The graph below shows changes made to Hansen’s GLB.Ts+dSST.txt over the past year. He makes these changes in place, overwriting the existing file so that there is no record on the NASA web site of his tampering. Fortunately we have people saving off old copies.
As usual, he has cooled the past and warmed the present. Hansen has created a 0.15C additional warming between 1910 and 2012, which didn’t exist in the February 20, 2012 version of the same file.
data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
He is apparently attempting to push temperatures above scenario C, but is failing to even do that. Mosher says this is all good.
Hansen has also blocked Internet archives from automatically tracking his tampering.
I placed a copy of the archived February 2012 data here : http://tinyurl.com/btrrvcu
Here is an earlier version :
It is frustrating that you can’t use the wayback machine for that any more, although there are still archives from a few years back (I forget when he locked archive.org out; might have been just after the first ClimateGate IIRC)
Do you have a link for the archived file, presumably from a year ago, you used? (I tried your second link above, but sure enough it blocks access).
http://tinyurl.com/btrrvcu
Have you or anyone else ever alerted the msm to what is going on with the temperature data? What can I do to help?
Repeat this information everywhere you can. Hansen makes Madoff appear like a saint.
Hansen engages in these antics because in 1988 he came out confident in Congress. Correlation backed him for a while. Then it failed. He now has no choice but to tell LIES with data fiddling.
Is there a mandatory retirement age for the likes of Hansen in NASA? The man has lost his mind.
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings and commented:
IMPORTANT!
Ye gods and little fishes … the first ten years of those two datasets compared:
Old: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3Kz9p_7fMvBSlpMVXR1NDh4Y28/edit?pli=1
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year
1880 -43 -27 -25 -36 -31 -38 -23 -13 -29 -23 -19 -22 -28 -99 -99 -31 -25 -24 1880
1881 -19 -23 0 -5 -6 -32 -13 -11 -25 -29 -37 -30 -19 -19 -22 -3 -19 -30 1881
1882 -13 -2 -10 -28 -25 -33 -27 -14 -24 -37 -36 -52 -25 -23 -15 -21 -25 -33 1882
1883 -46 -41 -17 -22 -27 -10 -9 -21 -31 -34 -32 -29 -27 -28 -46 -22 -14 -32 1883
1884 -27 -19 -35 -38 -37 -36 -28 -19 -31 -34 -35 -31 -31 -31 -25 -37 -28 -33 1884
1885 -61 -32 -23 -39 -33 -41 -29 -26 -22 -23 -19 -6 -29 -32 -41 -32 -32 -21 1885
1886 -36 -43 -28 -20 -18 -32 -7 -22 -20 -31 -33 -29 -27 -25 -28 -22 -21 -28 1886
1887 -64 -51 -35 -41 -29 -24 -8 -26 -25 -38 -32 -40 -34 -33 -48 -35 -19 -31 1887
1888 -48 -47 -45 -35 -28 -24 -19 -23 -19 -10 -5 -22 -27 -29 -45 -36 -22 -11 1888
1889 -22 9 -1 -3 -6 -13 -16 -24 -21 -30 -37 -33 -17 -16 -12 -3 -18 -29 1889
1890 -52 -40 -34 -37 -50 -39 -30 -37 -41 -23 -51 -34 -39 -39 -42 -40 -35 -38 1890
New: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year
1880 -33 -26 -21 -29 -15 -22 -18 -10 -19 -17 -16 -20 -21**** ***** -22 -17 -17 1880
1881 -12 -14 -1 -1 -1 -24 -10 -6 -16 -21 -26 -16 -12 -13 -16 -1 -13 -21 1881
1882 4 6 0 -22 -18 -30 -25 -9 -10 -23 -23 -36 -15 -14 -2 -13 -21 -19 1882
1883 -37 -36 -11 -18 -19 -6 -1 -12 -18 -17 -27 -19 -18 -20 -36 -16 -6 -21 1883
1884 -18 -12 -29 -34 -31 -34 -29 -22 -27 -23 -27 -24 -26 -26 -16 -31 -28 -26 1884
1885 -55 -27 -17 -35 -33 -38 -26 -23 -16 -12 -12 2 -24 -27 -35 -28 -29 -13 1885
1886 -36 -42 -32 -21 -19 -27 -10 -18 -10 -20 -26 -16 -23 -22 -25 -24 -18 -19 1886
1887 -57 -41 -23 -31 -26 -23 -17 -27 -22 -31 -26 -39 -30 -28 -38 -27 -22 -26 1887
1888 -41 -39 -37 -23 -24 -18 -9 -11 -9 -2 0 -8 -18 -21 -39 -28 -13 -3 1888
1889 -16 17 8 9 1 -8 -10 -17 -16 -19 -30 -28 -9 -8 -2 6 -12 -22 1889
1890 -39 -36 -35 -32 -42 -27 -23 -31 -30 -19 -43 -28 -32 -32 -34 -36 -27 -31 1890
Somebody please tell me he just changed the baseline, not the temperatures.
