Lies, Damned Lies, and Global Warming Statistics

by | Nov 26, 2015 | Videos | 6 comments


Don’t you hate when Fox News and the other MSM spin-meisters use simple tricks to skew and misrepresent data and statistics? How about when the World Meteorological Organization does it? Or NASA? Or the Journal of Climate? Or GISS? Join James for today’s thought for the day as he shows you some of the grade school level parlour tricks the global warming alarmists use to misrepresent their data and bamboozle the public.

The statisticians at Fox News use classic and novel graphical techniques to lead with data

You can’t deny global warming after seeing this graph

Lying with Charts – Global Warming Graph

A History Of Dishonest Fox Charts

WMO Climate Status 1999

Black Tuesday of Climate Science

The Yamal implosion

YAD06 – the Most Influential Tree in the World

Sherwood 2008: Where you can find a hot spot at zero degrees

GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

Uncertainty in the Global Average Surface Air Temperature Index: A Representative Lower Limit


  1. Very good video, James.

    Note on the Ezra Klein graph, they are also truncating the X-axis. By starting with the year 1881 and excluding earlier years where they also have data*, they create a graph showing a clear upward trend. Adding in earlier years however, would create a U-shaped trend line, which gives the reader a very different message.
    *Of course, we know such data is often unreliable.

    On the color graphs, another deception is that the scale is not balanced. Notice that the reddest color is +0.5 degrees, while the bluest is -1.0 degrees. Logically, you would run the scale from -1.0 to 1.0.

    • Note that, on any graph, both the X and Y axis must be truncated SOMEWHERE. Moving the X axis back even further, and it looks like an “N”. Further back yet, it looks like a “W”… although you will note that the GENERAL TREND since the beginning of the industrial revolution is for the left side of the letter to be lower than the right side.

  2. James,

    This has to be the best presentation I’ve seen to date on this information. Once again, you’ve done a great job clearly, comprehensively, and concisely demonstrating the inherent flaws in the statistical models which have been used in grossly misleading ways. Hats off on this one my friend. I sincerely appreciate it and it’s something I’m making a mental note of for future reference.

    I’ve begun to formulate a concept for presenting a counter argument for why those who legitimately care about the environment need to move away from the “warming” narrative and why it’s necessary to abandon any investment of hope, time, or energy into something like these “climate summits” and refocus efforts elsewhere. On top of that I see how an effective argument on this topic could become a valuable analogy which could be applied to abandoning a comparable investment of hope, time, and energy in the political process as it currently exists (at least in the United States).

    I’ve presented some of my ideas on the climate change topic here already, but I feel like I have a more comprehensive idea for presenting a compelling argument, at least to those who are concerned about climate change based on the IPCC hype.

    I know this statement here is relatively vague, but these are ideas I intend to flesh out more comprehensively moving forward. I don’t have the time at the moment to present an initial sketch of these ideas here, but I’ll come back to the topic for sure and share them here and perhaps at Boiling Frogs to further hash out and hopefully refine this “concept” into something which can have an impact on shifting conversations where the opportunity presents itself.

    There’s nothing particularly groundbreaking in what I have to say and, as mentioned, I’ve probably more or less stated so much already. However, I’m a believer in the concept that the fine points of how an argument is presented can go a long way in pushing a conversation in a more proactive direction. Particularly when it comes to arguments or concepts which challenge deeply held beliefs or adherence to “official narratives”. To me, that’s one of the most valuable aspects of your work. It’s fine to vent within the company of those who understand the nature of your frustrations in ways which others can’t, but if this is where the conversation ends, the time and energy invested in covering, uncovering, and analyzing topics which (let’s be honest) typically aren’t exactly the most uplifting, becomes a matter of questionable value (at least imo). I think your emphasis on “solutions” is reflection that you see the matter on similar terms.

    That’s all for the moment, but I just wanted to say kudos on this video and thanks for continuing with the great work you do here =]


Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member