Thanks for posting your evidence, but none of the links or data come from a reputable scientific source. Do you have anything that has been published by a peer reviewed source or at least is based on a peer reviewed article? Surely any PhD scientist worth their salt would have peer reviewed articles to back up their claims.
For 1979 as the starting year in temperature graphs, I believe that was the year that the satellite system was operational from which made those measurements. Temperature measurements from base stations span further back to 1880 as I recall. However, data bias would lead one to suspect the earliest data as precision & accuracy cannot be assumed.
As for the first graph, that is actually part of a three part series of graphs which require needing to be shown together in order to understand the picture.
The single graph seems to have been presented by Steve Goddard as part of a conspiracy theory on “arctic fraud.” However, his work has been discredited at large, as well as the claims that NASA data had been manipulated in a dishonest manner. Even the Koch’s backed scientist Richard Muller who examined the data didn’t find that the it had been manufactured, and his data analysis lead to similar results as NASA and NOAA. I’ll leave these links here for those interested in understanding more about this discussion.
A neat little blog post that explores the dishonesty behind Goddard-Taylor’s assertions that temperature data is fabricated.
Probably a little too liberal for your taste, Rick. There are some good resources which back up their assertions.
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111020/full/news.2011.607.html
The climate study partially backed by the Koch brothers.
And another link for fun.
I’m looking forward to seeing some peer reviewed work, but I can’t say that I expect to see it given the course of this exchange. As you said in a previous comment, I know when I’m being lied to.
