"Much of the observed warming this past century is artificial, either caused by the urban heat island effect or by dubious adjustments to the actual data reported by surface temperature stations.
Christopher Monckton has just uncovered the latest example of temperatures gatekeepers adjusting the data to fit an alarmist narrative.
Monckton writes: They’re at it again.
The old lady of temperature datasets – HadCRUT, the only global dataset to reach back to 1850 – has released its revised monthly global mean surface temperature anomalies for 1850-2020.
The earlier dataset (HadCRUT4) showed a least-squares linear-regression trend of 0.91 K on the monthly anomalies from 1850-2020 – only just over half a degree per century equivalent.
HadCRUT5 shows a 1.04° C trend from 1850-2020, or three-fifths of a degree per century equivalent, up 14% from the 0.91° C trend on the HadCRUT4 data.
Like the endlessly-adjusted GISS, RSS and NCEI datasets, HadCRUT5 hikes the trend – and does so by a startling 14%.
The usual method is adopted: depress the earlier temperatures (we know so much better what the temperature was a century and a half ago than the incompetents who actually took the measurements), and elevate the later temperatures with the effect of steepening the trend and increasing the apparent warming.
Of course, elaborate justifications for the alterations are provided.
... it is fascinating that the much-manipulated GISS, HadCRUT, RSS and NCEI datasets are managed by climate fanatics, while the UAH dataset – the only one of the big five to have gone the other way – is managed by climate skeptics.
Monckton goes on to compare these inflated temperature trends to climate models and says: This is the most straightforward way of showing that the models’ global-warming predictions are without a shred of legitimacy or credibility.
They are elaborate fictions.
They suffer from two defects: they are grossly excessive, and they are accordingly ill-constrained.
... warming adjustments to the temperature record seem to be happening faster than “global warming” itself.
Where is the accountability in climate science?"
