Met Office model is sunk by its own data

Christopher Booker, Telegraph
We are familiar with how consistently the Met Office has, in recent years, been getting its seasonal and medium-term weather forecasts so spectacularly wrong. We recall that soaking “barbecue summer” of 2009; their “warmer than average” December 2010, which turned out to be the coldest on record; last year’s “drier than average winter”, which led to the wettest January ever; and many more....... 
One reason this is significant, as I noted last year, is that it yet again confirms how seriously the Hadley Centre’s forecasting strategy has been skewed – by the way its computer models are programmed to assume that a steady rise in CO2 levels must inevitably lead to rising temperatures. This is the core reason why it has been getting all those forecasts of “hotter summers” and “drier winters” so dismally wrong.
A second point of concern is that the same unquestioned assumption has been allowed damagingly to reshape the energy policy of so many governments, above all our own. Yet, such is the power of group-think, not one of our leading politicians, from Barack (“the science is settled”) Obama down, has had the independence of mind to question that flawed assumption.
A third lesson that might emerge from this is that we should recognise that the Met Office’s blind acceptance of this scientific error has – in view of the disastrous influence it exerts on public policy – become a national scandal. In that popular buzz-phrase, the Met Office, for which we pay £200 million a year, has shown itself to be “not fit for purpose”. Yet never, by politicians or even the media, has there been any proper attempt to call it to account."

Rigged ‘science’

Washington Times
The “Steven Goddard Real Science” blog compares the raw U.S. temperature records from the Energy Department’s United States Historical Climatology Network to the “final” processed figures, to demonstrate how the historical data have been “corrected,” using computer modeling.
The modifications made to the past temperature record had the effect of cooling the 20th century, which makes temperatures over the last 14 years appear much warmer by comparison. Such changes don’t square with history, which shows the decade of the 1930s the hottest on record. The Dust Bowl storms were so severe they sent clouds of debris from Texas and Oklahoma to the East Coast, even darkening the skies over the U.S. Capitol one day in 1934. .................
With the global warming scam unraveling before his very eyes, President Obama and his administration want action now. “The question is not whether we need to act,” says Mr. Obama. “The overwhelming judgment of science, accumulated and measured and reviewed over decades, has put that question to rest. The question is whether we have the will to act before it’s too late.”
Too late for what? The planetary thermometer hasn’t budged in 15 years. Wildfires, tornadoes, hurricanes and other “extreme” weather events are at normal or below-normal levels. Pacific islands aren’t submerged. There’s so much ice the polar bears are celebrating.
Opinion polls show the public figured out that global warming was all hype years ago, but the judges still haven’t heard the news. The usually unflappable Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the Monday opinion, joined by the four liberal justices and assorted conservatives who agreed only in part, and disagreed in other parts of the opinion. The high court justices missed an opportunity to reverse the EPA premise that all humans are “polluters” because they exhale. It’s not supposed to be easy to dupe a judge, but the global warming scientists have done it."

Massive Temperature Adjustments At Luling, Texas

NALOPKT
As most will be aware, Steve Goddard has been running a series of posts about the large and unexplained adjustments being made to the US temperature record by NOAA. ......
In other words, the adjustments have added an astonishing 1.35C to the annual temperature for 2013. Note also that I have included the same figures for 1934, which show that the adjustment has reduced temperatures that year by 0.91C. So, the net effect of the adjustments between 1934 and 2013 has been to add 2.26C of warming.
Note as well, that the largest adjustments are for the estimated months of March – December. This is something that Steve Goddard has been emphasising.  ........"

Skeptical of skeptics: is Steve Goddard right?

Judith Curry
Last week, the mainstream media was abuzz with claims by skeptical blogger Steve Goddard that NOAA and NASA have dramatically altered the US temperature record.  For examples of MSM coverage, see:

• Telegraph:  The Scandal of Fiddled Global Warming Data
• Washington Times:  Rigged ‘science’
• RealClearPolitics: Climate Change: Who are the real deniers? 

OK, acknowledging that Goddard made some analysis errors, I am still left with some uneasiness about the actual data, and why it keeps changing.  For example, Jennifer Marohasy has been writing about Corrupting Australian’s temperature record.
In the midst of preparing this blog post, I received an email from Anthony Watts, suggesting that I hold off on my post since there is some breaking news.  Watts pointed me to a post  by Paul Homewood entitled Massive Temperature Adjustments At Luling, Texas.  "

The scientific method is at work on the USHCN temperature data set

WUWT
I’m talking about the claim made by Steve Goddard that 40% of the USHCN data is “fabricated”. which I and few other people thought was clearly wrong.  ........All of that added up to a big heap of confirmation bias, I was so used to Goddard being wrong, I expected it again, but this time Steve Goddard was right and my confirmation bias prevented me from seeing that there was in fact a real issue in the data and that NCDC has dead stations that are reporting data that isn’t real: mea culpa."

The Greatest Climate Myths of All – Part 2.

