In Update I, we discuss the deletion of the raw data that comprised the CRU database, the most widely used to “demonstrate” global warming.  In Update II, we talked about the warm bias in the data caused by improperly sited thermometers. Here is the CRU temperatures for the last 150 years. In part III, we discuss what may be an intentional bias built into the CRU computer code.  This is the part of Climategate that has been underreported.  It is based on a file called “Harry Read Me” which part of the FORTRAN code where a programmer “comments” on what he/she is doing and why.  I have read the Harry Read Me but have not attempted to analyze the code itself.  It has been a long time since I did FORTRAN programming in college and I don’t trust my skills.  If you wish to look at the code itself and multiple comments on it, go  here  and  here. I can state:  It is absolutely clear that the code is a complete mess.  Nothing a...

I was hoping to avoid the global warming controversy until this blog is better established but events have overtaken my preferences. If you have been reading the media (  Fox News  ) or internet today, you are probably aware that a number of emails and documents were hacked in Great Britian's Climate Research Unit (CRU).  Because I am so busy working with my editor to get Warnings  out in time, I have not looked over many of the documents. That said, there are clearly cases of pro-global warming scientists saying one thing in public ("warming is unequivocal") and something completely different in private ("where the heck is global warming?") during the same week, no less. I dislike the entire global warming controversy because, as I have stated on a number of occasions, it seems to have tainted atmospheric science.  Unfortunately, the more we learn, the more true this seems to be. Here are some blogs if you wish to follow the controversy:   Met...