Nearly all “warming” evidence found to be based on temperature “adjustments” rigged by people

07/16/2017 / By Amy Goodrich

Recently, a controversy over temperature adjustments has spiraled out of control — with proof of records being changed to support Obama’s climate policies and the global warming narrative.

A new research report — published June 27, 2017, by two scientists and a veteran statistician — found adjustments made to global surface temperature readings by scientists in recent years are totally inconsistent with published and credible temperature data.

“The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST [global average surface temperature] data sets are not a valid representation of reality,” the study authors explained. “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.”

Despite the fact that these data sets show that the recent years have been the warmest ever, the results cannot be trusted, noted the authors of the study. The astonishing evidence they found may change the entire idea of global warming and how to address the threats posed by the climate change hoax.

Adjustments in favor of the global warming narrative

The aim of the peer-reviewed study was to validate the adjustments made to raw thermometer readings by NASA, NOAA (U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), and the U.K.’s Met Office. Climate researchers often apply adjustments to surface temperature thermometers to account for “biases” in the data, The Daily Caller explained.

Though the study didn’t question the changes to the data, they reported that nearly all the adjustments were in favor of the increasing global warming trend. In an interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation, Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo — who co-authored the study with statistician James Wallace and Cato Institute climate scientist Craig Idso — explained that nearly all the warming they are now showing is found in the adjustments, adding that each data set pushed down the 1940s warming trend and pushed up the current warming.

“You would think that when you make adjustments you’d sometimes get warming and sometimes get cooling. That’s almost never happened,” said D’Aleo.

Furthermore, the team of researchers concluded that the measurements used to fortify the global warming narrative “nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history” by “systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature pattern.”

In 2009, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was given legal authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to tackle climate change issues. Based on these new findings, the study authors noted that the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide or CO2, based on the global warming trend is invalidated.

Sam Kazman, an attorney with the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), noted that this study is yet another important piece to add weight to the climate change debate, noting that this alone should give the EPA enough reason to reevaluate the endangerment finding.

Since the evidence used by the EPA to come to their conclusion and put a halt on CO2 emissions does not exist, D’Aleo and Wallace already filed a petition with EPA on behalf of their research group, the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council (CHECC).

“In sum, all three of the lines of evidence relied upon by EPA to attribute warming to human GHG emissions are invalid,” reads CHCC’s petition. “The Endangerment Finding itself is therefore invalid and should be reconsidered.”

During the Obama-era, we have repeatedly been told that rising CO2-emmisons are destroying the planet. Let’s hope President Donald Trump orders the EPA to reopen the endangerment finding to new scrutiny. Just as he ordered the EPA’s Administrator Scott Pruitt to review the Clean Power Plan. Though Pruitt said that he was spearheading a red team exercise to tackle climate science, he didn’t say a word whether or not he will reopen the case.

For more info about The REAL SCIENCE behind carbon dioxide, watch the video below.