Until about ten years ago, NASA showed the US on an 80 year long cooling trend, with the three hottest years being in the 1920s and 1930s. They have deleted the raw data from their website and blocked archiving, but John Daly captured it. It was originally located at this link :
and can now be seen here :
NASA has since rewritten US history and shows the same period warming – with 1998 as the hottest year.
James Hansen wrote this in 1999, before he decided to alter US history :
Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought. The drought of 1999 covered a smaller area than the 1988 drought, when the Mississippi almost dried up. And 1988 was a temporary inconvenience as compared with repeated droughts during the 1930s “Dust Bowl” that caused an exodus from the prairies, as chronicled in Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath.
in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases — in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the country
This sort of honest assessment was no use for obtaining funding or achieving radical left wing political goals, so Hansen created a hockey stick of adjustments to cool the past and warm the present.
The current version of the US temperature record from NOAA and NASA is a complete fraud, and fundamentally misrepresents changes to the US climate.
Great post! Those are the graphs I have been looking for all in one place. Neat!
Liberals Lied, Cheated, Committed Fraud and Faked Voter Data to Win the 2012 Election because They Knew that if they Keep the Criminals in Charge of the US Government, then there would be No Serious Investigations or as a result, No Consequences! So Why Not do the Same to Win the Global Warming Argument? As Long as the Criminals in Charge of the US Government Support Your Efforts and Offer Monetary Incentives, then you have Every Reason to Lie, Cheat and Fake Data!
I think James it would be easier to prove CO2 does not drive climate than your claim about a rigged election. (As much as I would like to think you were correct)
Honestly. James Hansen, shifty, sneaky, deceptive, and narcissistic. From the Wirth theatrics of a quarter century ago to today…one big lie, carefully released in easy-to-overlook tidbits.
Want to write a book together? Do you have enough credible evidence to show the historical changes in the record, and show how the record deviates from supporting literature? I would love to dig into this and build a case proving fraud. As long as they are describing what studies support their calculations (which I think they do), it should be easy to prove that they are not doing the calculations that way = fraud. The problem with climate science is that the propaganda mills pump out so much disinformation that it can be used to support virtually any position anyone would want to take. Plausible deniability… “Oh, we forgot to tell you, we use this bullshit study by WWF and that inflates the numbers”.
Sure. Paul Homewood has lots of GISS information too.
A book to update the situation with all of the fraud newly found by Steven would be a very welcome thing.
One thing I would note. I do not believe that our biggest problem right now is that “the propaganda mills pump out so much disinformation that it can be used to support virtually any position anyone would want to take.” I believe our biggest problem is now that extraordinary numbers of people simply do not believe that there is disinformation, and no longer trust those who say there is. There seems to now be a widespread belief that we are lying or distorting because we all hate them, personally. We have to find ways to bridge that divide, or people on the other side will not look at the original data, because they will not believe that it is the original data. I believe that any serious book should attempt to address this issue.
Let us not underestimate the degree to which liberals are now seeing all such material through a racial, ethnic, and gender lens, i.e. seeing it as mere red herrings for a campaign of racial, ethnic, and gender oppression. Deal with this. Confront it head-on, and with credibility, or else you may be wasting your time. Make an effort to explicitly reach out to minorities and women. Avoid telling jokes that suggest that such notions as they have about our views are stupid or ridiculous (no matter how stupid or ridiculous they may be). The jokes will not be seen as the slightest bit funny by those who have developed such delusions. Rather they will be seen as further confirmation of they already considered to be proven facts.
Good fortune with your efforts.
Richard: You’ll find a short discussion of Hansen’s egregious data manipulation (“GISS Rewrites the Past”) in my book “Global Warming False Alarm”, 2nd edition, which is available on Amazon.com. The same chapter of the book addresses numerous other instances of alarmist fraud.
I’ll check it out, Ralph. Thanks for the tip! (And for taking the time to publish!)
Why can’t we put this asshat in jail already? I’m am soooo sick of this crap. We do have laws in this country. I just don’t understand how this asshat can skirt those laws and continue to get away with it.
Yo squid , The law now only applies when those in power want it to . You are required to obey the law but anyone with politcal pull , or one of the approved minority groups , or a sexual deviate , or just someone in the right clique , or someone who captures the fancy of one of the powerfull is given a pass and the laws do not apply to them . I recall the Christian Bible described these times and told of their coming , and here they are .
NCDC are at it as well. I am in the middle of some interesting comparisons that rather back up everything Steve has been saying about USHCN adj etc.
I’ll post up tomorrow.
It is an outrage against the very foundations of science that anyone tampers with the original raw data. It is evidence of the non-scientific nature of James Hansen’s stance that he could say “Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought. ”
Empirical evidence, Mr Hansen, is what validates or dismisses your theory.
Hansen’s theory is as dead as a Norwegian Blue Parrot.
November 18, 2012 at 6:10 pm
It is an outrage against the very foundations of science that anyone tampers with the original raw data.
Something I’ve been saying on blogs for years. There are many, many people here and in the science, academie arena who simply don’t understand what is wrong with changing original raw data.