WUWT
Director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism
In part one, I wrote “In the simplest of terms, every study that has attributed the recent warming of the 1980s and 90s to rising CO₂ has been based on the difference between their models’ reconstruction of “natural climate change” with their models’ output of “natural climate change plus CO₂.” However the persistent failure of their models to reproduce how “natural climate changed before,” means any attribution of warming due to CO₂ is at best unreliable and at worse a graphic fairy tale.”

Like failed modeling results illustrated in Part 1, scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit published Attribution Of Polar Warming To Human Influence¹. Again their models failed to account for the heat during Arctic’s earlier natural warming (black line), a warming climate scientists called “the most spectacular event of the century”. Their “natural models” grossly underestimated the 40s peak warming by ~0.8° C (blue line) and when CO₂ and sulfates were added the warming event was cooled further (red line). So how much do we trust models’ attribution when they get climate change half wrong?  ...."

Eighty Years Ago, Eighty Percent Of The US Was In Drought

Real Science
People who say that droughts are getting worse, have absolutely no clue what they are talking about."

Daily Mail Compares Obama’s Climate Propaganda Vs. Real Science

Real Science
No doubt I will get an invitation to the White House to discuss this with the most transparent pro-science president in history."

--------------------------
Who Is Steven Goddard?

Obama mocks GOP global warming skeptics and says they 'pretend' they 'can't read' – but ignores new claims that the US has been COOLING since the 1930s

Daily Mail

The president spoke to a partisan audience of environmental activists on Wednesday night in Washington

He claimed GOP lawmakers believe global warming is real but won't admit it because they're afraid of 'a bunch fringe elements' in their own party

'They ducked the question and said "Hey, I'm not a scientist",' Obama joked

Obama ignored new evidence that American scientists have been altering climate data for years

The US Historical Climatology Network has been adjusting its records by replacing temperatures with data fabricated by computer models

How much global warming is just fiddled data?

Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun (Australia)
Steven Goddard:

Prior to the year 2000, NASA showed US temperatures cooling since the 1930?s, and 1934 much warmer than 1998…
Right after the year 2000, NASA and NOAA dramatically altered US climate history, making the past much colder and the present much warmer. The [graphs] below shows how NASA cooled 1934 and warmed 1998, to make 1998 the hottest year in US history instead of 1934. This alteration turned a long term cooling trend since 1930 into a warming trend.
 

Steven Goddard again:

I’ve shown how NASA and NOAA have dramatically altered the US temperature record, and they are doing the same thing in other countries, like Iceland and Australia – almost always cooling the past, which creates the appearance of warming.

Jennifer Marohasy:


I’ve since come to understand that the annual average temperature for 2013, which the Bureau claimed was a record, is in fact a wholly contrived valued based on modeling of temperatures, rather than the averaging of actual recorded values."

Using Thermometer Data Is Now Considering Data Tampering

Real Science
I have been accused several times in the last 24 hours of data tampering and cherry picking, because I use the the entire unaltered, measured HCN data set.
Only altered, fabricated data which reverses the measured US cooling trend is considered acceptable by climate alarmists."

Scientists at two of the world’s leading climate centres - NASA and NOAA - have been caught out manipulating temperature data to overstate the extent of the 20th century "global warming".

Breitbart

Scientists at two of the world’s leading climate centres - NASA and NOAA - have been caught out manipulating temperature data to overstate the extent of the 20th century "global warming".

The evidence of their tinkering can clearly be seen at Real Science, where blogger Steven Goddard has posted a series of graphs which show "climate change" before and after the adjustments.
When the raw data is used, there is little if any evidence of global warming and some evidence of global cooling. However, once the data has been adjusted - ie fabricated by computer models -  20th century 'global warming' suddenly looks much more dramatic.
This is especially noticeable on the US temperature records. Before 2000, it was generally accepted - even by climate activists like NASA's James Hansen - that the hottest decade in the US was the 1930s.

Roger Pielke Jr.'s Blog

Project Syndicate
" If the world is to solve the climate-change crisis, we will need a new approach. Currently, the major powers view climate change as a negotiation over who will reduce their CO₂ emissions ........Second, “decarbonizing” the energy system is technologically complicated.  ........Decarbonizing the world’s energy system requires preventing our production of vast and growing amounts of electricity from boosting atmospheric CO₂ emissions. .......Fighting climate change does depend on all countries having confidence that their competitors will follow suit. "

Oh dear.....

PS: "Even if you pile crazy assumption upon crazy assumption, you cannot even manage to make climate change cause minor damage" (Matt Ridley, Financial  Post)

Did Newsweek Really Claim Antarctic Sea Ice Is Melting?

The Federalist
Antarctic sea ice is undergoing dramatic long-term expansion despite a Newsweek article this week claiming the opposite. Newsweek’s false claim continues a long track record of global warming alarmists inventing false narratives to deceive the public on climate change.  ........The lesson to be learned from Newsweek’s Antarctic sea ice shenanigans is global warming alarmists continue to believe truthfulness can and must be sacrificed to advance their “greater goal” of global warming activism. It is no wonder the public no longer pays attention to their unending litany of alarmist propaganda."

EPICA Ice Core Analysis: Nowhere Do We See Temperature Lagging CO2

NoTricksZone
Nowhere here do we see any indication that CO2 is driving temperature. "