Here is a mean temperature chart of Alaska, for the last 100 years, as presented by the International Arctic Research Center. Note: we're to assume that they've been religiously measuring the temperatures and tracking them without bias.

Now... here is the mean temperature chart of Alaska, for the last 100 years, as presented by some dudes that live across the street. Note: they too drew a nice colored line on the graph indicating that there is an over general trend that you're supposed to believe:


The problem with this kind of quack data, as presented by either group is that 1) we don't know if or how the measuring equipment was calibrated, 2) We don't know who or what methodology was employed in the process of measuring the temperature, 3) We don't know where the measurements were taken - if taken IN Fairbanks, we haven't adjusted for the growth and thermal output of the city itself and it's effects on the immediate environment, and 4) The graph trend discounts what may have come before - say, in the previous 100 years. Actually, both trends are correct.. but it depends upon the time scale that the average encompasses.

A MOST accurate and truthful average temperature, using my most advanced climatological modeling software, and using only the visible data points, results in the following graph (and I don't have a political agenda unlike most recipients of grant money, or liberals in general):


The Bottom Line? The data implied by the International Arctic Research Center is pure NONSENSE. It implies that the average temperature of Fairbanks, Alaska was 0 degrees F around 900 A.D.; and in the whopping cold temperatures of about -20F range at the time of Christ. Pure BS! This clearly is not in our historical or geological records.