As I’ve explained, science dictates that you always analyse your raw data, print the results, explain the outliers and any other “unwanted” deviations. Never, never do you hide the raw in favour of the adjusted.
It’s not unusual to “pre process” or “clean up” raw data. The concern is that the process is not documented in a way that can be replicated or critiqued. Prima facie the adjustments look indefensible.
The adjustments are about 4X larger than what they documented in USHCN 1
The handcuffs are certainly appropriate:)
This is the type of thing you seem to be talking about.
Raw data for De Bilt, Holland
Adjusted data for De Bilt.
The archived raw temps have ‘disappeared’ but I have saved some over time. The BOM in Australia have done the same thing between the raw data and the High Quality data.
They’re getting good at ‘disappearing’ things in Australia … files from 4 boxes in 4 separate state repositories holding incriminating evidence of wrong doing by our feral sub-prime minister have mysteriously ‘disappeared’.
I noticed that the Bureau Of Meteorology of Australia have been modifying all their temperature data over the past 3-4 years. Quite a few years back when I began to have serious doubts about this AGW crap, I checked the BOM temp records on a number of 100 year old stations that are not effected by UHI, and lo and behold there was no increase in temps over 100 years at every station, outside the capital cities. A few months ago I checked again after reading Steve’s accounts of the GISS changes. Now there is a slight increase (<1 deg) where there was none before!! Except for some remote locations, the BOM must have been modifying the data in their databases to show a temp increase, in the same way as GISS, by cooling the past. I had great respect for Australia's BOM until I saw that happen.
Does anyone have evidence of this? I mean hard proof. I ask because I notice the same things, but since I didn’t keep copies of the original data, I can’t prove it. Does anyone have the original data? Would dearly love to find.
There appears to be a difference between the raw data and the High Quality data of individual stations rather than adjustments within the original data.
For instance, this is Lismore(Centre St). Check the raw data and the HQ data and there are major adjustments to earlier original records, some up to 0.7C lower (This station has now closed and moved to the airport).
This appears to have happened to many Australian weather stations and you could check in your area.
GISS NASA use to show the ‘raw data’ but each new version has meant earlier records being readjusted downwards. The earlier versions have disappeared (see De Bilt above).
I wonder if the BOM will ‘archive’ the original records now that they have their third version of temp data ie ACORN. These new records appear to have major problems though they are not in a format which is user friendly at the moment.
James ‘Yogi Bear’ Hansen doing the only thing he knows how.
Must be the hat.
His PHD on the wall says so. 😆
Now the World Bank reckon’s the planet will get hotter by 4 degrees? What a crock.
And check out Bazza’s comment @ 12.37 PM – “all deniers should be put in jail for not taking action sooner.”
And they reckon skeptics are irrational and hysterical. Smack’s of the new USCSR – Union of Soviet Climate Socialist Republics
Except the some Russians think that it will get colder in the future.
From the Monthly Weather Review January 1907.
A significant article in the Independent of January 31 (1907) narrates the trials of an honest independent thinker, who at the end of a log life is only able to say: “I am a slave to my committee, and always have been;” and again: “I like to recall the itellectual, as well as spiritual, independence of my grandfather, but that was 50 years ago… men are no longer measured by spirituality, or intellectual achievements…It is a miserable fact, which we must honestly face, that the average man is hypnotized out of his independence and manhood by the rich man of his environment. The time has come when he who wishes to be successful must be financially independent of his salary”
All this may be true of the ministerial, educational, and some other professions, but ought not be true of the scientific man, and least of all of the meteorologist; and yet we are told that the frosts and freezes in one State, droughts and rains in another, earthquakes in still another, are matters about “mums the word”; that the Weather Bureau men must not publish honest reports on these subjects because of the injury to local business enterprises and land booms, and that when they do make honest reports they must suffer attacks from those who wish to suppress the truth.
This ought not to be. If a few persons are injured by some natural phenomenon, be it earthquake, storm, frost, flood, drought, or strike of lightning, the rest of the world is interested to know the fact; for it enables us to be on the lookout for similar occurrences. Forewarned is forearmed and it is the highest duty of the Weather Bureau to care for the best interests of the whole community. We are supported by the whole nation and owe it our best service…Every patriotic citizen must rebel at the idea the a government for the people and by the people shall not be permitted to publish an honest report of data gathered by its own official observers for use of all the people…
**** How thing have changed *****
Oops I left off the last paragraph ->
It is wrong to mutilate or suppress the record of an observation of a phenomenon of nature, but it is also wrong to make a bad use of the record. In fact, it is the misuse of meteorological data, not the observing or publishing, that constitutes a crime against the community. Observations and careful research are to be encouraged as useful. Misrepresentations are to be avoided as harmful. The “Independent Press” as the “Voice of the People” should be not only “Vox Populi” but “Vox Dei”, repressing all cheats and hoaxes, defending the truth and the best interests of the whole nation as against the self-interests of the few.
as I said…
**** How thing have changed *****
Look at Figure #6 in Hansen’s 1999 paper:
Click to access 1999_Hansen_etal.pdf
Then compare that with the current version:
Click to access Fig.D.pdf
And now compare it to the other figure “US mean temp” in the same paper at Plate A2 (a) also in the same paper?
