So do you think that the japanesse are also lying to the world?
JMA uses the same basic temperature readings as everybody else. they also use the same type of corrections. one of the reasons I was so excited when Muller announced the BEST project was that he said that all the info was going to be publically available and that the different types of adjustments were going to be seperated out. eg. you would be able to plot raw temps, raw temps and TOBS, kridged, kridged and TOBS, long term stations only, rural only, urban only, etc. that didnt happen.
the raw temp trend is much smaller, liikewise rural is smaller than urban, long term smaller than short term. not only that but areas around the world with better documented records are smaller than poorly documented ones. much of the world has little or no information but has been estimated and infilled with no acknowledgement of the much greater error ranges involved. poorly measured Africa has a bigger impact on 'global temperature' than the USA.
so when JMA says that this has been the 'hottest xxx' on record, even though a large part of the increase is adjustments of one sort or another and based in large part on unreliable or non-existent readings, do you have confidence in their press release?
you claim to love science, and to be at least somewhat educated in scientific methods. how much credence do you give to the global record? what do you think the error bars are? do you think the homogenization methods that are in place now are the best available? do you think that they are doing what their programmers claim they are doing even though time after time the reality of inspected examples says they are not? is it just a coincidence that every new version adds to the trend?