It is still true globally which is of greater significance than it is locally. For the U.S. the changes were equal to 0.15° and only for the years after 2000.
> Still, the pro-warmers who dominate the Goddard
> Institute almost certainly recognized the impacts
> these changes would have on the global-warming debate,
> because they made no formal announcement of their
> recalculations.
>
> In many cases, the changes are statistically minor,
> but their potential impact on the rhetoric surrounding
> global warming is huge.
>
> The hottest year since 1880 becomes 1934 instead of
> 1998, which is now just second; 1921 is third.
>
What formal announcement would this author like? A notice that the difference in temperature between 1934 and 1998 is just .03°, a statistically insignificant change. Why expect an formal announcement about a statistically insignificant change?
> Four of the 10 hottest years were in the 1930s, only
> three in the past decade. Claiming that man-made
> carbon dioxide has caused the natural disasters of
> recent years makes as much sense as claiming
> fossil-fuel burning caused the Great Depression.
>
> The 15 hottest years since 1880 are spread over seven
> decades. Eight occurred before atmospheric carbon
> dioxide began its recent rise; seven occurred
> afterwards.
>
> In other words, there is no discernible trend, no
> obvious warming of late.
>
This again is only for the US. Since the issue is GLOBAL WARMING, not U.S. warming, and the corrections do not change the global picture and the trend is still obvious to anyone who doesn't have their head up their ass. It is an outright lie to claim there is no discernible trend in global warming.
> Of course, the current NASA changes are only for data
> collected in the United States. But available surface
> temperature readings cover only half the planet even
> today. Before the Second World War, they covered less
> than a quarter. So U.S. readings for a period that
> goes as far back as 1880 are among the most reliable
> there are.
>
> Perhaps we will have uncontrollable warming in the
> future, but it likely hasn't started yet.
The data from the rest of the world is still just as significant significant because it was spread out over a greater area. U.S. temperature is no more reliable than temperature readings taken by British and Dutch scientists all over the globe. This author is a fraud.
John Thornton