Gavin Schmidt at NASA created a new site site to prove that he isn’t tampering the data. It accomplishes the exact opposite.
Gavin nearly tripled global warming from 2000 to 2016, during a time when satellites showed the Earth cooling.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming! Please help with a gift by clicking the button below.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on Toxic Carbon Dioxide
- Disillusioned on Michael Mann Defines Himself
- conrad ziefle on Michael Mann Defines Himself
- Oeman 50 on Michael Mann Defines Himself
- arn on Michael Mann Defines Himself
Archives
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- March 2015
- January 2015
Anyone with modest ability can find old GISS data on the net and compare it to the latest stuff they are pooping out. The graph below is nearly a year old now, but it illustrates the point. Most of the data has been changed over the last ten years, and all of the changes after 1980 are up and most of the changes prior to 1980 are down. Anyone can apply the “Duck Test” and conclude that the lower the past increase the recent pattern isn’t just the way it happened to turn out.
By the way, the exact same thing is going on with sea level.
“By the way, the exact same thing is going on with sea level.”
Very true. Some of the data shows the sea level is actually decreasing as I showed several times over at the old website. link
This makes sense when you think about the glaciers that have re-established after melting during the early Holocene.
I’ve posted the one below a few times now, but it never hurts slap it up here again (-: Each squiggle is a different release from Colorado University’s Sea Level Research Group. And what those plots tell you is rate for a particular date from a particular time series of data. For instance, CU’s Release 2005_rel5 says that in 2004 the rate was about 2.9 mm/yr, and CU’s Release 2006_rel3 says that in 2004 the rate was almost 3.2 mm/yr.
And if you look carefully at 2011_ rel4 and 2016_rel3 it sure looks like the CU crew has started to lower the past and bump up the recent history.
By the way the Jason 3 satellite was launched in January and I expect the next Release to use that data, so I wouldn’t be surprised if some large data adjustments are made. Besides if you go to CU’s Sea Level page on the web at sealevel.colorado.edu, you will find a paper with the title, “Is the detection of accelerated sea level rise imminent?” So a finding of acceleration of sea level rise on the next release is just about a done deal.
There was a big article in the NY Times about how sea level rise is now way out of control. Their charts looked very much like the “adjustments” made in the chart above. All timed for the upcoming election. Unless we elect Hillary and fight climate change through carbon taxes and world socialism, we are doomed!
What an absolute farce and so incredibly corrupt!
I am glad Hermine was such a complete flop after so much hype.
Bam! You shot that down quick! Love that graph comparison.
An issue that doesn’t get enough attention is long-term plan for these adjustments:
When/if they finally get what they want they will simply adjust the data back to some semblance of reality and claim that they have healed the Earth……that somehow passing some law or enacting some treaty has lowered the temperatures and reduced the rate of sea level rise, when all along it war really ma-made…..by data manipulation.
B I N G O, That deserves repeating:
Glacierman said at 3:15 pm:
An issue that doesn’t get enough attention is long-term plan for these adjustments:
When/if they finally get what they want they will simply adjust the data back to some semblance of reality and claim that they have healed the Earth……that somehow passing some law or enacting some treaty has lowered the temperatures and reduced the rate of sea level rise, when all along it war really ma-made…..by data manipulation.
Until that happens, I can’t wait for them to adjust everything to a near vertical line and see how they explain that one.
Well at last, proof that GW is inflenced by man’s activities.
‘Scientists’ like Gavin’s manipulation of the raw measured data is to blame !!
In the second chart you – accidentally (I assume) – charted RSS-land against GIStemp global. You can’t compare a land-only data set against a global one and claim they are depicting the same thing. It’s dishonest.
gistemp-dts is their surface stations, which are their land only temperatures.
But thanks for your clueless, misinformed and dishonest statement. I’ve come to expect at least one of these on every thread.
My apologies, Tony, you are right. I was confusing GIStemp loti (which attempts to be global by including SSTs) with the dTs – which is land stations only. But when I went to verify your chart, I found that mine didn’t look like yours much. I definitely saw a difference in slope between the GIStemp dTs and the RSS land-only for the period specified, but the difference in slope and the difference in curves was nothing like what you depicted. I quickly realized what it was: the “mean:60” smoothing factor…
Now – if I apply the mean=60 smoothing I get your result…
Now, for laughs I said what if we make the smoothing mean=10 instead? Look at the slopes.
60 months == five year mean, which is how GISS normally represents their data.
Got it, thanks.
So, changing the smoothing changes the slopes. The GIStemp dTs shows a much higher slope with mean:60 and the RSS actually changes from a slight positive slope to a slight negative one. Why apply the mean:60 averaging? What’s your rationale?
Cross posted – I understand your rationale now. But a 5 year mean applied to a 19 year data set seems to exaggerate things.
Gosh Josh,
RSS, is a far more comprehensive temperature data set,that covers most of the worlds atmosphere and everyday.
If RSS says it is cooling since the start of the new century,then it is.
Sunsettommy – WoodForTrees offers both the global RSS mean and a land-only one. The latter is what is used in this blog post.
Josh,
RSS, doesn’t have any ground based data. It covers ONLY the atmosphere.
