Comments on: Cap and Trade Takes a Big Hit in Australia http://www.globalwarming.org/2009/11/30/cap-and-trade-takes-a-big-hit-in-australia/ Climate Change News & Analysis Wed, 12 Dec 2012 14:44:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: robertg222http://www.globalwarming.org/2009/11/30/cap-and-trade-takes-a-big-hit-in-australia/comment-page-1/#comment-30233 robertg222 Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:46:18 +0000 http://www.openmarket.org/?p=22794#comment-30233 Here’s some of the code released by climategate. The programmer has written in helpful notes that us non-programmers can understand, like this one: “Apply a very artificial correction for decline”. You get the feeling this climate programmer didn’t like pushing the data around so blatantly. Note the technical comment: “fudge factor”. ; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!! ; yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904] valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,- 0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$ 2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’ The numbers in a row, in the [ ] brackets, are the numbers the data are to be altered by. If there were no adjustments, they’d all be zero. It’s obvious there is no attempt to treat all the data equally, or use a rigorous method to make adjustments. What could their reasons be besides "hide the decline"? East Anglia Data Adjustments In 1900-1920: “All thermometers working accurately”. In 1930: “Stock market crash and global depression causes artificial inflation in temperatures. Corrected, using inverted Dow Jones index until 1940?. 1940: “Due to WWII, briefly, thermometers work again”. 1945: “Artificial rise due to Nagasaki/Hiroshima nuclear summer effect. Compensated.” 1950 – 2000: “Quality control at thermometer factories must be going to pieces. Thermometers are just reading too low, and it kept getting worse until 1970. Instead of demanding the factories get it right, simply adjust the data. Still not enough. Quality control puts air-conditioning exhaust vents close to thermometers in the field, to further counteract apparent factory problem.” Here’s some of the code released by climategate. The programmer has written in helpful notes that us non-programmers can understand, like this one: “Apply a very artificial correction for decline”. You get the feeling this climate programmer didn’t like pushing the data around so blatantly. Note the technical comment: “fudge factor”.

; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!

;

yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]

valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,- 0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$

2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor

if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’

The numbers in a row, in the [ ] brackets, are the numbers the data are to be altered by. If there were no adjustments, they’d all be zero. It’s obvious there is no attempt to treat all the data equally, or use a rigorous method to make adjustments. What could their reasons be besides "hide the decline"?

East Anglia Data Adjustments

In 1900-1920: “All thermometers working accurately”.

In 1930: “Stock market crash and global depression causes artificial inflation in temperatures. Corrected, using inverted Dow Jones index until 1940?.

1940: “Due to WWII, briefly, thermometers work again”.

1945: “Artificial rise due to Nagasaki/Hiroshima nuclear summer effect. Compensated.”

1950 – 2000: “Quality control at thermometer factories must be going to pieces. Thermometers are just reading too low, and it kept getting worse until 1970. Instead of demanding the factories get it right, simply adjust the data. Still not enough. Quality control puts air-conditioning exhaust vents close to thermometers in the field, to further counteract apparent factory problem.”

]]>