global scamming
Quote:
the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.
The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.
Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.
Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.
The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.
The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.
On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.
IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.
The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world’s land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.
|
So...
1) the Hadley Center is only using data from a small fraction of the available Russian stations;
2) the stations which are not used in the temperature survey were not omitted because of a lack of data;
3) the data in stations NOT included in the survey do not show any discernable warming trend;
4) the data included in the survey are from stations located in populated areas which are widely understood to be warmer than non-populated areas.
Let's take another stab at the scientific process per the CRU....
1) Claim hypothesis is proven and beyond question;
2) Cherry pick data to create scarey graphs that will scare the bejesus out of people
3) Fight like hell to keep other people from seeing the raw data;
4) Say that anyone skeptical of the scam...errr....science is an anti-book-learning jesus freak who works for an oil company and wants to kill puppies.