Of course they would. In fact, the agenda-driven, politically saturated science behind the global warming scare demands that they do.
The paper, published in Science magazine and written by a team from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, claims the missing heat was there all the time. It was merely hidden from view by “data biases.”
Yes, there are biases at work here, but not the ones the NOAA paper is referring to.
To arrive at the conclusion they were surely looking for, the NOAA researchers put more weight on some parts of the temperature record while dismissing the importance of others. Michael Bastasch of the Daily Caller reports that the “new climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years.”
In the NOAA scientists’ words, they “updated” and “corrected” the record.
But some might say what they really did was torture the data.
Climate expert Fred Singer simply wrote “don’t believe it.”
“The pause is real,” he said, “and in all other data sets.”
Climate scientists Patrick J. Michaels, Richard Lindzen and Paul C. Knappenberger say the NOAA researchers were “desperate” and the “main claim” that “they have uncovered a significant recent warming trend is dubious.” The NOAA’s treatment of the data, they say, “guaranteed to create a warming trend.”
Piers Forster, a University of Leeds climate change professor, has a response similar to Singer’s. He told Phys.org that the United Nations’ global warming report is based on several data sets, not just NOAA’s alone.
“Even with the corrections in this study, the observed warming has not been as large as predicted by models. Other global datasets, even when corrected for missing Arctic data, still show a decreased trend since 1998,” said Forster.
“I still don’t think this study will be the last word on this complex subject.”
Naturally the NOAA’s paper is getting extra attention. It fits the media narrative.
Meanwhile, another set of adjusted temperature data based on satellite readings was recently released by the University of Alabama in Hunstville. But it’s being virtually ignored. That’s because it adjusted the temperature record downward. It doesn’t fit the narrative.