I tried reworking this infographic into a data graphic, Junk-Charts-style, over on my blog. Any feedback that you or your readers are willing to offer will be appreciated. Thanks!

But are the climate scientists always correcting obvious errors in the data and reducing measurement error when they "clean" the data? In many--probably most--cases, they are, but the mismanagement of some of the data and the politicking in the climate research community does raise doubts--in my mind, at least. When you combine opacity of methods and lack of reproducibility in climate data management with sensitivity of climate models to inputs--to say nothing of the incentives resulting from politicization--you're leaning pretty hard on the integrity and the infallibility of the climate scientists.

The apparent lesson here is not to publish a chart in such a way that it can be separated from its caption! Erik Voeten posted Adam Bonica's graph on The Monkey Cage blog without Bonica's accompanying explanation. The vertical lines mark ideological rankings of professions estimated from campaign contribution data, but the density plots describe the ideological distribution of Democrat and Republican candidates--blue and red, respectively. See Bonica's blog posts for details and improvements. (I'd link them here but the comment box isn't allowing me to paste.)