The official data used for “global warming” fearmongering has been exaggerated by up to 50 percent over the last 50 years, bombshell new evidence has revealed.
The new groundbreaking research, compiled by two atmospheric scientists at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, Dr. Roy Spencer and Professor John Christy, shows 50% less warming over 50 years across the eastern United States than official data claims.
The new evidence deals a major blow to the widespread use of regularly adjusted global and local surface temperature datasets showing increasingly implausible rates of warming.
The research attempts to remove distortions caused by increasing urban heat and uses human-made structure density data over 50 years supplied by the Landsat satellites.
It compares the official National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) homogenized surface temperature dataset and exposes a 50% reduction in the warming trend.
Dr. Spencer and Professor Christy used a dataset of urbanization changes called “Built-Up” to determine the average effect that urbanization has had on surface temperatures.
Urbanization differences were compared to temperature differences from closely spaced weather stations.
The temperature plotted was in the morning during the summertime.
In a posting on Dr. Spencer’s blog, a full methodology of the project is shown here.
Dr. Spencer argues that the “Built-Up” dataset, which extends back to the 1970s, will be useful in “de-urbanizing” land-based surface temperature measurements in the U.S. as well as other countries.
All the major global datasets use temperature measurements from the Integrated Surface Database (ISD).
All have undertaken retrospective upward adjustments in the recent past.
In the U.K., the Met Office removed a “pause” in global temperatures from 1998 to around 2010 by two significant adjustments to its HadCRUT database over the last 10 years.
The adjustments added about 30% warming to the recent record. Removing the recent adjustments would bring the surface datasets more in line with the accurate measurements made by satellites and meteorological balloons.
Of course, if the objective is to promote a command-and-control Net Zero project, using widespread fear of rising temperatures to mandate huge societal and economic changes, a little extra warming would appear useful.
But warming on a global scale started to run out of steam over 20 years ago, and the stunt can only be pulled for so long before the disconnect with reality becomes too obvious.
There is a danger that the integrity of the surface measurements will be put on the line.
Earlier this year, two top atmospheric scientists exposed a significant manipulation of “climate science” data.
Emeritus Professors William Happer and Richard Lindzen told a U.S. Government inquiry that “climate science is awash with manipulated data, which provides no reliable scientific evidence.”
This is not the first time that the NOAA U.S. surface database has been under fire.
In a recently published critical report, U.S. meteorologist Anthony Watts called the database “fatally flawed.”
Watts found that 96% of U.S. temperature stations failed to meet what NOAA itself considered to be acceptable and uncorrupted placement standards.
He defined “corruption” as being caused by the localized effects of urbanization.
His report also drew attention to a rarely-publicized NOAA database compiled from 114 nationwide stations designed to provide continuous recordings away from urban heat distortions.
The measurements started in 2005 and to date show little warming, if any at all.
Meanwhile, the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP27, begins this weekend.
It is a fair bet that every warning of future temperature rise will reference the politically-correct surface datasets.
Every forecast of climate thermogeddon will undoubtedly incant the authority of climate models.
