In 1999, Hansen was unhappy that the US didn’t show any warming.
Whither U.S. Climate?
By James Hansen, Reto Ruedy, Jay Glascoe and Makiko Sato — August 1999
What’s happening to our climate? Was the heat wave and drought in the Eastern United States in 1999 a sign of global warming?
Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought. The drought of 1999 covered a smaller area than the 1988 drought, when the Mississippi almost dried up. And 1988 was a temporary inconvenience as compared with repeated droughts during the 1930s “Dust Bowl” that caused an exodus from the prairies, as chronicled in Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath.
How can the absence of clear climate change in the United States be reconciled with continued reports of record global temperature? Part of the “answer” is that U.S. climate has been following a different course than global climate, at least so far. Figure 1 compares the temperature history in the U.S. and the world for the past 120 years. The U.S. has warmed during the past century, but the warming hardly exceeds year-to-year variability. Indeed, in the U.S. the warmest decade was the 1930s and the warmest year was 1934. Global temperature, in contrast, had passed 1930s values by 1980 and the world has warmed at a remarkable rate over the last 25 years.
So they fixed it during the the next year.
But they were quite clever how they did it. Going from USHCN V1 to V2 they shifted all of the older temperatures downwards, as seen in this animation. This created a non-existent upwards spike, and brought US temperature trends in line with Hansen’s theory.
The green arrow below shows the 0.5C upwards shift in the five year mean anomaly line, made between the 1999 version (red) and the current version in blue.
Closer analysis reveals that it is a hockey stick of exponential data tampering since 1940. Remember that they shifted the baseline temperatures downwards, so the absolute anomaly numbers don’t mean anything. What is important is the magnitude and shape of the curve.
This data tampering brought the US in line with the rest of the world, and secured billions in global warming research funding. The current GISS US temperature graph has a nice hockey stick in it, courtesy of massive tampering by NOAA/NASA.
This next graph shows the raw data (blue) and the NCDC published data in red. It shows how they cool the past in their published graphs, and create the appearance of warming – which is not indicated by the thermometer data.
The difficulty in getting the attention of the world on this is the big problem. Maybe if, instead of presenting it as easily-verified data, you were to “leak” it, as embarrassing top-secret data protected by national security laws to keep it from the public, it would get the attention it deserves from the mainstream media. (Now, getting the proper attention from scientists, with glittering academic credentials and lifetimes of recognition, is another thing; they are a petulant, thoroughly condescending lot, on the whole, and don’t like their constant banquet of admiration and praise interrupted by scruffy critics like you and me–which is to say, the criminals, criminally incompetent and crazies are in charge, of all of our institutions).
By the way, you should address, and readers here should remember, US Temperatures Have Been Falsely Adjusted According to the Level of Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere
Do not forget the CO2 measurements are just as FALSELY ADJUSTED.
Carbon cycle modelling and the residence time of natural and anthropogenic atmospheric CO2: On the construction of the “Greenhouse Effect Global Warming” dogma.
Which is odd too, because I may have inadvertently stumbled upon Utah’s possible discontinuity yesterday – but it’s 1994, not 1997 like the rest of the US
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/us/42/00/tmp/ytd/12/1934-2014?trend=true&trend_base=10&firsttrendyear=1934&lasttrendyear=1993
Utah should trap more then it’s fair share of the Heat that was supposedly blanketing the US during the Pacific’s Super El Nino event of 1997. The Wasatch/Rocky Mountain ranges do so for normal storms, at least, why would a super storm be any different? But Utah sees barely a blip in 1997, especially compared to the massive, nearly 3.5 degree, jump in 1994 which supposedly deposited so much heat the state has only been able to get rid of 1 degree of it since (there is an overall -1 Degree trend since, from 1994-2013)
I haven’t checked myself yet, but does make me wonder what each state’s possible discontinuity is. Utah (I would have thought) should have been one of the better catches for the massive 1997 heat deposit coming from the Pacific. It seems to have cared less about the US’s trend though.
So do any states show the 1997 warming? Very quickly checking California, Washington, Oregon, Nevada & Arizona (the States which should have shown it most) the answer seems to be a big fat no, unless I am missing something.
The data tampering evidence is becoming overwhelming.
It would make a phenomenal book, tracing the tampering from the earliest instances to these most egregious ones you have recently published, Steve.
Real Science : “If the data does not fit your theory, your theory is wrong”
Climate “science” : “If the data does not fit your theory, change the data”
Or, Climate “science”: It does now. See?!
Don’t forget sea level. The historical satellite data over the last ten years has been rewritten:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040719102733/http://sealevel.colorado.edu/2004_rel1.2/sl_ib_ns_cu2004_rel1.2_global.txt
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/files/2014_rel1/sl_ns_global.txt
It is not our civilization that has dramatic sea level rise.
http://youtu.be/wPWQ-Ax0o84
So I guess when the end of the century arrives and our descendents are shivering in igloos they will not dare light the whale oil for fear of making the planet any warmer than the warmist charts tell them it is….
Otherwise cynicism might have crept in at some point before then.
I don’t trust any graph of global temperature without knowing that every single weather station on it is a rural station, that every weather station is included for the entire graph and that all of the data is raw unadjusted data. If such a graph exists then it should be reliable for showing trends.
Reblogged this on The Firewall.
What a disgrace… our whole socio-media political system chooses to ignore all this data tampering… wont even acknowledge it. Instead they call us names like skeptic or flat earthers… oh, I guess lying makes them more advanced beings..