THIS POST IS A REVIEW OF REPORTS IN CLIMATE SKEPTIC BLOGS THAT A NEW JAPANESE RESEARCH PAPER HAS REVEALED EVIDENCE OF DATA TAMPERING IN CLIMATE SCIENCE TO SHOW WARMING WHERE THERE WAS NONE OR TO HIDE A COOLING TREND OR TO EXAGGERATE THE RATE OF WARMING.

ACCORDING TO THESE BLOGS, “THE DAMNING REVELATIONS IN THE JAPANESE PAPER AGAINST THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE ARE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.

(1) THERE ARE “STATISTICAL DATA ALTERATIONS”

(2) THERE ARE HUGE GAPS

(3) DISSENTING EXPERTS ARE PLAGUING CLIMATE SCIENCE

(4) NATURAL FACTORS ARE VERY MUCH AT WORK WHEN IT COMES TO CLIMATE CHANGE.

THE JAPANESE RESEARCH PAPER IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS

Japan’s Canon Institute For Global Studies (CIGS) Presents New Working Paper On Climate Science Data Inconsistencies
By P Gosselin on 15. June 2021. Statistical data alterations, huge data gaps and dissenting experts are among the problems plaguing climate science, new Japanese CIGS working paper highlights. In November 2019, the Canon Institute for Global Studies (CIGS) released a working paper noting that natural factors are also very much at work when it comes to climate change.

Now CIGS has added another new working paper. The new working paper has been released, in Japanese – authored by KiryeNet – and it reports that climate change goes well beyond one trace gas running the climate show and that there are a number of data inconsistencies and sloppiness in climate science and computing trends.

The new CIGS publication also shows how Japan’s mean winter temperature has in fact cooled over the past 30 years, and not warmed like many have been falsely led to believe

CRITICAL COMMENTARY

(1): THAT CO2 IS A “TRACE GAS” IS NOT A VALID ARGUMENT AGAINST THE THEORY OF AGW AS DESCRIBED IN A RELATED POST: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/04/17/abs-temp/

(2): THAT GLOBAL MEAN SURFACE TEMPERATURE HAS BEEN STEADILY RISING SINCE 1979 IS SEEN IN THE UAH SATELLITE DATA. LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/01/11/global-warming-dec2020/

(3): THAT “ natural factors are also very much at work when it comes to climate change.” IS NOT DISPUTED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE AS SEEN IN THESE NASA GISS FORCINGS: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/10/22/forcings/

(4): THAT “Japan’s mean winter temperature has in fact cooled over the past 30 years, and not warmed like many have been falsely led to believe” HAS NO INTERPRETATION IN TERMS OF AGW WHERE THE RELEVANT CLIMATE VARIABLE IS THE LONG TERM TREND IN GLOBAL MEAN SURFACE TEMPERATURE. IN THAT CONTEXT, VARIATIONS IN WINTER TEMPERATURE IN JAPAN OVER A 30-YEAR PERIOD MUST BE UNDERSTOOD AS INTERNAL CLIMATE VARIABILITY. LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/07/16/the-internal-variability-issue/

(5) THAT THERE WAS COOLING OR NO WARMING PRIOR TO 1950 AND THAT THESE ANOMALIES IN THE THEORY OF GLOBAL WARMING HAVE BEEN REMOVED WITH DATA TAMPERING HAS NO INTERPRETATION IN TERMS OF THE THEORY OF AGW WHERE THE TEMPERATURE TRENDS IN THE PERIOD 1850 TO 1950 ARE ACKNOWLEDGED AS THE SO ALLED ETCW ISSUE IN CLIMATE SCIENCE. IT IMPLIES THAT THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY TEMPERATURE TRENDS ARE NOT WELL UNDERSTOOD IN TERMS OF THE THEORY OF AGW. LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/10/09/the-etcw-issue-in-climate-science/

THE ETCW ISSUE IS THE LIKELY REASON FOR CLIMATE SCIENTISTS AT NASA AND ELSEWHERE TO MOVE THE START YEAR OF GLOBAL WARMING TO 1950. ALSO SEE THE EXCELLENT PAPER BY TOM KNUTSON ON THIS ISSUE: Delworth, Thomas L., and Thomas R. Knutson. “Simulation of early 20th century global warming.” Science 287.5461 (2000): 2246-2250

ABSTRACT: The observed global warming of the past century occurred primarily in two distinct 20-year periods, from 1925 to 1944 and from 1978 to the present. Although the latter warming is often attributed to a human-induced increase of greenhouse gases, causes of the earlier warming are less clear because this period precedes the time of strongest increases in human-induced greenhouse gas (radiative) forcing. Results from a set of six integrations of a coupled ocean-atmosphere climate model suggest that the warming of the early 20th century could have resulted from a combination of human-induced radiative forcing and an unusually large realization of internal multidecadal variability of the coupled ocean-atmosphere system. This conclusion is dependent on the model’s climate sensitivity, internal variability, and the specification of the time-varying human-induced radiative forcing.

CONCLUSION: THERE ARE MANY WEAKNESSES AND FLAWS IN CLIMATE SCIENCE THAT KEEP US DENIERS BUSY WRITING BLOGS BUT AS SEEN IN THE CLAIMS REVIEWED ABOVE, THE ENTHUSIASM TO ATTACK CLIMATE SCIENCE CAN GO OVERBOARD.