At least one part of the data is bad, too.

If you know me, you probably know that I’m a global warming skeptic. Not a denier, per se; but I’m concerned that stories like the following seem to keep appearing:

Those, dear friends, are the clumsy fingerprints of someone messing with the data Egyptian style … they are indisputable evidence that the “homogenized” data has been changed to fit someone’s preconceptions about whether the earth is warming.

Anthony Watts has put together a great discussion revolving around the temperature data from Darwin, Australia, and how it seems to have been manipulated. Read more at Watts Up With That?.

For reference, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies published its surface temperature analysis earlier this year. Now, I don’t claim this as anything other than idle pondering, but: I wonder what the GWS/m² (Global Warming Skeptic per square meter) density is in Scandinavia…

UPDATE: From WSJ.com, The Tip of the Climategate Iceberg. Open access to the data is a two-edged sword, but it’s the best way to get to the truth.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.