Raw Data, Wrong Answers

Andrew Dessler · 27 Jul 2026 · theclimatebrink.com ↗

3 korrents from this piece

Andrew Dessler did not write this page.

Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.

Our reading
Failing to adjust raw data for known measurement biases produces inaccurate results.

Their wordsIf you do not adjust the data for known biases, you're getting the wrong answer.
Our reading
Climate skeptics' opposition to data adjustments is driven by which results those adjustments produce, not by scientific principle.

Their wordsthe opposition to adjustments is entirely instrumental: climate skeptics like the results that the raw, biased data give them for the US, and they don't like the results that bias-corrected data give them.
Our reading
The intense U.S. heat of the 1930s was driven by regional natural variability plus human-caused poor land management (the Dust Bowl), not global warming.

Their wordsthe heat of the 1930s was a regional event, due to a combination of unforced variability and human activities (poor agricultural land management).