Reading Thermometers Is Hard

In the 1970’s, back when NASA was putting men on the moon – they simply didn’t know how to read thermometers correctly. Scientists thought that 1970 was cooler than 1900, and there was a big spike at 1940 – followed by rapid cooling.

ScreenHunter_8556 Apr. 12 11.05

ScreenHunter_8559 Apr. 12 11.33

NASA can no longer put men on the moon, but they can go back in time and reread thermometers from the 1970’s. They have since discovered that 1970 was much warmer than 1900, and that the scientists who put men on the moon were of inferior intellect to Mikey, Gavin, and Jim.

Fig.A (1)

The image below overlays the 1970’s graph on the current one. NASA time travel  has removed the blip, and saved us from the unpardonable sin of climate denial.

ScreenHunter_8558 Apr. 12 11.22

From: Tom Wigley <wigley@ucar.edu>
To: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
Subject: 1940s
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:25:38 -0600
Cc: Ben Santer <santer1@llnl.gov>

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

di2.nu/foia/1254108338.txt

Mike,
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise… Can you also email Gene [Wahl] and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar [Ammann] to do likewise.
Cheers, Phil

junksciencearchive.com/FOIA/mail/1212063122.txt

About stevengoddard

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

89 Responses to Reading Thermometers Is Hard

  1. omanuel says:

    You alone of bloggers have recognized the BIG LIE Intended to save the world from nuclear annihilation in 1945:

  2. Bob Greene says:

    They have gotten much better at reading the thermometers. In the past they could read them to no better than 0.3°. Now they can resolve differences as low as 0.02°. Same thermometers. Must be really blessed climate scientists with their wayback machines.

    • SMS says:

      They can determine temperature to an accuracy of 0.02C but need corrections in the full degrees to accomplish this feat. I am still gob smacked that as our (official) thermometers get more and more accurate, the government climate scientists feel a need to correct to a greater and greater degree. Kinda counter-intuitive.

    • Lance says:

      Does anyone know of a statistically valid treatment of UHI effects as a function of radial distance from centre ( inverse square law ) and the gradient between rural temp stations and urban stations? A comparison of that gradient to the claimed “averaging” of rural / city stations might disclose the degree of actual data manipulation. I’m not privy to such a thing. Appreciate any direction or references to that topic.

      • Lance says:

        An Indian study indicated 3.7 to 4.6 C effects in early morning hours. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878029614001340

        That said, how do GISS/NASA attribute these effects? Averaging station data would not be appropriate without attention to the gradient?

      • Menicholas says:

        One way to get at the truth would be to preserve all records as they were recorded, and separate out sites that have the least if any urbanization. Then look at trend for each of these individual locations, and note how many have increased, how many have decreased, how many stayed the same.
        Do this for somewhat urbanized locations, and have the most heavily urbanized ones as a separate group.
        Look at trends for individual stations. Make spread sheets for each.

        Graphs should be drawn using original recorded data and colors changed at 1995 to delineate when the new measuring tools were installed.

        I expect that the story/stories such analysis’ told would/could be very instructive.

        But we see nothing like this.

        We only see information that fits in squarely with the desired and preplanned narrative.

        The more one learns about the way the old records are being altered, the more obvious it is that what is occurring is not science, it is storytelling.
        In fact it is a lot of things.
        One thing it is not is a truthful and unbiased and unvarnished attempt to describe objective reality.

        • Menicholas says:

          Is this not tainted data though? Adjusted?

        • gator69 says:

          Once data has been adjusted, it is no longer data, it is an artifact of analysis.

          The grantologists point to artifacts, and claim it as ‘data’.

          da·ta ˈdadə,ˈdādə/ noun
          1- facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.

          ar·ti·fact ˈärdəfakt/ noun
          1- an object made by a human being…

        • Menicholas says:

          I would like to see how agricultural sites are trending. I suspect that in places with zero development, it is actually getting colder. One reason I think this is that sites in the rural half of the pairs have had at least some increase in paving, and human heat sources.
          We need to look at wilderness or farms to see areas where nothing has changed.

        • Menicholas says:

          Also some of these pairs may not be ideally chosen. Arcadia is inland Florida, and Fort Myers, at least the downtown, is very near a large body of water, and close enough t the Gulf for marine influences such as sea breezes to exist.
          I live south of Arcadia, East of Fort Myers, and it is hotter here during almost every day than over in Fort Myers, especially the East part of town near Page field.
          Since the International Airport was not existent a hundred years ago, I think the data is likely Page Field or thereabouts.
          And the town of Arcadia is small, but way bigger than in days of yore.