Please look at the chart in the OP. RSS for “land- only” areas is used.
Just as the GISS chart is. Why are you trying to pull the same scam again?
Clearly your work is having an impact Tony.
Through 2000-2012-2016 GISS added 0.9C of warming…just as the Pause was crucifying AGW theory right before the eyes of the world. Over 18 years of no warming and over 20 years of ‘no statistically significant’ warming was giving the Team sleepless nights.
They said 15 years of no warming would falsify AGW theory. They NEVER expected to ever get even close to that figure.
UK prof Phil Jones said ’15 years (of no warming) and we’re in trouble’. As the Pause sailed past 15 years that figure was promptly upped to 20 years!
US Ben Santer arbitrarily raised the bar from 15 to 17 years. (for no obvious reason)
The UK Met Office said (I paraphrase) ‘come back in 50 years’. ie…they weren’t for admitting ANY failure of the theory or models at any time, regardless of how they were comparing to real-world observations. ‘Scientists’, eh?
The Pause was never going to be allowed to get anywhere near the 30 year timeline that distinguishes climate from weather. That would’ve derailed the billion-dollar climate choo-choo express and we can’t have that.
Lo and behold, look how those 15-18 year timelines fit almost perfectly with the timing of the above adjustments – made just as the Pause was crashing through their own thresholds and thus annihilating their blessed theory on their own terms – in the process potentially trashing $multi-billion climate racket. Their response? Cook the books, fiddle the data, cheat, lie, adjust, corrupt the evidence and smear ALL opposition. Anything to keep the show on the road.
Truly, where’s ‘RICO’ when you need him?
Probably most of the overestimation of warming by GISS is due to improper treatment of the UHI and the increasing closure of rural stations.
The Climate Scammers use anything and everything to ‘increase warming’
TOBS = Time of Observation.
my comment:
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/01/06/fixing-the-past-at-the-ministry-of-truth/#comment-477742
Steve addresses TOBS in another manner:
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/?s=tobs
March of the Thermometers
my comment:
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/01/18/how-gavin-cheated-to-create-the-required-talking-point/#comment-482838
CONTINUED
UHI
New Study in winter 2015: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/18/new-urban-heat-island-study-shows-surprising-variation-in-air-temperatures/
Some parts of the Twin Cities can spike temperatures up to 9°F higher than surrounding communities thanks to the “urban heat island” effect, according to a new study from the University of Minnesota…. In urban areas during the winter when snow cover is less pervasive, temperatures are higher than rural areas in the daytime by an average of 2 °F.
They reckon the UHI in Peking is at least 3’C,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3002906/Electric-cars-combat-urban-heat-problem-study.html
E.M. Smith’s summary post: https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/summary-report-on-v1-vs-v3-ghcn/
The EFFECT:
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/01/08/ghcn-gistemp-interactions-the-bolivia-effect/
“Urban Island Heat” effect. NOAA and a rebuttal by Steve McIntyre
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/09/17/fake-adjustments-from-fake-scientists/#comment-424001
Roy Spenser on Heat Island Effect
paper: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/03/the-global-average-urban-heat-island-effect-in-2000-estimated-from-station-temperatures-and-population-density-data/
Las Vegas: Poster Child for the Urban Heat Island Effect – a good demonstration
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/06/las-vegas-poster-child-for-the-urban-heat-island-effect-updated-corrected/
As you can see from the above, whenever you do a ‘dig here’ on the explanations for the different adjustments you find a thin veneer covering a lie.
CONTINUED
This one is a real kick in the teeth to the CAGW conjecture.
Misunderstanding of the Global Temperature Anomaly from John Kehr
Add Steve Goddard’s damning bits of evidence.
“The most damning graph of all though is the one below, showing how NOAA (red) is cooling the past relative to their own thermometer data (blue)”
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/bgqd5wpcmaajkg3.png
“Before data tampering by NCDC, US temperatures show essentially zero correlation with atmospheric CO2. Climate sensitivity of zero.”
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/screenhunter_5685-dec-30-18-55.gif
“.. I tried correlating the magnitude of the tampering with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and found almost perfect correlation – shown below.”
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/screenhunter_3233-oct-01-22-59.gif
If R= 0.0 there is no correlation if R = 1.0 there is perfect correlation. Since the raw US temperature data shows NO CORRELATION with CO2 the correlation was put into the data using bogus adjustments!
At some point I just got so angry I can’t read this stuff any more. How can he get away with it? Complete mystery.
Tony, so write a Schmidt/GISS ‘dirty dossier’ and send it to all the world’s MSM Editors-in-Chiefs, so they are officially notified of absence of truth in his ‘work’ and the total unreliability of citing it. If they continue to peddle this stuff, they will do so knowingly and so be complicit.
Pingback: Understanding The “Hottest Year Evah” | Climatism
I wrote a while back on how their changes fly in the face of their asserted confidence intervals.
“Though climate scientists use complex mathematical formulas to justify changes to the temperature record and to justify the associated confidence intervals, simple arithmetic shows that either the former or the latter, or both, are wrong….”
http://www.elcore.net/ClimateSanity/GISTEMPsOverconfidenceIntervals.html