Thanks to Eric Raymond, famous computer guru and leader of the open-source movement, at ESR, we can see what those sophisticated climate modelers were doing. They’ve found the code from the leaked files, and Eric’s comment is:
This isn’t just a smoking gun, it’s a siege cannon with the barrel still hot.
Here’s the code. The programmer has written in helpful notes that us non-programmers can understand, like this one: “Apply a very artificial correction for decline”. You get the feeling this climate programmer didn’t like pushing the data around so blatantly. Note the technical comment: “fudge factor”.
; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’
The numbers in a row, in the [ ] brackets, are the numbers the data are to be altered by. If there were no adjustments, they’d all be zero. It’s obvious there is no attempt to treat all the data equally, or use a rigorous method to make adjustments. What could their reasons be?
East Anglia Data Adjustments
In 1900-1920: “All thermometers working accurately”.
In 1930: “Stock market crash and global depression causes artificial inflation in temperatures. Corrected, using inverted Dow Jones index until 1940″.
1940: “Due to WWII, briefly, thermometers work again”.
1945: “Artificial rise due to Nagasaki/Hiroshima effect. Compensated.”
1950 – 2000: “Quality control at thermometer factories must be going to pieces. Thermometers are just reading too low, and it kept getting worse until 1970. Instead of demanding the factories get it right, simply adjust the data. Still not enough. Quality control puts air-conditioning exhaust vents close to thermometers in the field, to further counteract apparent factory problem.”
Ladies and gentlemen, I’m seriously concerned. All along I’ve said the world was warming. Now I’m not so sure. How would we know? How does anyone know in the light of all that data fudging?
That hacker or leaker of info deserves glory and thanks.
Serious postscript: How can anyone defend this? These people work for a team that wants more of your money. Is this not evidence of criminal intent to deceive?