        • gator69 says:

          The least corrupted land based stations are found in the rural Midwest. Some of those towns have not grown in size for nearly a century, and the original stations have never had to be moved, as land usage has not changed.

          I used to get unadjusted temperatures from those stations (about 10 years ago), before NASA made that impossible, and stations that had been in place for a century or longer had a slight cooling trend.

        • Menicholas says:

          West part of town near Page Field. Sorry.

        • Menicholas says:

          Anyway, it is very interesting and I thank you Gator for posting this video.
          Even though perhaps not ideal, this shows straight off a far different picture than what the official narrative is.
          It is jaw dropping to read opinion pieces with the view that the UHI is a net wash, or does not exist at all.
          It should be mandatory for anyone doing science in a field such as climate or weather to have to spend time outside at night, all night, in various locations, on a regular basis.
          Imagine getting advice from a doctor who has only studied books, rather than examining actual people?
          There are things an observant person will notice, and only notice, by being outside at all times of day at all times of year.
          I have been known to sit in a chair or on the ground all night in the middle of a field in the middle of nowhere. Walking around is good too, but just sitting and feeling and meditating and observing…no substitute.

          Plus, having a plant nursery back in the 80s and 90s, and seeing how things can and do change, and how quickly, and how much agricultural areas and places such as cold pockets differ from reporting stations a few miles away taught me things that I have never been able to explain to anyone.
          Ex:
          Radiational cooling events can cause extreme changes rarely hinted at even in agricultural weather reports.

        • Menicholas says:

          “The least corrupted land based stations are found in the rural Midwest. Some of those towns have not grown in size for nearly a century, and the original stations have never had to be moved, as land usage has not changed.

          I used to get unadjusted temperatures from those stations (about 10 years ago), before NASA made that impossible, and stations that had been in place for a century or longer had a slight cooling trend.”

          Excellent.

        • gator69 says:

          It is amazing how detached from nature people become, when they live in cities.

          I watched an interesting documentary on New Guinea natives, and part of it dealt with their ability to discern the slightest change in green tint. The natives were shown an image with about a dozen green spots on it, and only one was a slightly different shade. The natives had no problem finding the one that was not identical to the others, but when they asked whites (university faculty and students) to find the out of place spot, not one of them could.

          The most amazing thing to me, was that I too could find the off shade spot. And I attribute that to my daily life here in the sticks. I can identify plant species by leaf shape and color, and even tell when they are stressed by their slightly differing coloration throughout a season.

          Temperatures on my property can change in an instant, by several degrees, simply from a wind direction change. Last night I went for my evening stroll out to the road after dinner, and as soon as I reached the road the temperature dropped a few degrees, because the trees and brush on my land were still holding warmer air from a southerly breeze, that had changed after a front rolled through earlier.

          As was has been said, an average global temperature is about as useful as an average global telephone number.

      • Ben Vorlich says:

        In the UK you just have to listen to weather forecasts. On the BBC supplied by the Met Office. It is normally 3-5’C cooler in rural areas and even more in Scottish Glens and sheltered areas.

        • Me says:

          Ya put your trust and what has it gotten ya? was it warm enough for ya to do what you wanted. If so then good, if not then they are full of it. So take it with a grain of salt and don’t trust them anymore. Tell people about it along with this global warming bullshit and the people that pay their taxes to the elected officials, that if they want to continue to have their job they it sucks to be them to push BS!

        • Me says:

          So over there you have to pay a TV tax to support the BBC Right?

        • Me says:

          Sorry pay for a TV license! here we pay taxes to support the CBC!

        • Me says:

          So do you now pay a fee yet again, to recycle your old TV and have to pay another tax to buy a new one?

        • Me says:

          And yet again, if it was under warenty, what did you get back? Was it a new product, or was it refurbished? If it was new, then was the warenty renewed to the day you got the new product?

    • Unknown to all you deniers… the Laws of Physics demand yearly recalibration of the Temperature Scale… calibration UP every year .3 Degrees every year …

      So …. to all you low IQ deniers on here… last years 70 degrees is this years 70.3…. simple enough??

      This is why we need Kommon Köre Edukashun implemented NOW!!

