In the second week of November an agency responsible for monitoring global temperatures decreed October 2008 as the warmest on record around the world. Lest memories be confused by "experts" who perceive reality with far greater acuity than mere mortals demonstrate, here’s a list of facts pertaining to the sweltering month of October:
London experienced its first October snow in 70 years
Chicago and the Great Plains states broke several lowest-temperature records, some of which had stood for 120 years
Tibet broke snowfall records
Glaciers in Alaska, the Alps and New Zealand began advancing
Sea ice expanded so rapidly it covered 30% more of Arctic than at the end of October 2007
So what’s up with the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), an agency charged with supplying climate information for the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and its report that October of 2008 was the hottest October on record? Incompetence and a less excusable bias in favor of climate change orthodoxy.
It turns out that GISS report was based on the worldwide temperatures for the month of September, not October. Obviously in the northern hemisphere September is quite a bit warmer than October. The figures for October in fact show that the month, far from being the warmest on record, was only the 70th warmest in the past 114 years, well in the bottom half of all the Octobers for the past century or so.
Some who are sceptical of anthropogenic climate change are suspicious that GISS purposefully substituted September’s temperatures for October to push the agenda although it’s far more likely that GISS was duped by an honest mistake. It does bear responsibility for so easily accepting figures that showed a one-month temperature jump of nearly one degree worldwide. That GISS is so wrapped up in a particular agenda that it doesn’t double check surprising data doesn’t speak well of it as a scientific organization.
As happened with the tobacco issue the desire to find the "right" facts blinds even honest researchers into uncritically accepting data that supports a politically motivated agenda. Anti-tobacco requires a never-ending stream of epidemiological trash that fingers smoking as unhealthy, based on nothing, while the global warming hoax requires an explosion of high temperatures, even if they don’t exist.