One would think that thirty-seven instances of data manipulation, errors, and other shenanigans would be enough to convince global warming alarmists that more of the same is a bad idea.
One would be wrong (WUWT):
It is apparent from the data that CRUTEM4 temperatures adjustments have, in part, been made with reference only to the earlier CRUTEM3 data, rather than raw temperature data. Further, the adjustments depend on the month for the data, and these adjustments are made for 20 or 30 consecutive years.
In the case of Adelaide (946720), for 30 years from 1857, CRUTEM4
Lowers all January temps by 1.4oC
Lowers all Feb temps by 0.9oC
Lowers all March temps by 1.7oC
With April to December all lowered by 0.5 to 1.1oC.
Thereafter, there are no adjustments until 2000, when a smattering of adjustments appear, mostly raising the temperature.
There are many examples of this practice. The total effect of all the differences between CRUTEM4 and CRUTEM3 where there is corresponding data is to accentuate warming trend by lowering pre 1995 temps by 0.1 to 0.2oC, and raising post 1995 temps by a similar amount.
In other words, the latest dataset was manipulated to show even more artificial warming from the last dataset.
Will these people never learn?
Cross posted to Virginia Virtucon