Billy_Bob
Diamond Member
NASA and NOAA's Problematic Adjustments And Divergences..
Well this is going to leave a huge mark... Duke Physicist Robert Brown pulls no punches when it comes to calling out fraud in our government folks, intentional or not..
The two data sets should not be diverging, period, unless everything we understand about atmospheric thermal dynamics is wrong. That is, I will add my “opinion” to Werner’s and point out that it is based on simple atmospheric physics taught in any relevant textbook.
And he even goes one to explain why even if it is simply confirmation bias it too is fraud as they should have been prepared to counter thier own personal biases.
The bias doesn’t even have to be deliberate in the sense of people going “Mwahahahaha, I’m going to fool the world with this deliberate misrepresentation of the data”. Sadly, there is overwhelming evidence that confirmation bias doesn’t require anything like deliberate dishonesty. All it requires is a failure in applying double blind, placebo controlled reasoning in measurements. Ask any physician or medical researcher. It is almost impossible for the human mind not to select data in ways that confirm our biases if we don’t actively defeat it.
Yet as this article shows the adjustment are not random, they are always in one direction, and they always conform to propping up the biases. This means they are not scientific, they are contrived, even if they were somehow 'justified'
So even like the excellent discussion on Curry’s blog where each individual change made by USHCN can be justified in some way or another which pointed out — correctly, I believe — that the adjustments were made in a kind of good faith, that is not sufficient evidence that they are not made without bias towards a specific conclusion that might end up with correction error greater than the total error that would be made with no correction at all.
I would not be so forgiving as these gentlemen are. To have so many scientists remain blinded and refuse to look at their own internal biases leads me to believe they have made these changes with malice and forethought. If it were simply one or two causing this it might be unintentional, but i dont think so..