ABSTRACT
The objective of this research was to test the hypothesis that Global Average Surface Temperature (GAST) data, produced by NOAA, NASA, and HADLEY, are sufficiently credible estimates of global average temperatures such that they can be relied upon for climate modeling and policy analysis purposes. The relevance of this research is that the validity of all three of the so- called Lines of Evidence in EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding require GAST data to be a valid representation of reality.
In this research report, the most important surface data adjustment issues are identified and past changes in the previously reported historical data are quantified. It was found that each new version of GAST has nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history. And, it was nearly always accomplished by systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature pattern. This was true for all three entities providing GAST data measurement, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU.
As a result, this research sought to validate the current estimates of GAST using the best available relevant data. This included the best documented and understood data sets from the U.S. and elsewhere as well as global data from satellites that provide far more extensive global coverage and are not contaminated by bad siting and urbanization impacts. Satellite data integrity also benefits from having cross checks with Balloon data.
The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting warming.
Finally, since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these research findings.
RELEVANCE OF THIS RESEARCH
The assumption that Global Average Surface Temperature Data is valid is critical to all Three Lines of Evidence in EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding. This may be easily seen by reviewing each Line of Evidence.
Stated simply, first, the Tropical Hot Spot (THS) is claimed to be a fingerprint or signature of atmospheric and Global Average Surface Temperatures (GAST) warming caused by increasing GHG/CO2 concentrations.
Second, higher atmospheric CO2 and other GHG concentrations are claimed to have been the primary cause of the claimed record setting GAST over the past 50 plus years.
Third, climate models are said to be valid for policy analysis purposes, that is, their predictions of the impact of rising CO2 levels on future GAST levels are said to be credible. Thus, GAST is the critical variable in all the climate models EPA has relied upon. These are the climate models that EPA relied upon in its policy analysis supporting, for example, its Clean Power Plan --recently put on hold by a Supreme Court stay. These climate models were also critical to the Social Cost of Carbon estimates EPA had used to justify a multitude of regulations across U.S. Government agencies.
Clearly, if GAST data is not valid, neither is the Endangerment Finding.
Read the complete report here:
http://redirect.viglink.com/?format=go&jsonp=vglnk_149960736977912&key=e7609c039c08d3ae00aebd97e6f0bffd&libId=j4wri7yo010110e3000DAt55etmwcazhu&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fdailycaller.com%2F2017%2F07%2F05%2Fexclusive-study-finds-temperature-adjustments-account-for-nearly-all-of-the-warming-in-climate-data%2F&v=1&out=https%3A%2F%2Fthsresearch.files.wordpress.com%2F2017%2F05%2Fef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf&title=Study%20Targets%20Adjusted%20Climate%20Data%20%7C%20The%20Daily%20Caller&txt=according%20to%20a%20study
No comments:
Post a Comment