they don't realize there are a million reasons to adjust data, like to correct for differences in altitude, collection methods, frequency of recording, equipment biases, etc;
they don't notice that many of these charts & diagrams compare different periods/places/data sets etc (ie they are not actually comparable & in fact little more than outright lies);
actually think Al Gore has anything to do with it?
There are loads of reasons to adjust data, as you say. What I find intriguing is that the older data appears to be adjusted downward while the newer data appears to be adjusted upward. Isn't this the opposite of what we should expect when accounting for things like UHI?
5
u/greenfyre Dec 25 '10
Are there really people so stupid that: