” said D’Aleo, who co-authored the study with statistician James Wallace and Cato Institute climate scientist Craig Idso.
Their study found measurements “nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history,” which was “nearly always accomplished by systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature pattern.”
“The conclusive findings of this research are that the three [global average surface temperature] data sets are not a valid representation of reality,” the study found. “In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data.”
Based on these results, the study’s authors claim the science underpinning the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate greenhouse gases “is invalidated.”
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com