The Climate Scientists at the Hadley CRU may be able to finesse terms of art like “trick” and “hide the decline”, but I’d sure hate to be the guy that had to explain what the programmer’s comments in the following snippet of code really mean, under oath.
; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,'Oooops!'
That’s a snippet of code written in Interactive Data Language (IDL). This analysis courtesy self-described climate agnostic Robert Greiner at a website called Cube Antics, and covered by wattsupwiththat.com in two articles called Climategate: The Smoking Code and The Smoking Code, part 2.
I’m coming to you today as a scientist and engineer with an agnostic stand on global warming. …
First, let’s get this out of the way: Emails prove nothing. Sure, you can look like an unethical a**hole who may have committed a felony using government funded money; but all email is, is talk, and talk is cheap.
Now, here is some actual proof that the CRU was deliberately tampering with their data. Unfortunately, for readability’s sake, this code was written in Interactive Data Language (IDL) and is a pain to go through.
[emphasis in original]
Suffice it to say, that if such a “correction” were to be applied to random, trendless data, it would make them skew upward in the last 25 to 50 years, in a shape that might be said to resemble a ski slope, or even …. a hockey stick!
What’s lacking here is a direct tie between this programming routine and the so-called “value-added” data used by the IPCC. If the raw data indeed no longer exists, it may be difficult to establish a connection.
I’ll leave it to the real engineers and computer experts to sort this out. I’m a technical manager, so my job is to have a highly developed bullcrap detector. And, right now, my AGW bullcrap meter is pegging on ManBearPig.
H/T: The Cooler Heads Digest of the Competitive Enterprise Institute