IPCC ignores best average temperature and CO2 data because they don't support the global warming cause

"Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early twenty-first century's developed world went into a hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age."      
                      Richard S. Lindzen, PhD
MIT Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, member of the National Academy of Sciences, and former lead author, UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
.
The "cause", as defined by Maurice Strong of the UN in the 1970s before the first Earth Day, is to convince the world a climate change disaster is coming, have the UN seize the power to manage the environment of the whole world, and force wealthy nations to give some of their wealth to poor nations as 'climate change reparations'.

Since this cause furthers equality, it is obviously a leftist goal, and leftist goals are considered too important and too noble to be bothered with scientific honesty.
.
An open mind on whether or not climate change is natural (as it has been for 4.5 billion years, which even the IPCC admits) or manmade starting in the 1950s, as the IPCC claims, is not a characteristic of the climate change cult.
.

Lying, misleading and data mining are the standard operating procedure for the IPCC to demonize CO2. 

.
This is not occasional, or inadvertent -- it is blatant, and consistent. 
.
The IPCC uses the least accurate data source for average temperature and CO2 levels simply because more accurate sources do not support their fantasy of a coming climate catastrophe. 
.
I write about climate change because it affects the economy … and because the IPCC is political, not scientific.
.
In reality, climate change is natural, harmless climate cycles, with an effect from humans that is either too small to measure, or does not exist -- there is no correlation of manmade CO2 and average temperature.
.
There are three methodologies to estimate the average temperature of Earth: Weather satellites, weather balloons and surface measurements. 
.
The satellites and balloons are global measurements, reasonably accurate because they are in a consistent environment, and confirm each other. 
.
Surface measurements are non-global, inaccurate and repeatedly "adjusted" in a way that always seems to make the hot 1930s cooler, and current decades warmer.
.
So of course the UN's IPCC completely ignores the two best measurement methodologies … simply because surface measurements show more warming!
.
For historical temperature data, the IPCC completely ignores the two important results of ice core proxy studies:
.
(1) The average temperature is always changing, and 
.
(2) There seems to be natural warming/cooling cycles lasting roughly 1,500 years +/- 500 years.
.
The 1,500-year (+/-500 years) Dansgaard-Oeschger global climate cycle has existed on Earth for up to one million years, in times when atmospheric CO2 was high, and low. 
.
This 1,500-year climate cycle was discovered by scientists Willi Dansgaard and Hans Oeschger using Greenland ice cores, and by scientist Claude Lorius working independently with Antarctic ice cores. 
.
The three men shared the 1996 Tyler Prize (environmental Nobel Prize)..
.
.
After ignoring the two important results of ice core studies (above), the IPCC does use ice core studies for estimating the actual CO2 levels in the atmosphere.
.
A scientific explanation follows of why this use of ice cores is inaccurate. 
.
For now, let's say the weight of the ice affects the air bubbles in the ice. 
.
The older the ice, the less accurate the CO2 level measurement. 
.
Historical temperature and CO2 cycles are visible in ice core climate proxies, but the actual average temperature of Earth is a rough estimate, and the actual CO2 content of the air is definitely wrong.
.
The measurement error for CO2 content in the ice causes a long-term rising trend of CO2 from the oldest ice to the newest ice … and that's exactly the trend the IPCC wants to show everyone.
.
So, it seems for the IPCC, ice core climate proxy studies are "perfect" for CO2 levels, and are used for that ... but 90,000 actual real-time CO2 measurements of the air from 1812 to 1961 by the Pettenkofer method are completely ignored … along with the two reasonably accurate conclusions of ice core studies (Earth's climate always varies, and there are semi-regular cycles)! 
.
Here's a scientist explaining why ice cores are not accurate for estimating actual CO2 levels in the past:
.