Figure 6 is per meteorological year which can differ significantly (dec-nov) for the averages per year. Lets rule it out!
Steven, Hansen is hardly doing this all by his lonesome.
So do tell me, when will you finally concede that science itself is the problem? That science is dead, because even in the face of relentless, blatant, repetitive, fraud, the ‘community’ of ‘scientists’ does nothing? (Well, that’s it not quite correct: they do stand WITH the likes of Hansen.)
How can there even be talk of things like ‘peer-review’, in the face of this utter lack of regard for HONESTY?! What, is the ‘process of science’ then to ‘correct’ LIES, and FRAUD? And those guilty of both action and inaction to nod their heads wisely and say: “Well, science will prevail”?
So please do please tell me, when will their actions (namely BOTH those who lie, and those who let the lies stand) finally be permanently attached to their names, never to be forgiven?
You do not let a child-molester near your children, and you do not let ANY of these people near data, EVER AGAIN. These people MUST be ‘dis-bared’: cast out forever, with no possibility of return.
These lies by Hansen et al are causing people to DIE, Steven. (These green hippies are doing their highly-effective utmost to lock-in poverty.) And that is ignoring their complicity in things like the DDT lies, which is mass-murdering mostly children.
I am reminded of politics, and people like Mugabe. People who are blatantly guilty of mass murder, mass rapes, mass violence. Mass dehumanization. And then they are simply… forgiven. By their ‘community’. And all things continue. Thus it is with people like Bishop et al.
I can understand people like Hansen: like child-molesters, they are defective: natural-born Practical Satanists. And I can understand politicians forgiving Mugabe: almost without exception, politicians are natural-born Practical Satanists. They should all have their crimes burned into the foreheads. But people like Bishop should be burned alive at the stake, using green wood.
The enemy here is not Hansen et al, the problem is Bishop et al. Because the problem is that both Bishop, and Hansen, AND the ‘scientific community’ are Satanists In Word And Practice.
Care to comment? Or are you too a politician, with the bleeding puss of once-mewling baby corpses on your silent lips?
All involved had better pray that a Just God does not exist, for if He does exist, then He will surely cast them all into a most bitter Hell.
Steven this is no longer a joke. Attempting to delete tax payer generated weather data and then changing it is a felony. Some very wealthy guy should be taking these people to court. It will probably happen next election which will be lost by Dems resoundly (Australia too), when world economies etc will be in a complete mess and they (AGW’ers) will be obliged to give up
If I beat the bullshit out of him, would there be anything left?
Someone(s) at NASA should absolutely, unequivocally go to jail for this. The entire US economy hinges on affordable, reliable energy. That means fossil fuels.
Falsifying science to destroy fossil fuel use in the U.S. is borderline treasonas a national security issue in terms of economic damage.
An inspector general, attorney general, etc. needs to investigatet this and people need to be punished.
Has anyone brought this to the attention of Jim Inhofe and the US Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works? Surely this is something that they need to be investigating.
They have their implausible deniability covered.
Perfect what notrickzone is doing:
I think that all sceptic bloggers around the world must to do this.
In Watts et al. 2012 and the last session by Evans and Watts at WUWT-TV. Anthony Watts shows a major cause is “homogenizing” to eliminate “outliers”. The best #1 and #2 grade temperature sites form only ~10% of the total. Therefore the homogenization routine thinks the BEST sites are the OUTLIERS and replaces those best quality data with the average of much poorer #3, #4, and #5 with UHI driven higher temperatures.
The left has to resort to deceit and data manipulation to advance their extreme agenda. This should tell everyone that the claim of human activity, being the cause of climate change, is false. If you have the truth on your side, you don’t need to lie.
I was looking at something completely unrelated and came across this theory I’d not read about before. Hansen and these NASA guys have obviously not heard of the “Snowball Earth” Theory from the neoproterozoic period. Earth was completely covered in 2 km of ice a number of times when CO2 levels were much much higher than now some 650 – 770 MYA. Perhaps if they could explain (peer reviewd of course, burp) the relationship between high CO2 levels and a globally frozen planet, we might get a bit further along in understanding how badly the AGW theory is flawed.
I think Hansen should get the Nobel prise for physics. He clearly shows that the coefficient of thermal expansion of alcohol and mercury vary with time, and is not a constant.
If Hansen was playing pinball, the TILT alarm would have gone of years ago.
Good work Steven.
In the NASA data are values for temperature expressed in hundredths of degrees.
Question: are all the data observed precise to the nearest hundredth?
No doubt today’s instrumentation is that precise, but I have doubts about the olden days when the readings might have included the observations using an uncalibrated thermometer read on a wobbly deck.
I was taught everything has to be rounded to the least significant integer.
Sponsored by Exxon Oil.
Your comment is sponsored by progressive paranoia, and an utter disregard for facts.
here is some older data… most of the other dates error
Reblogged this on 4timesayear's Blog.