the methods of Intelligent Design be brought to bear to detect anthropogenic
influence in temperature records? Core to the climate debate is the danger of
catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. We hear of “tipping
points” promising coast lands drowning in glacial melt. Defining “very likely”
as > 90%, the IPCC’s Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report
Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the
mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic
In The Smoking Gun At Darwin
Zero Willis Eschenback examines temperature records at
Darwin, North Australia. He looks
at what happens when the GHCN removes the “in-homogeneities” to “adjust”
the data. Of the five raw datasets, the GHCN discards two, . . . The three
remaining records are first “homogenized” and then averaged to give the “GHCN
Adjusted” temperature record for Darwin.
To my great surprise, here’s what
I found. To explain the full effect, I am showing this with both datasets
starting at the same point (rather than ending at the same point as they are
Figure 7. GHCN homogeneity adjustments to Darwin
Airport combined record
YIKES! Before getting homogenized, temperatures in Darwin were falling at
0.7 Celcius per century … but after the homogenization, they were warming at
1.2 Celcius per century. And the adjustment that they made was over two
degrees per century … when those guys “adjust”, they don’t mess around. And
the adjustment is an odd shape, with the adjustment first going stepwise, then
climbing roughly to stop at 2.4C. . . .
Figure 8 Darwin Zero Homogeneity Adjustments. Black
line shows amount and timing of adjustments.
Yikes again, double yikes! What on earth justifies that adjustment? How can
they do that? We have five different records covering Darwin from 1941 on.
They all agree almost exactly. Why adjust them at all? They’ve just added a
huge artificial totally imaginary trend to the last half of the raw data! Now
it looks like the IPCC diagram in Figure 1, all right … but a six degree per
century trend? And in the shape of a regular stepped pyramid climbing to
heaven? What’s up with that?
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.. . .
And with the Latin saying “Falsus in unum, falsus in omis” (false in
one, false in all) as our guide, until all of the station “adjustments” are
examined, adjustments of CRU, GHCN, and GISS alike, we can’t trust anyone
using homogenized numbers. . . .
Do you agree with Eschenback in attributing to humans these differences in
reported temperatures? Can such “adjustments” be reliably distinguished from
natural variations such as those due to
Figure 3 Glacial fluctuations, Temperature & PDO
See Easterbrook's presentations onglobal warming including
his predictions of global cooling and warming
. See also Matt Vooro on AMO and PDO- The Real Climate Makers In United
So what say you? Can anthropogenic influence be detected in temperature
records or can these variations be considered as natural? Can such data be
depended on to make public policy decisions for trillion dollar investments?
See Willis Eschenback’s full article: The Smoking Gun At Darwin