    • nielszoo says:

      And they can do it with instruments that, according to their own specs, are +/-0.5°F with displays at 0.1°F. Here’s the data on the MMTS from NOAA:
      http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/dad/coop/specs-1.html

  3. It’s not what you think. Sean Cash and I have figured it out. Here is how it works:

    https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/04/12/ncdc-us-temperature-fraud-update/#comment-514140

    It’s a distortion in space-time energy equilibrium caused by quantum level events at NCDC. Their current readings of past temperatures are correct. You should update the post before Mosher or Hausfather do a drive-by.

    • That’s the thing, isn’t it? With quantum theory, measurements can be both correct and wrong at the same time, and the temperature at a location can be both rising and falling simultaneously, and so (by extension) both conditions can produce “dangerous warming”.

      We should have realized that if we accepted the nonsense of quantum dynamics, such madness would be merely a few short decades away. The public can’t tell the difference between crazy and sane science any more, because they’ve been told that barking-mad physics is sane, or at least “valid”.

      • Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water, Richard. Without quantum theory and some lateral space-time moves this Goddard graph of the Arctic ice death spiral would be axiomatically invalid and we’d have to chuck 30-40 years of climate science:

        No Schrödinger pet could bounce like this after hitting rock bottom if not for some creative square-dancing in physics. The ice simply must be allowed to reverse the flow of time. More on it here, with some precise data:

        https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/04/01/death-spiral-details/#comment-511458

      • gator69 says:

        The origins of Theoretical Physics…

        Is the cat alive or dead? Who cares, pass the grant money please.

        • It should be understood that when people like Bohr and Einstein emit all their metaphysical refuse, their basis for having to do so is to explain experimental results that are evidently impossible. But the reality is that that the correct results were either flubbed, or a decision was made that they had to be hidden. (More likely the latter.)

          But if we object, we’re told that we can’t possibly question the integrity or honesty of experimental physicists under any circumstances. That of course sets off all the alarms for me.

          All of this nonsense is being offered up by them for one primary reason: a desperate attempt to try to shore up the Principle of Uniformitarianism, without which general evolution falls, never to be rehabilitated.

          And they certainly can’t have that now, can they?

        • gator69 says:

          What is the question most asked by Theoretical Physicists?

          Would you like fries with that?

  4. sfx2020 says:

    Back in those old days, they used calibrated radiosondes to gather temperature (and other data) from all the layers of the atmosphere. It was an almost global coverage, as the balloons drifted, and the data was calibrated and adjusted at the time to get an accurate idea of all the layers of the atmosphere. What GISS is showing is surface station adjusted temperature analysis, with a lot of assumptions added onto previous assumptions, It does not represent the atmosphere, nor does it in any way show the changes in regions.

    There is no such thing as it represents. It’s a made up metric of “global temperatures”, and it can be shown to be almost completely fictional for most of the past, as well as many regions of the world.

    • AndyG55 says:

      “it can be shown to be almost completely fictional”

      And not even science fiction., just a downright fabrication.

    • We need more Lawyers …. more bureaucrats… more Taxes… more control by the Adults in the room… what does it matter??

      … and a few Laws to halt this Denialism on here!! Its about the Science!! 97% Consensus!! We need more funding of Government Scientists…. more beheading of large birds by giant 100mph guillotine blades!!…

      • Marsh says:

        Phillippe , your 97% Consensus is a myth that’s been exposed over & over. Denialism as “you put it” is appropriate given that the CO2 hypothesis is as thin as its proportions… It is the act of an Intelligent person to question AGW & not be subject to trickery. Having failed this prerequisite, your IQ is here for all to see & its audacious to claim otherwise !

        • Disillusioned says:

          Marsh, I thought he was being facetious.

        • Marsh says:

          Disillusioned , you maybe right but this is worse ; it denigrates a serious issue to that of a game, a farce that others are taking seriously. The intent should at least be qualified in a final line or it comes across as a CC obsessive. If they act & pretend to be a rabbit or a troll and get shot, more the better…

        • Menicholas says:

          Marsh, we can all cry until we laugh, or laugh until we cry.
          One thing we will never be able to do is stay sane in an insane world by taking ourselves too seriously every minute of our days.

        • Me says:

          Until it cost the poor even more than they can afford, so tell Me about it. I’m not laughing. But then again some of us can and do with out, so fuck us and carry on is the slogan.

