Comparing 1975 National Academy Of Sciences To 2015 GISS

In 1975, the National Academy Of Sciences published this graph, showing about 1°C warming in the Northern Hemisphere from 1885 to 1940, and that all 1900 to 1940 warming was lost by 1970.

ScreenHunter_9457 May. 24 06.49

GISS has since reduced the 1885 to 1940 warming by half, and reduced the 1940-1970 cooling by two thirds.

ScreenHunter_9456 May. 24 06.43 

The next graph shows an overlay of the two at the same scale, normalized to 1905-1940 

ScreenHunter_9458 May. 24 06.52 

The animation below shows how they reduced both the pre-1940 warming, and the post-1940 cooling. Neither are explainable by global warming theory, so government experts made both largely disappear.


So which one is correct? In 1923, the Arctic was very warm and melting rapidly.

ScreenHunter_9425 May. 23 06.41


But in 1970, the Arctic was very cold, and ice was expanding rapidly.

ScreenHunter_1434 Jul. 30 06.37

ScreenHunter_1435 Jul. 30 06.37

TimesMachine: July 18, 1970 –

ScreenHunter_9465 May. 24 08.38

PaintImage10991 (1)

CIA Report 1974

The 1975 NAS graph makes sense. The Arctic melting when it is warm, and freezing when it is cold.

ScreenHunter_9463 May. 24 08.25

But what about the current GISS graph?  It shows the Arctic melting when it is cold, and freezing when it is warm.

ScreenHunter_9461 May. 24 08.21

It is painfully obvious that the GISS temperatures are fraudulent, yet several prominent skeptics continue to enable this scam by pretending that the NASA/NOAA temperatures are somehow legitimate.

About stevengoddard

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

13 Responses to Comparing 1975 National Academy Of Sciences To 2015 GISS

  1. Centinel2012 says:

    Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
    George Orwell, “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

  2. sfx2020 says:

    GISS has hardly any data on the arctic for the early part of their analysis, and none of the southern pole. The dishonesty is presenting the graphs as anomalies for the entire hemispheres.

    The same is true for a lot of land area, there is almost no data, or none at all, for much of the land in the past. Using their recent surface data can be useful, but the old reconstruction certainly is bogus.

  3. David A says:

    I disagree stx. The ice age scare was real, and the early NH T looks far more accurate. There was no call that the cooling was anthropogenic, and so no political basis for not being as accurate as possible. The CAGW advocates openly expressed the desire to remove the 40s blip, and they did. TOB does not begin to explain the difference ,

    If the 70s graphic does not include arctic cooling, then it likely underestimated the drop in T from the 40s. The changes to global T are similar, just not as extreme as the NH graphics. The NH likely fluctuates more, because it has a great deal more land.

  4. Disillusioned says:

    Tony, that was an excellent post. Thank you.

    • darrylb says:

      I have stated this before, but of all the global warming outright dishonesty, this info is at the heart of the nucleus of the propaganda which has me most, well
      At one time I had the understanding that scientists were all above reproach.

      Now, we have to accept the fact that in all walks of life humans are just so ‘human’

      Sometimes, I think we need more Spock’s or Data’s

  5. gymnosperm says:

    Great post. The last two graphics make a very good point.

  6. spren says:

    I’m curious who the skeptics are that were referenced?

  7. sunsettommy says:

    Tony, your logic is impeccable:

    “The 1975 NAS graph makes sense. The Arctic melting when it is warm, and freezing when it is cold.”

    “But what about the current GISS graph? It shows the Arctic melting when it is cold, and freezing when it is warm.”

    I predict the usual warmist morons will miss the obvious here.

  8. Scott Scarborough says:

    You forgot to mention that the climate-gate emails talked about “eliminating the 1940’s blip.” So this is much more than just conjecture. It’s like reading Mein Kamph and then seeing the results!

    • cheshirered says:

      Scott, don’t you worry: the clowns at NASA / GISS are well and truly rumbled by our host. He’s highlighted the bogus removal of the 40’s blip many times before. He knows, and funnily enough, so do they.

  9. omanuel says:

    The National Academy of Sciences became part of the problem on 24 Oct 1945:

    AGW is the fourth in a series of MAJOR LIES invented after nations (UN) and national academies of science (NAS) were united on 24 Oct 1945 into an Orwellian Ministry of Consensus Science Truths to forbid public knowledge of Neutron Repulsion – the major source of energy in cores of heavy atom, some planets, ordinary stars, galaxies and the universe:

    1. SSM- standard solar model
    2. SNM- standard nuclear model
    3. BBC- Big Bang cosmology model
    4. AGW- anthropologic global warming

    My suggestion for society’s escape from this 70-year old matrix of deceit is a series of short papers for teachers of future generations:

    Click to access Introduction.pdf

    Your comments, corrections or criticisms would be appreciated.

  10. Chewer says:

    The fraud being propagated will get people killed:

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