As a public service, I will translate the double speak coming out of Phil Jones and the CRU
SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.
The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.
The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building…
In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”
By “value-added,” the CRU means raw data where arbitrary scaling factors and adjustments have been added to the data in a totally opaque and non-replicable sort of way. From past experience in other locations (see this post on New Zealand and the US), the adjustments to the raw data tend to drive 80-100% of the global warming signal. In other words, in areas where we have been able to check, these data adjustments account for 80+% of what the scientists call “global warming.” Without these adjustments, warming has been more modest or non-existent.
By destroying the raw data and thereby hiding the amount of massaging and adjustment that has been made to the data (“value add”) we are therefore unlike to be able to scrutinize the source of 80% of the warming signal. More from Anthony Watts here.
Update: This does not mean that there has been no warming, just that it has been exaggerated. Satellites have shown warming over the last 30 years and are unaffected by the same biases and issues as at the CRU. But the whole point is the exaggeration. Skeptics generally don’t think there is no warming from man’s CO2, just that it is greatly exaggerated. And this matters. Ten degrees of warming vs. a half degree of warming over the next century have very very different policy implications. See my video here for more.