        • Marsh says:

          Me & Menicholas , you both make a valid point ; we have to lighten up, I do so in other areas of life; you are right in that the Climate Change nonsense makes my blood boil.
          Simply put , my tolerance for Global Warming fraudsters has reached an all time limit.

          The amount of propaganda from the IPCC to Government represents one of the worst forms of duplicity in living memory outside of a War; this is a conflict without an enemy.

          In effect , the AGW doctrine is a Crime against humanity , made worse by being officially sanctioned around corrupted Science ; at the expense of the people around the World. Sorry , I just can’t see the funny side ; I don’t laugh at train wrecks either…

        • Marsh says:

          Poe’s law ( Wiki ) named after its author Nathan Poe,
          [1] is a literary adage which stipulates that , without a clear indicator of an author’s intention , it is often impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of such extremism.
          [2] Someone will likely mistake the parody for a genuine article, or vice-versa.

        • Menicholas says:

          I do not see a funny side either. I just have to crack some jokes now and then for some reason.

  5. Hugh K says:

    If not for the easily Grubered, most would not even know there was a Mikey, Gavin, and Jim. And the most Grubered of all seems to be the media….those that should be informed better than anyone else.
    If only Brian Williams shallow tales had stopped with his own life instead of dragging the rest of the country/world down into his fantasy world of among other fantasies, CAGW. You would think the rest of the media would get a clue by now. But in some sad pathetic way, they appear to get off on being Grubered by their political party of choice. Or is it just the high price the media are willing to pay for that prestigious table at the Correspondents Dinner? Crazy frickin’ world…

    • In the world of the news media, content is controlled by editors, and editors have bills to pay just like the rest of us.

      Seek the answer to the question: Who controls the editors? The why is not as important as the who.

      – Richard

    • darrylb says:

      Hugh, the media must produce dramatic results in order to earn enough money to exist.
      Therefore, unfortunately, bad news is good news and good news is no news.

      The bad news feeds the doctrine of the church of environmentalism. The doctrine states that we all have the original sin of producing carbon pollution. To become a true believer we must lead a carbon free life and pay penance by purchasing carbon credits.
      These carbon credits can be exchanged for carbon producing activities.

      Of course the leaders in the church, sometimes referred to as ‘greenies’ are automatically given an abundance of carbon credits, so they can fly around the world leaving their carbon foot print everywhere.

      Every so often we carbon sinners should kneel before the carbon credit God, sometimes referred to as The Gore who keeps at his side a few ladies in waiting. One lady who got tired of waiting was given the name Tipper, and even a long meaningless kiss was not enough to make her kneel because she found out the real ‘Inconvenient Truth’

      BTW–I hate the term carbon pollution- used by the most ignorant

  6. darrylb says:

    I think the homogenization procedure was mostly the product of Tom Karl.

    I cannot find whether or not it was ever peer reviewed, except perhaps with
    friends in the climate get-a-long gang.on a Saturday morning with coffee or maybe
    a Saturday evening over a brew.

    Karl has somehow kept his name out of the climate noise.

  7. Andy DC says:

    You have to remember, that in the early 20th Century, humans still walked on their knuckles. They had no radio or TV, let alone cell phones and Internet. So how could they measure temperatures reliably? We obviously need modern climate scientists to perform adjustments, in order to ensure that temperatures precisely fit their sophisticated climate models and predetermined conclusion.

    • nielszoo says:

      That’s also why they dump all the readings from rural stations and replace them with modeled data from urban stations… us dumb folk out here in the sticks are still walking on our knuckles, clinging to our guns and bibles and are too stupid to see that it’s really 8°~10° hotter than them newfangled diteetul thermometers says it is. We’re not edjumicated ‘nough to cipher it out on our own. We need them gub’mint scientists in their white coats to tell us. (According to them all we’ve got is white sheets and hoods and that ain’t the same.)

    • Marsh says:

      The modern mercury Thermometer has NOW been around for 300 years !! After 200yrs on, one could say they were well developed and accurate by the early 20th Century… Absolute temperatures today is not so much the issue on the equipment as before ; it’s more on the integrity of the reporting & tampering of original Data by vested interests.

      As to the walking on knuckles ( they had Radio in the early 20th C); I recall the years when we Earthlings routinely sent our Astronauts to the Moon & our best civil and military Aircraft could “cruise” at Mach II. Near half a Century on,”we can’t do it today”.
      Now with our PC we can download what once was & dream of how advanced we were!

