Removing The 1940’s Blip

As of 1975, there was nearly unanimous consensus among experts that the first half of the 20th century was exceptionally warm, and that temperatures had plummeted after 1940. In fact, by the late 1960s, temperatures were colder than they were in 1900.

The National Academy of Sciences published this graph, showing that the late 1960’s were cooler than the turn of the 20th century.

ScreenHunter_600 Jun. 21 17.05

From 1900 to 1950, there was dramatic retreat of ice in the Northern Hemisphere


CLEVELAND, Feb. 16 (A.A.P.) Dr. William S. Carlson, an Arctic expert, said to-night that the Polar icecaps were melting at an astonishing and unexplained rate and were threatening to swamp seaports  by raising the ocean levels.

The glaciers of Norway and Alaska are only half the size they were 50 years ago. The temperature around Spitsbergen has so modified that the sailing time has lengthened from three to eight months of the year,” he said. ‘


The Courier-Mail  Monday 6 May 1940

Professor Ahlmann was speaking on the collated results of his expedition to north-east Greenland, and he stated that the glaciers there showed clear signs of a change towards a warmer climate. As had been observed in other parts of the Arctic, especially in Spitzbergen, the melting had increased rapidly. By far the largest number of local glaciers in northeast Greenland had receded very greatly during recent decades, and it would not be exaggerating to say that these glaciers were nearing a catastrophe.

06 May 1940 – Greenland’s Climate Becoming Milder


But by 1970, the Arctic was rapidly freezing, with scientists reporting a large increase in ice.  The CIA reported a 10-15% increase in ice and snow. there can be little doubt that the early 1970’s were much colder than earlier in the century – when glaciers were rapidly melting.

PaintImage10991 (1)

CIA Report 1974

And scientists reported there was no end in sight to Northern Hemipshere cooling

ScreenHunter_291 May. 08 11.50ScreenHunter_292 May. 08 11.50

ScreenHunter_284 May. 08 11.45

ScreenHunter_290 May. 08 11.46

International Team of Specialists Finds No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend in Northern Hemisphere – View Article –

The 1940 spike in temperatures doesn’t fit the current global warming narrative, so government funded climate scientists decided to get rid of it.

From: Tom Wigley <>
To: Phil Jones <>
Subject: 1940s
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:25:38 -0600
Cc: Ben Santer <>

It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with “why the blip”.

And they did exactly that. The Hockey Team removed almost all of the 1940s blip, and the post 1940 cooling.

ScreenHunter_598 Jun. 21 15.49


1975 NAS understandingcli00un…

They accomplished this by massively cooling the period from 1901 to 1960. The graph below shows haw Northern Hemisphere temperatures have been rewritten since the 1975 National Academy of Sciences report. The Hockey Team knocked more than 0.4ºC off 1920 temperatures, relative to the late 1960’s.

ScreenHunter_599 Jun. 21 15.49

By doing this they paved the way for Michael Mann’s hockey stick – which of course wouldn’t have worked if 1970 was colder than 1900.

ScreenHunter_601 Jun. 21 17.39

ScreenHunter_812 Dec. 25 09.12

…That’s the News. And Now for San Juan’s Weather… – View Article –

But it wasn’t just the Northern Hemisphere, the Hockey team has also dramatically cooled the Southern Hemisphere’s past.

ScreenHunter_515 Jun. 16 05.15

Without all of this massive data tampering by the Hockey Team, the global warming story collapses.


About stevengoddard

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

26 Responses to Removing The 1940’s Blip

  1. Jason Calley says:

    Another great post! Ten years from now when the CAGW cultists (hopefully FORMER-cultist by the time) are claiming that “we made the best judgement with the evidence available at the time!” I plan on showing them your site and proving them wrong.

  2. Latitude says:

    Excellent post Steve!…….I saved it for later

  3. tom0mason says:

    Another fine collection of historical facts.
    Keep-up the good work (between soccer matches 🙂 )

  4. B says:

    speaking of CIA assessments of cooling… once upon a time I was thumbing through issues of foreign affairs from the late 1970s and came across a story on what cooling would do the economy, balance of power, society, etc. It referred to the CIA’s work in this area. Issues of this era also had ads about how Iran’s nuclear power was a good thing.

  5. “By doing this they paved the way for Michael Mann’s hockey stick – which of course wouldn’t have worked if 1940 was colder than 1900.”

    That’s obviously a typo–it should say “…if 1960 was colder than 1900”–that might confuse new visitors here. You’ve pointed out 1960 vs. 1900 any number of times here before.

  6. Curt Widlund says:

    The ice melted quickly during industrialization depends on the black soot that spread all over the earth with volcanic eruptions. The soot coming in layers that increased melting when multiple layers were summed.

  7. _Jim says:

    I wonder .. could I put this in slide format and distribute it? On Youtube even? W/attributions, of course …

  8. Shanna M says:

    Great post! While its easy to adjust temperature data, it seems like its much harder to get rid of all the old papers/articles detailing the glacial retreat and the following cold snap. If anything proves the adjusted temperature record is flawed, its that.

  9. Andy Oz says:

    A whole week of snowfall in Australia will blankets the Snowy Mountains this week. A week ago alarmists were saying Climate Change would stop Australia getting any snow ever. “Children won’t know what snow is.”

  10. Andy Oz says:

    Excellent post as usual.

    A whole week of snowfall in Australia will blankets the Snowy Mountains this week. A week ago alarmists were saying Climate Change would stop Australia getting any snow ever. “Children won’t know what snow is.”

  11. Congratulations Steve on getting some mainstream attention over the last few days!

  12. Dellers has picked up on this over at Breitbart, and gone into more detail than Booker.

  13. Eric Simpson says:

    Steven, I know you are already working on something, but an idea for another book would be to concentrate in detail on these official agw data manipulations. The odds are that you could get this sort of book into the publicity pipeline, so that would be a huge plus. With your blog you have of course seen the objections that the activists try to raise to the points you make, so also in the book I’d bring up these objections and deal with them. And this sort of book would also strongly help “the cause” of climate skepticism.

  14. glenncz says:

    These guys work tirelessly. From Climategate emails.
    “So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC,
    then this would be significant for the global mean — but
    we’d still have to explain the land blip.

    I’ve chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an
    ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of
    ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common
    forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of
    these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are
    1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips — higher sensitivity
    plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things
    consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from.

    Removing ENSO does not affect this.

    It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip,
    but we are still left with “why the blip”.”

  15. Steven, Steven, Steven… you silly lad… this was all before the age of computing, algorithms, HOckey Sticks and proper temperature manipulation, er, ugh, I mean “normalizing”. Let’s just go along to get along.. move FORWARD ..

  16. slimething says:

    The NAS were a bunch of idiots back then and didn’t have geniuses like Nick Stokes, Tom “fake PhD” Karl and Steve Mosher to set them straight.


  17. climategrog says:

    I did this comparison of AMO ( not detrended ) and cyclone ACE
    I had to do an arbitrary adjustment around 1925 to line the two up. I suspect this is a pointer to some spurious data adjustments in hadSST3 but have not looked into it.

    Bear in mind disruption to shipping made the cyclone reporting in WWII even more questionable than SST collection and the very early record is equally unreliable for ACE.

    There was all sorts of “bucket” adjustments going on the early 20th c. and believe 1920-25 was a change over period from one set of ‘corrections’ to another.

    This out to be looked at in more detail by someone.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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