In 2012, I caught NSIDC cheating, just as Arctic sea ice extent was about to cross above the 1979-2000 average. They changed their measurement system using a completely bogus mathematical trick. NSIDC argued with me about it for a while, and eventually admitted that their nature trick was garbage.
NSIDC’s 2012 Nature Trick | Real Science
They have done a much bigger cheat this time, in order to generate this propaganda:
ice at least 5 years or older, is at its smallest level in the satellite record, representing only 3 percent of the total ice cover
March ends a most interesting winter | Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis
From week 1 1984 to week 37, 2015 NSIDC generated ice age maps in this format:
Week 38 (late September) is the week when the ice has its birthday, and all of the ice advances one year. I generated the map below of what week 38 should have looked like, based on advancing the ice age one year. There should have been a large increase in 5+ ice, because all of the 4 year old ice became five year old ice on week 38.
However, that didn’t happen. What they did was change to a new set of maps on week 39, and actually deleted the directory containing the 1984-2015 maps. They never generated a week 38 map. Very naughty.
A large area of four year old ice not only didn’t age, but it disappeared entirely.
The animation below shows what the map should have looked like compared to what it does look like. They massively reduced the amount of five year old ice that should have been present in the map.
The graph below shows the sum total of they did. When they switched maps, they decreased the amount of 3, 4 and 5+ year old ice, and increased the amount of two year old ice.
Not only did they they alter the data, but they also deleted the evidence. And to make matters worse, they blocked auto archiving of the 1984-2015 data.
The data is not lost however. I have all their old maps archived here. Did they really think I wasn’t going to catch them?
Tony, I actually miss the good old days when I still had suspicions that the official so-called “climate scientists” still had some shred of ethics. This latest from them is totally shameful. They are dirtying the name of science. History will not be kind to them, nor do they deserve any kindness.
Thanks for pointing it out.
This needs to be trumpeted big time.
They are probably breaking some set of rules again.
“Science in the service of politics.”
Lindzen has a chapter (3.) devoted to this topic in the paper referenced below:
Thanks for the link :) … this situation seem’s to infest most fields of Scientific research, Astrophysics included
Racketeering In Cryosphere Operations?
Sheldon may finally find the appropriate acronym he is after.
On 2nd thought, Racketeering In Cryosphere Observations is a better fit….
La Niña in the way.
Yes it looks like la nina is back and appears to be strong? http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sfc_daily.php?plot=ssa&inv=0&t=cur
I emailed the chair of the CCAR at Colorado State about whether or not the Arctic ice thickness graph data had been moved to another archive location and received no reply. Browsing the ftp server, I saw a number of researchers who had recently been active but their directories had been cleared out from public viewing as well. This leads me to one of two conclusions:
(a) The ice thickness data was going to show a strong inconvenient disconnect to presumed levels based on a new year’s addition, or
(b) Researchers don’t want to expose themselves to the public because the average skeptic is becoming more aware of what could be honestly described as fraud and is collecting data that demonstrates it.
The question is not whether there is fraud, but how much and who is involved.
Threats to the planet: super volcanoes, super earthquakes, space rocks . . . over these we have no control. What we do have control over potentially are the poisons: nuclear radiation; genetically modified organism; herbicides and pesticides; and other advanced technological inventions . . . and Wars. The climate is a very minor consideration given the real threats. It could hardly be more obvious what “climate change” is all about which is Control. The most primitive persons on the planet happen to be those with the most money and power; these types are almost elemental like diseases or acts of God. They have practically no freedom and live in very dark states of mind. And they would like to draft everyone into their perverted conditions.
Whether we designate them as psychopaths or criminals they are dangerous. Ideally they should be rounded up and put on an isolated island in the Pacific where food and other necessities can be air dropped now and then. Or something along those lines.
This is fraud, pure and simple. They aren’t even good at it, just brazen (I didn’t do it – nobody saw me do it), and relying on the MSM to protect that fraud.
Pretty strange series of coincidences, hey.
They know the AMO is heading downwards and that a strong La Nina is forming, and suddenly one of the satellites that will give an accurate picture of sea ice levels fails, old data disappears and they care caught fudging the new pictures.
NSIDC have some serious questions to answer as to their truthfulness and ethical behaviour.
I have no idea why this happens, honestly I’m stumped!!
Both Arctic, and Global sea ice show a insignificant change from the short term average.
Yes, Arctic Sea Ice is less than during the LIA, but it is still much higher than it was for the first 7000 years of the Holocene when summer sea ice was regularly zero..
“I have all their old maps archived here.”
I have downloaded them for other safe keeping.
With these fraudsters active, you need multiple redundancies.
I suggest anyone with drive space , also grab a copy.
hmm… looks like they already made a gif for week 41-2015 which showed accurate 5+year sea ice before they changed their set of maps. I just found it archived here:
I created snapshot from the full page at https://archive.is/TmKO2
What is interesting is the 1 year sea ice in the gif. It seems to have formed since the week 38 change-over.. or am I reading something wrongly.
Sadly, history will not be able to make a judgement, when its being demonstrably altered by the ministry of truth. So, no verdict from History, although I agree with your sentiments.
I reblogged your initial story on my site. I am really fed up with this Tom-foolery. I think this news should be spread far and wide.
At the very least, a bit of pressure might make them at least offer an explanation for the “adjustments”. The fact they don’t even bother to explain is particularly exasperating.
I like to watch the sea-ice and offer my own observations. This alteration is nuts. To drastically change the data like this is tantamount to saying all their earlier data was flawed. If they feel that is true, they should say so.
If they do not want the public to comment on their data, why offer it? If they do offer it, they should make sure it does not contain impossible statements, such as half the five-year-old ice vanishing at a time the ice is still freezing.
Pingback: A Sea Change In The Arctic | Real Science
Pingback: Arctic Melt Season Almost Over | Real Science