"My hunch is that whether innocently or fraudulently, there has been a systemic warm bias in the adjustment process"
Jay?
Ya think?!
I thought we had been all over this. The 'adjustments' skew the data.
Intrigued by the curious shape of the average of the homogenized Darwin records, I then went to see how they had homogenized each of the individual station records. What made up that strange average shown in Fig. 7? I started at zero with the earliest record. Here is Station Zero at Darwin, showing the raw and the homogenized versions.
Yikes again, double yikes! What on earth justifies that adjustment? How can they do that? We have five different records covering Darwin from 1941 on. They all agree almost exactly. Why adjust them at all? They’ve just added a huge artificial totally imaginary trend to the last half of the raw data! Now it looks like the IPCC diagram in Figure 1, all right … but a six degree per century trend? And in the shape of a regular stepped pyramid climbing to heaven?
Stairway to heaven!
I'll say. Just homogenizing the data. Love that old homogenization process. If its good for milk its got to be good for weather station data.
Nothing like it!!
Love that old homogenization process. If its good for milk its got to be good for weather station data.
ReplyDeleteLOL. Good one.
Wakefield, look at the step-like quality of the 'adjustments' (the black line). Try doing that on your balance sheet for work and see how far you get.
ReplyDelete"Well Mr. Bank Loan officer, as you can see from this chart, the profits of my business (raw data adjusted and homogenized of course for, ahem, 'readability' purposes) are showing a steady upward progression." ; )
ReplyDeleteYeah. Would that money flows that easily.
ReplyDelete