A scientist would note adjustments and then do a thorough literature study to determine why those adjustments take place. Neither Homewood nor you have done that. It is thus clear who it is that lacks the scientific acumen…

Come on then, Dan, show me wrong by doing a full analysis of the points brought up by Rasmus Benestad (an actual climate scientist) and Kevin Cowtan (a scientist in another field, but author of one climate paper).

And *you* bleat, in faux outrage, about “name calling?” Hah. Despite your hand-waving and continuing denial of the findings of those who, you know, actually *understand* why temperatures are adjusted (which you resolutely refuse to do) you have presented *nothing* to robustly refute what the science supports. Keep trying, Mr. Dismissive! Oops, I called you a name! WAAAAAH!

Truth is truth, despite post modern ideology that wishes it wasnt. All of you are just fooling yourselves.

The link is to a timeseries of temperature data because the comment section deleted my hyperlink.

And, last I could care less what you call me. It just affirms to me the statistical illiteracy, reasoning fallacies, and lack of scientific acumen so thoroughly present in the climate alarmist crowd.

Laughable is the word that comes to mind.

Also, you are an asshole. Not sure if you knew that, but if I did post your comments eceryone else would immediately know. perhaps that is your wish.

Dan, yes, you have some comments in moderation. still trying to decide what to do with them. I checked out one of your links and strange popups that resembled the usual prelude to computer viruses came up. plus the link was utter bullshit. In addition I dont allow this blog to be used as a link farm to anti science sites. Finally, there is no censorship here. that is impossible. you are free to say whatever you like. It is possible, however, that I won’t entertain that here. It is a nig internet, you could always get your own blog! So cool your jets and when I have time I’ll evaluate your comments more closely.

Its by Paul Homewood whom the climate alarmist blogosphere has gone ape attempting to prove something, anything about him.

I contend it just demonstrates more statistical illiteracy amongst the faux intelligensia of climate alarmists.

Homewood’s methods are statistically valid. They show a profoundly solid education and many years of experience.

But then again, comparing historical trends as written from several different sources against the NASA data sets is no small thing. It’s research of the highest order and demands a very sharp mind and an eye for detail.

I’m posting is article about the Arctic adjustments because they are so egregious. And demonstrate the potential level of fraud inherent in the rest of the measurements.

So I ask again if you can find anything wrong with his methodology please demonstrated otherwise your opinion will be assigned the value it demonstrates.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/temperature-adjustments-transform-arctic-climate-history/#more-13039

1850-2006, 150 years of no temp variance. Data source and how derived noted in the graph itself.