Look at the blue graph -that is the raw temperature data from the surface station at Darwin Airport, Australia. Do you see a warming?
Now look at the red and the black graphs.The black line is the adjustments that had been applied to that data, and the red line is the result following the adjustments-the 'adjusted' data used by CRU and reported by IPCC. Do you see a warming? Sure you do.And as surely, there is some 'man' involved in creating that warming.
Adjusting temperature data at Darwin- producing man-made warming
Read the full details here. As Willis Eschenbach puts it-
YIKES! Before getting homogenized, temperatures in Darwin were falling at 0.7 Celcius per century … but after the homogenization, they were warming at 1.2 Celcius per century. And the adjustment that they made was over two degrees per century … when those guys “adjust”, they don’t mess around.
The Economist critcizes Willis Eschenbach's work and he responds here.
In Willis Eschenbach's response there is this zinger-
And while I am sorry to hear of the lacunae in your math education, please don’t make the foolish assumption that others are similarly limited. I have no problem with the GHCN math. If you truly have no idea on the question as you say … then why are you excoriating my ideas on the question?
Next you say: “Average guys with websites can do a lot of amazing things. One thing they cannot do is reveal statistical manipulation in climate-change studies that require a PhD in a related field to understand.”
Your understanding of statistics is as poor as your understanding of chronology. The statistics used by GHCN are average college level tools. You are dazzled by the fact that you don’t understand them, so you make the incredibly foolish assumption that no one without “a PhD in a related field” can understand them either. Some of us actually paid attention in class, you know.
Update 3 -
Cleaned up some confusing language