The Real Temperature Record

As we have written a number of times, one of the basic problems in assessing the credibility of the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming theory is that it has been difficult, if not impossible, to obtain raw temperature data for scientific analysis. The agencies responsible for publishing temperature data, not just in the U.S. but around the world, are committed to the global warming scare, which is the source of their money and prestige, and they generally do not publish raw temperature data. Instead, they publish “adjusted” temperature data, usually without explaining how or why it has been adjusted. This is a huge scientific scandal that has only recently become generally known, due to independent scientists who have dug out published temperature records from decades ago and compared them with what is now reported by, for example, NOAA. The result has been that temperatures from earlier decades, especially the 1930s, have been adjusted downward, while more recent temperatures have been adjusted upward. Imagine that. Everything you read about 20th century temperature trends, and every chart or graph that you see, is based on these altered data.

So The Original Temperatures Project, a Herculean task that has been undertaken by Frank Lansner, is of great importance. Lansner reports on his findings to date at Watts Up With That. As you might expect, it isn’t easy to get government agencies to cough up their actual records, many of which they have falsely reported. But Lansner has persisted and, while his project is ongoing, he has accumulated a remarkable amount of data. You can read his long post and draw your own conclusions.

The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature report was hailed by liberal media as the ultimate proof of global warming; this is Lansner’s “suggestion to an update of their FAQ-text:”


The global warming scam is the worst scientific scandal in human history, in my opinion. The warmists make Trofim Lysenko look like a model of scientific integrity.

UPDATE: This post has been revised thanks to a reader’s correction.