      NASA has a new focus with Climate Change; this belies their real world achievements!
      Billions on measuring technology in the sky ; but temperatures can be more reliably resolved with an old mercury thermometer at ground level ; they call that progress ?

      • Menicholas says:

        I firmly believe that the folks that were recording weather data in days gone by were more conscientious, more thoughtful, more attentive to the task assigned to them, had more time on their hands, were less distracted, and had no reason for bias one way or the other.
        One hundred years ago, there was no television, radio was barely getting started and was many years from providing much content, movies were short, few, silent and black and white…basically there was not much to distract a person.
        People occupied themselves by focusing on the task or tasks at hand.
        And accurate instrumentation was available.
        Back then a High School education meant that a person was well versed in numerous subjects than many students today could not even spell correctly.

      • amirlach says:

        “Progrsives” call that progress.

        FORWARD!!!

  8. JeffU says:

    Where can I find that first graph? Can I search and find it? I don’t dispute it, I just like to be able to find things like that on my own.

  9. sfx2020 says:

    The global atmospheric temperature data in the old graphic was quality controlled, peer reviewed and subject to challenges, considering it was the main evidence for human caused global cooling.

    You should add the graph and commentary by Hansen 1987

    Click to access 1987_Hansen_Lebedeff_1.pdf

  10. gator69 says:

    Reading Thermometers Is Hard

    At least we know where they are getting their ‘data’.

    • rah says:

      You guys do know how to tell a rectal thermometer from an oral one…………..Right?

      • Menicholas says:

        My nurse told me…by the taste, she said.

        • rah says:

          LOL! Don’t think the patient would appreciate that. At least in the Army the Rectal thermometers were triangular in shape and the bulb was larger. The Army also had them color coded. Blue dot on the distal end for oral and red for rectal. Or was t it the other way around???????? Been too long to remember the color code but I’m positive about the shape.

  11. AndyG55 says:

    Gator, Appell is on no Tricks Zone, care to visit for a while ? 😉

  12. Snowleopard says:

    So basically government temperature graphs/data are now filed in the same bin with government (un)employment figures and government cost of living/inflation figures,

  13. Robertv says:

    Polar outbreak on Monday and Tuesday

    A burst of cold air originating from the Antarctic ice sheet is expected to affect New Zealand on Monday and Tuesday. Unseasonably cold temperatures, strong winds and snow to low levels are expected over the South Island where this event is likely to have a high impact. Livestock could be affected and it will probably have an effect on higher roads where significant snow accumulations may make driving conditions difficult and could lead to some road closures. The coldest air is expected to make its way north to the North Island on Tuesday bringing strong winds and unusually low temperatures.
    http://blog.metservice.com/2015/04/polar-outbreak-on-monday-and-tuesday/

  14. Centinel2012 says:

    Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
    No one as yet figured out how we went to the Moon without a cell and a tablet connected to the cloud?

  15. rah says:

    “Reading Thermometers Is Hard”
    And forecasting a hurricane season is even harder. The nearly worthless predictions are starting to come out now for the coming Atlantic Hurricane season.
    Colorado State University pointed their blindfolded chimp towards the dart board and here is what he came up with: “Colorado State University climatologists are predicting a lower than average Atlantic hurricane season, with three hurricanes and seven named storms in 2015. They predict one of those three will be a major hurricane – a category 3 or higher.”
    http://www.nola.com/hurricane/index.ssf/2015/04/2015_atlantic_hurricane_season.html

    • Snowleopard says:

      Hurricane prediction might be worthless for you, but, IMHO Bill Gray’s forecasts have been the best there is at that game. This is Bill’s last year with CSU’s hurricane forecast. Bill is a CO2 skeptic, has “retired”, and will be concentrating on studying climate change henceforth. The full hurricane forecast report, for those who think it is worth their time, is available here:

      Click to access apr2015.pdf

  16. Andy Oz says:

    http://nsidc.org/data/docs/daac/nsidc0064_nenana.gd.html

    Hi Tony,

    Do you have the data from 2000 -2014 for Nenana River ice break up dates?
    NSIDC has it up to 1920 – 2000 and the chart looks to me to have a very good inverse correlation between the 1970’s NASA temp graph and the Nenana break up dates.
    I also remember that 2013 was either 1 or 2 all time record.
    May 5 seems to be the average break up date.

    Cheers

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