Report explodes global-warming alarmism.
A new blockbuster study that examines the most relied-upon global temperature data sets could start a chain-reaction demolition of global-warming alarmism. The peer-reviewed study by two climate scientists and a statistician challenges the "adjustment" process used to produce the global average surface temperature datasets (GAST) that have dominated media headlines and political debate for the past two decades.
The new study, "On the Validity of NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU Global Average Surface Temperature Data & The Validity of EPA's C02 Endangerment Finding," co-authored by Drs. James P. Wallace III, Craig D. Idso, and Joseph S. D'Aleo, was released on June 27. It was peer-reviewed by a distinguished group of seven scientists, including Dr. Alan Carlin (retired senior analyst and manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), Professor Anthony R. Lupo (expert reviewer for the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and Dr. George T. Wolff (former chair of the EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee).
The "conclusive findings" of their research, say the study coauthors, are that inappropriate "adjustments" have been made to the temperature record, with the result 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."
The new Wallace/D'Aleo/Idso study is likely to provide additional fuel to President Donald Trump's efforts to undo the Obama administration's EPA "endangerment finding," which made the incredible claim that carbon dioxide is a "pollutant" that must be severely regulated by the EPA to prevent catastrophic global warming. After noting the three GAST data sets "are not a valid representation of reality," the authors state that "since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for EPA's GHG/C[O.sub.2] Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these research findings."