From the CATO institute

New Study: Hadley Center and CRU Apparently Cherry-picked Russia’s Climate Data

Posted by Andrei Illarionov
December 17, 2009 @ 8:47 am

Yesterday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA), of which I am President, [1] issued a study (in Russian), “How Warming Is Being Made: The Case of Russia.” The report, prepared by IEA director Natalya Pivovarova, suggests that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia (CRU) in Norwich (England) apparently cherry-picked Russian climate data….([2] Full Story)

_____________
The IEA study identifies, amongst other things, that,

•  Russian meteorological-station data in the last 130 years did not substantiate the rate of warming on Russian territory suggested by the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature (HadCRUT) database…
• Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, while the HadCRUT used data from only 25% of such stations in their calculations…
• The data of stations located in areas not listed in the HadCRUT survey often shows slight cooling or no substantial warming in the second part of the 20th century and the early 21st century.
• The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing shorter observations and incomplete data highlighting the warming process, rather than stations providing longer and uninterrupted observations not demonstrating significant warming.
• The IEA authors calculated that the scale of actual warming for the Russian territory in 1877-1998 was probably exaggerated by 0.64°C. Since Russia accounts for 12.5% of the world’s land mass, such an exaggeration for Russia alone should have an impact on the IPCC claim that the global temperature in the last century has risen by 0.76°C.

The IEA report concludes that, “If similar procedures have been used for processing climate data from other national data sources, the impact on the rate of change in global temperature would be considerable….”

Judging by [3] observations of similar falsifications of temperature trends in other areas of the world, all of which show that the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia (and strongly related agencies — used similar tactics elsewhere in the world temperature record, there appears to be little doubt that the global temperature record experienced serious and deliberate distortions, with the aim to manufacture evidence of a rapidly rising global temperature trend.

GIven the recent melt down of HadCRUt in Climategate, and the mutual mantra of GIStemp is like HadCRUt is like NCDC so we all must be right, when all are variations on GHCN, I suspect NCDC via GHCN is at the heart of Climategate. So, when you hear NOAA or NCDC or GHCN, they are just organizational levels of the same thing. NOAA is the parent of NCDC and NCDC is the producer of GHCN. ([4] Source)

Do not expect to see any reporting on this in the Main-Stream Media any time soon.