I have been reading climate research for as long as I can recall. Even as a child I was fascinated by the stories of Ice Age cycles and the realization that inevitably we would head back to a period of colder temperatures. As climate alarmism grew, fueled by people who really want us all living in the Stone Age, I spent more time trying to understand just the basics–how are we measuring temperature in modern times and ascertaining trends; how were we attempting to identify temperatures from pre-instrument times; what are all the factors influencing temperature. I took two key lessons away from all my reading. One was that the climate system is incredibly complex and anyone who claims to have a “model” that explains climate and can accurately identify changes in outputs from changes in inputs is just a liar, plain and simple. We don’t understand the system to any degree of accuracy.
The second lesson was that the basic and fundamental data, as is often the case in science, was in dispute and that some “researchers” performed incredible “data-cleaning” and statistical tricks to get the outcome they wanted, the despicable Michael Mann being exhibit A for that practice. Fortunately there are a few researchers who retain the integrity and the courage to do real research and to point out the flaws in what has become mainstream climate non-science. One of those people is Dr. Roy Spencer, whose blog you should read. Dr. Spencer thinks there is warming, some is caused by humans, but isn’t buying into the extremist nonsense pimped by those who make a fortune off supposed “renewable” energy.
Dr. Spencer’s most recent work identifies a key flaw in temperature analyses–the ability to adjust for warming that is caused by urban areas. As we all know, a city generates a lot of heat, and that heat influences the local temperature, but has nothing to do with broader temperature or climate driven trends. His analysis adds to concerns about the accuracy of the often-reported and relied on temperature data sets. We already know that many temperature reporting sites are badly sited and subject to spurious warming. We know that bogus “homogenization” and “time of day” adjustments are used that raise actual reported temperatures. And it appears that these official data sets also fail to adjust properly for the urban heat island effect. Dr. Spencer calculates that this has increased reported warming by 40% to 50%. (Spencer Post)
So whenever you read anything about supposed global warming, just remember that the increase in temperature, if any, if greatly exaggerated, to the point that what remains is likely due to natural variation. Meanwhile, we spend trillions on expensive and unreliable renewable energy when we could be pursuing nuclear and fossil fuels, as China and other major competitor nations are doing.