When the data does not support your agenda - Truncate!

Russ Steele

With the all the data sources on the Internet, why does the left truncated data that does not support their agenda when writing reports and studies?  Reports that are promoted in press releases. Do they really thing that this deception will not be discovered? Or, are they confident that a compliant press will not investigate the deception?

KQED Climate Watch is promoting a recent report on sea level rise, they quote a report by the Pacific Institue on sea level rise in San Francisco Bay.  Here is a link to the report.

Go to page 6 of the report. The original version of the report truncated the data in 2000 even though data was available through 2010.  I brought this discrepancy to the attention of the authors, and they updated the graphic to 2010, but the title says 2006. More details here.  Sea level rise is declining in San Francisco Bay, not rising.

We found out during Climategate that Dr. Briffa truncated his tree ring data that did not support the warmer agenda. Details here.

The Public Policy Institute of California claims that jobs are not leaving California and as proof they use data from 1992-2006. Here are the details in a report from HealthyCal.org

Public Policy Institute of California has shown that relatively few jobs move into or out of the state in any given year. Although numbers are not available for the most recent years, data for 1992 through 2006 showed that about 16,000 jobs per year moved into California from elsewhere while 25,000 moved out. That’s a net decline of about 9,000 jobs per year, a tiny fraction of the state’s base of more than 15 million jobs overall.

AB32 was not signed until 2006, which was five years ago. Is 2006 the best jobs data that PPIC could come up with, or did they just truncate the data to support the idea that jobs are not leaving the state. 

Exit Question: Why does the left think they can trucated tha data and not get caught?