The Fundamental Lack of Trustworthiness of The Theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming

I have blogged on this issue before, but it bears repeating. The above graph shows two vastly different world temperature averages over the past century, but both are from Jim Hansen at NASA and both are based on the same data.

Prior to 2007, NASA showed a world (red line) whose average temperatures were relatively stable from 1880 to about 1998, when world temperatures declined for about a decade. Post 2007, NASA showed a world (black line) that was once cool in the 1880's with the temperatures rising until 1998 when they shot through the roof. Huh? Just who are we to believe, NASA or . . . well . . . NASA? What could possibly justify this massive adjustment to the historical record?

People need to understand that the most fundamental aspect of climate science - measuring prior temperatures to compare them against current temps - lacks any iota of trustworthiness. And that is due not just to the Hansenesque hidden methodology and unsubstantiated changes to actual "raw data," but that the data collection stations themselves have numerous issues of reliability.

At any rate, the graph shows how Jim Hansen at NASA adjusted the historical temperature record in 2007 when the weather wasn't cooperating with the theory of global warming. It is how he is able to claim that we are in the hottest decade on record. It is not merely pure - and costly - fantasy, it is criminal.

As Real Science comments, "If nature won’t cooperate and produce some actual warming, someone has to do the dirty work for her."