Arctic warmth in the 1940’s just didn’t fit the Arctic warming narrative, so NASA erased it two years ago.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Worst March Drought On Record
- ChartGL Process Control Demo
- The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
- Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
- Did Bill Gates Do This?
- Worst March Drought On Record In The US
- The Real Hockey Stick Graph
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Worst March Drought On Record
- Hank Phillips on Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
- Hank Phillips on The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Hank Phillips on The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Hank Phillips on The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- arn on The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Gordon Vigurs on Worst March Drought On Record
- Robertvd on Worst March Drought On Record
- Bob G on Worst March Drought On Record
- GW on The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
I forgot where I saw it but the Icelandic met does not agree with these adjustments….must of been in comments at wuwt
Paul Homewood has blogged about that.
Steve, I would love to see a chart which overlays each new version of the historical temperature record that NCDC has produced over the years. It would be very powerful, I think.
Correction: NASA.
Iceland successfully told the EU to take a hike after the GFC when they wanted the icelandic people to pay for the bankruptcy of the three main commercial banks. Iceland should tell GISS to take a hike with their fraudulent manipulation of past temperatures, and publish it.
Big money on the line to prove the skeptical case. Now is your chance to cover some of those costs Steve!! $10,000 bet by Nobel winner.
http://m.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/nobel-scientist-willing-to-bet-on-global-warming/story-e6frgcjx-1226802801018#mm-premium
Think again. Under Schmidt’s terms, he wins if it’s warmer in 20 years, however small the increase. He could well win this bet even if he’s totally wrong, which he is.
Reblogged this on Gds44's Blog.
I overlaid both GISS data sets over the ESRL AMO Index
(for easy viewing, they are lined up for a 0.1 AMO = 0.5 GISS match, with a 0.0 AMO = 5.0 GISS baseline)
Here is what I found
http://oi41.tinypic.com/3486pw9.jpg
…now I don’t even claim to be anything super intelligent like a “Climate Scientist” or anything, but…
And while not perfect (which I wouldn’t expect anyway) one sure does seem to make much more sense then the other to me (please, correct me if I am wrong)
Anyone have more instances of data changing? I’ll have the time later this evening to do a couple more