I found this 2001 version of the GISS global station graph in the web archive. Note that the 1880’s used to be just as warm as the 1960’s.

NASA Goddard Institute: Surface Temperature: Graphs

Here is the current version. Note that the 1880’s have cooled about 0.4ºC since 2001, and are now much colder than the 1960’s. (Funny how that works.)

Fig.A.gif (656×446)

Next graph is a composite, normalized to 1998, with the 2013 version in blue.

And finally the trend graphs, which show that 45% of all current warming is due to “adjustments” since 2001. This of course doesn’t include how much of the trend is due to tampering prior to 2001.

2001 version : http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data/update/gistemp/graphs/FigA.txt

2013 version : data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.txt

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

They can only hide the truth in the past or in the future, or deep in the sea. And the truth is that it’s all a big lie. How can they sleep at night ?

How I see this data, at first look: The blue slope is 70% of the red slope, so 70% of the “adjusted temperature” increase (red) is accounted for by the unadjusted temperature trend (blue), and only 30% is due to adjustments, not 45%.

It has been adjusted upwards by 45%

I don’t know whether it’s worthwhile answering this, but the title of the post is still wrong, so I will. red slope is 0.00737…, blue slope is 0.00514…; the ratio of the two slopes is 1.435, approx. (not 1.45, quite). You wrote “45% of all current warming” is due to adjustments; but call the red warming rate “1”, so the adjusted rate is “1.435”–and that is “all the current warming”, of which 0.435 is due to adjustments, or 0.435/1.435 = 30%. You can properly say adjustments since 2001 have increased the warming rate by 43.5%–or about 45%–but you can’t rightly say 45% of GISS surface trends, or “all current (adjusted) warming”, are due to that data tampering.

….call the unadjusted, BLUE, warming rate “1”, and the adjusted rate “1.435”…

These people are disgusting.