[GoNative]

Originally Posted by Sangetsu

Look at the GSS satellite record for world temperatures, they are available to the public. The GISS satellites measure temperatures from the upper atmosphere, and are not subject to the same fudging which occurs with readings from ground stations. Look carefully and tell me which way the trend is running. Since 1998 world temperatures have decreased, have they not? And, if temperatures have not increased, where is the global warming? During this time, Co2 levels have increased about 5 parts-per-million. According to the established "science" of the UN, temperatures should have increased, but they haven't, have they?
...".

This is one of the reasons why people with little to no science in their backgrounds are so easily manipulated by pseudo-science and misinformation. Again I assume you have never studied any science Sangetsu beyond the absolute basic stuff we all get in secondary education?

In a warming troposphere scenario we actually expect to see cooling in the stratosphere (upper atmosphere). Here's a link that explains why this is so in nice basic language even the scientific illiterate like yourself may understand.

- Cooling

In regards to your assertion the IPCC only chose sights where warming was recorded I suggest you take a look at the following. 'The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project was created to make the best possible
estimate of global temperature change using as complete a record of measurements as possible and by applying novel methods for the estimation and elimination of systematic biases.'

Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (

It is the most comprehensive project to bring as much temperature data together as possible form around the world. They have expanded the dataset of stations from 7,280 (used by the IPCC) to 39,390. The project has been fully supported by both sides of the debate and is deemed as independent from bias.

Their initial findings were rescently presented to the House of Representatives.

Imporatantly they found the following

We have done an initial study of the station selection issue. Rather than pick stations with long records (as done by the prior groups) we picked stations randomly from the complete set. This approach eliminates station selection bias. Our results are shown in the Figure; we see a global warming trend that is very similar to that previously reported by the other groups.

So your assertions that site selection by the IPCC has biased the temperature record is without any basis whatsoever and is just part of the denialist blogosphere unsupported by any actual proof.

Specifically in relation to US weather stations and siting which has come under a lot of criticism by climate denialists in recent years they have the following to say.

Many temperature stations in the U.S. are located near buildings, in parking lots, or close
to heat sources. Anthony Watts and his team has shown that most of the current stations
in the US Historical Climatology Network would be ranked “poor” by NOAA’s own
standards, with error uncertainties up to 5 degrees C.
Did such poor station quality exaggerate the estimates of global warming? We’ve
studied this issue, and our preliminary answer is no.
The Berkeley Earth analysis shows that over the past 50 years the poor stations in the
U.S. network do not show greater warming than do the good stations.
Thus, although poor station quality might affect absolute temperature, it does not appear
to affect trends, and for global warming estimates, the trend is what is important.