Changing the baseline would not cause the slope to change. This is data tampering, pure and simple.
Good point.
BTW, the oldest version of Hansen’s file I can find on archive.org (11th Jan 2012) appears at a glance to match yours, in case anyone had any doubts:
http://web.archive.org/web/20120111000513/http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
If Hansen isn’t careful, they’re going to wind up with a second “Little Ice Age” in the middle of the 30’s.
BTW, the GISS baseline continues to be mid-20th century (1951-1980). The rest of the worlds scientists have updated, using a period containing the last full century (2010), as the WMO recommends.
What a Gleickhead.
You can start a petition at ‘Change.org’ and millions will read it.
Steve
I’ve got a copy the Met Office sent me, which must have been dated March 2005. I’ll email over.
The summary I did is here.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/how-giss-have-changed-the-temperature-record-since-2008/
you people don’t understand – it’s like Marcott adding a hockey stick because he KNEW it was supposed to be there – Hansen KNOWS it’s hotter now so the record must be wrong!
Gleickhead, OMG gotta love that one, now to clean the coffee off my monitor.
fraud /frôd/
Noun:
1. Wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.
2. A person or thing intended to deceive others, typically by unjustifiably claiming or being credited with accomplishments or qualities.
Synonyms:
cheat – deceit – deception – swindle – humbug – fake
The gambit of cooling past temperatures to create a rising trend is very clever. Anyone can verify cuyrrent temperatures, but it is much mor difficult to verify past temperatures. Also, it is much harder to argue the case against adjustments than if the current temperatures were adjusted upwards.
I have never understand the reasoning for doing this, but then they are masters of the science so only the anointed can understand them.
If you compare the current data with last years, and especially with the data archived by climate4you from 2008, and mentioned by Paul Homewood in his blog entry linked above you’ll see that Hansen adjusts modern temperatures upwards too.
http://www.climate4you.com/Text/20080517%20GLB_Ts+dSST.txt – 2008
http://web.archive.org/web/20120111000513/http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt – 2012
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt – 2013, current
My comment above appears to be stuck in a moderation queue. Did I break a rule somewhere? I apologise if so.
They have PEER reviewed papers that were published showing justification for what they do. Even if they go a step further than what they claim is justified! Or was that a MILE further that what they claim is justified. Of course we all know how rigorous PAL Review is! The groups needed an excuse to make “MINOR” adjustments and having the right PALS that can get pushed through and published!
I have asked Hansen via email about this over the past year, 20 messages, no answer.
Nothing from Gavin Schmidt. Not even the courtesy of a reply.
Hansen and the Gav, Courteous? You have been around long enough to know otherwise. 😉
I am surprised the Gav did not use your e-mail as a post at RC!
Giss historic temperature reports are computer model outputs! Each time the run the model they will get different results. It is all based on the AlGoreRhythm they use that just happens to cool the past and distort the latest current temperature records. The get their input information from the NOAA computer model runs that distort also. NOAA is probably worse than GISS as far as distorting historical records goes.
For evidence regarding what GISS does read this:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/abs_temp.html
They admit their report is not real temperatures.
NOAA is horrible. They applied their own algorithms to local Weather service data to give hundreds of regions a positive temperature slope with time when the historical averages were in fact negative.
It is just a computer model output! I am certain, by mow, most of us realize how reliable computer models are at getting correct results. The word Atrocious comes to mind! But they do help promote the GIGO theory!
The secret is in the weighting. I have the feeling they weight temperature data according to how they feel the impact of things like El Nino actually influenced the weather – tacit in this, I am sure, are such assumptions as “El Nino are increasing intensity because of CO2 in the air” etc.
They don’t divulge what recipes they use, either.
I thought GISS was claiming that 2010 was the hottest on record? Your plot doesn’t show that.
The plot is of adjustments to the data, not of temperature anomalies.
“Mosher says this is all good” well then, it must be.
Obviously climate scientists live in an alternate universe. Leaching funding must change the known laws of the universe.
Greedy lying bastards, they should make a documentary about them.
The Climate Trinity,
starring ….
Tamper Hansen, Excel Phil and Mann Ipulate
Steve,
Is there anyway you can put together a timeline post of the known adjustments.
Starting with the raw numbers, then the mid-1990s, and then all the known data shifts.
I’m pretty sure there’s been at least 5 different tweaks, it’s hard to keep up with at this point, and I’m sure every last one of them has made the temperature slope steeper.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/30-of-giss-warming-is-due-to-data-tampering-since-2005/
I have saved as many before and after graphs as I can here, if this happened in business or worse still medicine bosses would end up behind bars and patients would die. Would you like your vital signs to be adjusted when the doctors wanted different records to show their paymasters?
http://understandingfraud.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/before-and-after-adjusted-climate-graphs.html
The USHCN adjustments are actually 3X larger than what they document..