The past is cooling fast
In my job, "adjusting" or more accurately falsifying data can land you in prison.
17 Apr 2019 | OP ED Watch
A troubling new video from Tony Heller shows that the United States has been cooling rapidly—in the past. The 1930s are a lot colder today than they were 30 years ago thanks to the wizards at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. How did they do it? Simple. Because the early 21st century has refused to heat up the way the models told it too, NOAA kept the temperature line tilted scarily up to the right by pushing down on the left side, to the point that its own data formerly showing the 1930s hotter than today now show the reverse. Say, is that your thumb on the scale?
There are many grounds on which to question the extent to which alarmist science is science, including the refusal to make predictions and stand by them and insulting those who ask awkward questions. But fiddling data is especially egregious.
Of course it’s permissible, indeed desirable, to revisit data sets in light of refined understanding of how they were gathered and adjust them accordingly. Including historical temperature data. Unfortunately Heller makes a strong argument that in this case the adjustment has not been driven by better scientific understanding but by determination to hype the crisis.
It’s a bold claim and we invite you to watch Heller’s video and evaluate his detailed explanation of what happened and why he thinks it’s not legitimate. But first let us point out one very suspicious feature not only of this business, but also of the adjustment of official historical temperature data in Australia that we criticized last week. It’s that the adjustment always ends up going in one direction, making things worse, like those news stories that invariably tell us scientists just discovered global warming is worse than we thought.
Even if climate change is a crisis, every so often you’d have to find that some effects in some places were actually not as bad as predicted even if, which again strains credulity, they all turned out to be bad. And a genuinely scientific venture to clean up old data would find errors distributed in various directions.
When all the “corrections” go in one congenial direction, it looks disturbingly like manipulation.