"Formation of CO2 clathrates starts in the ice sheets at about 200 meter depth, and that of O2 and N2 at 600 to 1000 meters.  . This leads to depletion of CO2 in the gas trapped in the ice sheets.  . This is why the records of CO2 concentration in the gas inclusions from deep polar ice show the values lower than in the contemporary atmosphere, even for the epochs when the global surface temperature was higher than now." . "The data from shallow ice cores, such as those from Siple, Antarctica[5, 6], are widely used as a proof of man-made increase of CO2 content in the global atmosphere, notably by IPCC[7].  . These data show a clear inverse correlation between the decreasing CO2 concentrations, and the load-pressure increasing with depth (Figure 1 A) ."  . "The problem with Siple data (and with other shallow cores) is that the CO2 concentration found in pre-industrial ice from a depth of 68 meters (i.e. above the depth of clathrate formation) was "too high".  . This ice was deposited in 1890 AD, and the CO2 concentration was 328 ppmv, not about 290 ppmv, as needed by man-made warming hypothesis.  . The CO2 atmospheric concentration of about 328 ppmv was measured at Mauna Loa, Hawaii as later as in 1973[8], i.e. 83 years after the ice was deposited at Siple."  "An ad hoc assumption, not supported by any factual evidence[3, 9], solved the problem: the average age of air was arbitrary decreed to be exactly 83 years younger than the ice in which it was trapped.  . The "corrected" ice data were then smoothly aligned with the Mauna Loa record (Figure 1 B), and reproduced in countless publications as a famous "Siple curve". . Only thirteen years later, in 1993, glaciologists attempted to prove experimentally the "age assumption"[10], but they failed[9]."

"The notion of low pre-industrial CO2 atmospheric level, based on such poor knowledge, became a widely accepted Holy Grail of climate warming models. 
.
The modelers ignored the evidence from direct measurements of CO2 in atmospheric air indicating that in 19th century its average concentration was 335 ppmv[11] (Figure 2). 
.
In Figure 2 encircled values show a biased selection of data used to demonstrate that in 19th century atmosphere the CO2 level was 292 ppmv[12]. 
.
A study of stomatal frequency in fossil leaves from Holocene lake deposits in Denmark, showing that 9400 years ago CO2 atmospheric level was 333 ppmv, and 9600 years ago 348 ppmv, falsify the concept of stabilized and low CO2 air concentration until the advent of industrial revolution [13]. "

- Statement of Prof. Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection - Warsaw, Poland  Statement written for the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation March 2004

 . 

.

Here's a geologist explaining how the IPCC ignores historical CO2 measurement simply because they don't like the data:
.

(from page 416):

  “The measurement of CO2 in the atmosphere is fraught with difficulty. 

.

There is a 180-year record of atmospheric CO2 measurement by the same method. It has been measured with an accuracy of 1 - 3% from 1812 until 1961 by a chemical method. 

.

Between 1812 and 1961, there have been more than 90,000 measurements of atmospheric CO2 by the Pettenkofer method. 

.

These showed peaks in atmospheric CO2 in 1825, 1857 and 1942.  

.

In 1942, the atmospheric CO2 content (400 ppmv) was higher than now. 

.

A plot of the CO2 measured by these methods shows that for much of the 19th Century, and from 1935 to 1950, the atmospheric CO2 was higher than at present and varied considerably. 

.

There are great variations in CO2. 

.

A simple home experiment indoors can show that in a week, CO2 can change by 75 ppmv. 

.

A variable CO2 content is exactly as expected, a smooth CO2 curve rings alarm bells. 

.

… In 1959, the measurement method was changed to infra-red spectroscopy with the establishment of the Mauna Loa (Hawaii) station, and measurements were compared to a reference gas sample.   

.

Compared to the Pettenkofer method, infra-red spectroscopy is simple, cheap and quick. 

.

The infra-red technique has never been validated against the Pettenkofer method. 

.

The raw data from Mauna Loa is “edited” by an operator who deletes what may be considered poor data. 

.

Some 82% of the raw infra-red CO2 measurement data is “edited” leaving just 18% of the raw data measurements for statistical analysis. 

.

With such savage editing of raw data, whatever trend one wants to show can be shown. 

.

In publications, large natural variations in CO2 were removed from the data by editing in order to make an upward-trending curve showing an increasing human contribution to CO2.”    

.

(from page 419):

  “The IPCC chose to ignore the 90,000 precise CO2 measurements compiled despite the fact that there is an overlap in time between the Pettenkofer method and the infra-red method measurements at Mauna Loa. 

.

If a large body of validated historical data is to be ignored, then a well reasoned argument needs to be given. There was no explanation. Just silence.”

 quotes above from:  “Heaven and Earth", a book by Professor Ian Plimer  (Plimer was a two-time winner of Australia's highest scientific honor, the Eureka Prize, and a professor in the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide).