Hansen Covering His Tracks In Iceland

A few weeks ago, Hansen was caught massively altering the temperature record in Iceland – to produce a non-existent warming trend, and disappear that pesky warm 1930s and 1940s.

Paul Matthews points out that Hansen has a new version of the graph, which isn’t as bad as the one from a few weeks ago, but has now disappeared the pre-1940 warming.

Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

Even with the recent corrections, GISS is still not in agreement with CRUTEM, which shows no warming since 1930. The non-homogenized GISS data is supposed to be unadjusted historical temperatures. How did the past change?

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Hansen Covering His Tracks In Iceland

    • Thanks. I posted the wrong graph originally and have corrected it. There is a new graph (data_set=14) which is half way between the original version and the fully corrupted version.

  1. Paul Matthews says:

    The dataset=12 version is the one I was looking at – that’s the “GHCN v3 adjusted” version, and it’s completely wrong, showing cooling in the early 20thC where the raw data shows warming.
    The dataset=14 version is after the GISS homogeneity adjustment and is better, as you say.
    The real clowns here are GHCN, not Hansen (though he is a clown to use their duff data).
    The GHCN adjustments keep changing, see

  2. sean2829 says:

    There is a danger in all the adjustments. If natural variations continue in a cyclical fashion as they always have, a perfectly predicticable change in weather patterns will take people by surprise in the near future. Consider what happened in Australia. Because of the myopic view of a constantly warming world with permanent drought, they did not anticipate a much wetter period in the weather that lead to flooding where there was adequate infrastructure built in the past to handle it. On top of that they built giant desalination plants (very energy intensive ones at that) that are coming on line just as they have to deal with too much water, not too little.

    • gregole says:


      You are right on. A growing, thriving country; Australia can be our example here, needs to plan, engineer, construct, and then maintain and eventually decommission large-scale water projects.

      Dams and Reservoirs – Desalinization plants – a mix of both? What drives decisions are admittedly a number of factors with public-preference being one among the many; but a realistic understanding of climate would be another, with a misunderstanding of climate being a real problem because it would drive the decision- making to a guaranteed non-optimal solution.

      In short, bad climate science skews risk analysis with the two mechanisms being public opinion from misinformation (sometimes called propaganda), and bad technical risk analysis as you have mentioned, by solving the wrong problem.

  3. What GHCN have done is to adjust temperatures upward from between 1900 and 1925. The overall effect is to produce a hockey stick, by removing the rise from 1900 to 1940, and subsequent drop till 1980.

    What is also interesting is that the GISS homogeneity adj, which is supposed to remove the UHI effect (and nothing else), only allows 0.2C for the change in UHI since 1940 in Reykjavik. Surely this is not enough?

  4. ntesdorf says:

    Every week there is a new graph coming from Hansen’s desk. The pace is frenetic. It’s hard to follow, but every time one does, it leads to the funding trough. If only there was some science behind it all.

    • Olaf Koenders says:

      I can’t wait until they try and publish their “new” warming info, and then we show the world the original data. It’ll be a red letter day.

  5. wikeroy says:

    So, since NASA is a government agency, this is actually the US Government falsifying data?

    Makes you wonder what the agenda is.

    I have a theory.
    This could be a part of the war against terror. And that could be the reason for the western governments not want to say straigh out what the agenda is..

    As you know, there is a stream of supertankers going from arab countries to the US.
    Every day.
    And there is a stream of dollars going from the US to arab countries.
    Every day.

    Trying to throttle this stream of tankers / dollars will give many side-effects apart from the dollar-stream. Greenies being happy, NOX emissions down, lobbyists for wind,solar,nuclear happy. Socialists happy. Newspapers happy.

    But you cannot admit it openly. And those who aren’t supporting us, are against us. Right?
    It also explains why they are so confident that mails won’t be released. And why different enquiries allways ends up empty handed.

    • As you know, there is a stream of supertankers going from arab countries to the US.
      Every day.
      And there is a stream of dollars going from the US to arab countries.
      Every day.

      It’s mostly Europe, actually. The US gets most of its oil from Messico, S. America, & that magical Canadia-land. But, you’re right about the money, most of those Euros are founded on unpaid war debt.

      • wikeroy says:

        Really? I have allways had the impression that those tankers came from arab countries.

        Mexico, S.America and Canada? Well, that is good info, actually. And probably kills my “theory”.

  6. Hugh K says:

    Anybody know who Hansen reports to (his boss)? A specific name, tiltle and agency would be helpful…

  7. Lightrain says:

    Unbelievable! Hansen changed one year by almost 10°C!
    Why is he free to change temperatures around the world without explaining his reasoning (if he has any). Totally unbelievable that he gets away with this, even a tree in Yamal has more brains, the UHI means temperatures in later years should be reduced, not increased to compensate, and as for the early temperatures there is no reason to adjust because what was reported probably had errors alright, but they would average out, not all be in one direction.

    If Hansen is so worried about the future earth, just what does he think will happens when millions of the current users of the earth are thrown into survival mode and have to ‘live off the earth’ in their 50′ x 50′ backyards? There won’t be any trees left to reforest they’ll all go up in huge CO2 masses as we try to survive winters etc. etc.

    Hansen is the new Ted Kaczynski, everyone thought he was crazy, why not Hansen?

    As for us being Climate deniers, they should be called Climate Liars!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s