GISS : 0.15 C Cheating In Just The Last Two Years

[This article was corrected, as I was originally using different data sets for the comparison. The current text and images compare the same data sets]

Climate experts say that the Earth has warmed about 0.7ºC since 1880. In the last two years alone, NASA has created almost 0.15ºC warming – simply by altering their data set.

GISSChanges2010-2012

2012 version  2010 version

The graph below shows the data alterations which have occurred since 2010. The tampering is increasing, as the world cools and obliterates Hansen’s theory.

ScreenHunter_40 Jun. 01 22.16

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

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

23 Responses to GISS : 0.15 C Cheating In Just The Last Two Years

  1. Robertv says:

    NASA has created almost 0.3ºC warming to melt 97 per cent of Greenland’s ice annually by 2025.

    http://www.icenews.is/2013/06/01/melting-ice-sheets-to-become-the-norm/

    I could not find how many minutes of melting every year.

  2. The Iconoclast says:

    Unbelievable. How blatant! They used to subtract from temps in the past. It’s is simply brazen to increase recent temperatures. I get why they feel the need to, but what the flip.

  3. Latitude says:

    I need to bookmark this post…..Steve can you stash this in “maps and graphs” or something…
    post where you put it if you do

  4. The Iconoclast says:

    If the modelers test their models by trying to hindcast the adjusted temperatures, they’ll always read high against the actual ones.

    What possible legit reason in the world could there be for upward-adjusting the temperatures reported, in particular the most recent ones, and adjusting down the older ones. Did the technology change? if anything they should be adjusting down the more recent ones due to UHI. Oh but they would only be doing that if the global cooling scare was still in play.

  5. Diablo says:

    Steve, you are comparing station data (2010) with land-ocean temperature index LOTI (2012).
    You should compare station data with station data, or LOTI with LOTI.
    Station data 2004: http://web.archive.org/web/20050914112713/http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/ZonAnn.Ts.txt
    Station data today: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/ZonAnn.Ts.txt

    LOTI 2004: http://web.archive.org/web/20050914112139/http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/ZonAnn.Ts+dSST.txt
    LOTI today: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/ZonAnn.Ts+dSST.txt

    • You are correct, and I have changed everything accordingly

      • Traitor In Chief says:

        So just to be clear on this, I went back and re-read your statement above. Are you saying they achieve the .15C bump by selecting a different set of thermometers, or by simply adjusting the data from the same set of thermometers?

  6. Anything is possible says:

    Real Science : ” If the data does not fit your theory, your theory is wrong.”

    Climate Science : “If the data does not fit the theory, adjust the data.”

    • terrence says:

      I must add –

      Point 2 for Climate Science : “If we do not have data, make it up.”

      Point 3 for Climate Science : “If the data we use in our model produces a ‘hockey stick’ pretend that random data does not produce a hockey stick.”

      • The current “talking points” of official governments’ defense of climate alarmism (a.k.a. “the consensus”), when properly translated from standard officialese, is:

        “We don’t need no stinking data–the science is settled.”

      • Ben says:

        Point 4 for Climate Science : If someone wins an FOIA case against you, say that you lost the original data and only have the adjusted data.

  7. The beginning of the 20th century is steadily heading towards an ice age.

  8. R2Dtoo says:

    This bugs me more than anything else about the “game”. It will not stop until someone/everyone challenges these guys in court. Then they may shut up. I’ll put some bucks into any such effort.

  9. Larry Fields says:

    Aha! The smoking graph. Good for you, Steven.

  10. omanuel says:

    Craig Rucker and CFACT issued an advisory on new UN climate talks that will be held in Bonn, Germany on 3-14 June 2013:

    http://tinyurl.com/l8uh2pp

    Thanks to Climategate emails that surfaced in Nov 2009, we now know the 1945 decision to form the UN sacrificed:

    a.) Civilian control of government, and
    b.) The integrity of government science

    Fear and loathing that humans would destroy life on Earth with the energy that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 and 9 Aug 1945 convinced world leaders and their advisors to undertake a human engineering experiment sixty-eight years ago by:

    c.) Forming the United Nations on 24 Oct 1945,
    d.) Ending national boundaries and national governments, and
    e.) Compromising the integrity of science to hide that source of energy.

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo

    • Harold Ambler says:

      Hansen (and Schmidt) fail to understand that the recent upward adjustments will have a tendency to make any cooling in the next 20-30 years appear more dramatic. On that level it is good that they’ve been given plenty of rope.

      Switching metaphors, I’ve always liked the saying “Time heals all wounds and wounds all heels.”

      One possible indication of where we’re headed climatologically: “Don’t Sell Your Coat” has been selling increasingly well of late.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s