1975 National Academy Of Sciences Report
The 1975 National Academy of Sciences report showed a large amount of warming in the northern hemisphere from 1880 to 1940, followed by an almost equally large amount of cooling to 1970.
NASA has since removed most of the 1940’s warmth and subsequent cooling.
The graph below overlays the NASA graph on the NAS graph. NASA has cooled the past, and the 1940’s blip has been completely removed. Also note that the NAS Y-axis is not perfectly linear. I aligned the graphs to match full scale.
The NAS report also showed a sharp cooling from 1958 to 1963. NASA has completely removed this cooling.
NOAA showed this same cooling in both surface and radiosonde temperatures.
At the time, there was 100% consensus among scientists that Earth was cooling. NASA has erased the unanimous consensus.
Glaciers in Norway were growing for the first time in 200 years.
18 Jul 1963 – Glaciers Grow In Norway
The destruction of the temperature record did not happen accidentally. Climate scientists planned this out, and executed exactly to plan.
Government climate scientists have demonstrated over and over again that they can’t be trusted with models or data. Even alarmist Carl Mears acknowledges that the models don’t work.
Note that after 1998, the observations are likely to be below the simulated values, indicating that the simulation as a whole are predicting too much warming.
That email shows a conscious attempt to fabricate figures to change the recorded record. What kind of legitimate scientist does that, Gavin????
Historically, the migration of ‘official’ weather observations from the city to the airports occurred during the period from 1956 through 1968, for the most part. This could have moved temperature measurements out of the ‘urban heat island’ for a period of time. Then, new construction around the airports re-established the heat islands again. Example O’Hare was originally located away from Chicago in an agricultural area, then surrounded by new cities like Bensonville, Schiller Park and Des Plains about 10 miles deep by the 1980s. The call letters KORD are from the airport’s original name Orchard Airport. It is an example of many locations throughout the country during the 1950s to 1970s. In the ASOS era, relocations of sensors on the airports have had similar effects.
NOAA showed the same cooling with radiosonde data. Do you you think the glaciers in Norway were faking it?
These sort of rationalizations always astonish me.
The email refers to reducing the blip on *ocean* temperatures. How many airports and urban heat islands are you suggesting exist in the ocean?
It also references land, but that would require some actual reading on your part.
First, my reply was to James.
Second, I am well aware that it references land. Possibly I am misunderstanding the point of James post. I have seen precisely the “heat island” argument being used for lowering past temperatures to artificially create a warming trend. I interpreted his post to argue that moving observation locations away from the heat islands was the explanation for the decline in the period he references.
But observations are similar on both land and ocean, making that argument a bit silly.
If I misunderstood the point of his post I apologize. I am not sure why you are quite so offended, as I believe I am in fundamental agreement with you that past actual observations are preferable to going back 50+ years and deciding to change the data.
And the adjustments made for those relocations causes an exaggerated warming over time because the UHI effect is greatest for the initial change from rural to urban. This is shown in Zhang(2014) ‘Effect of data homogenization on estimate of temperature trend: a case of Huairou station in Beijing Municipality’. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00704-013-0894-0/fulltext.html
Here is Figure 6: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/zhang_et_al_homogenization_china_fig6.png .
Yeah Tony, you’ve posted this smoking gun example of dishonesty many times now. It really should spark an intensive congressional investigation since congress is looking at committing to a huge effort to combat climate change. But until this appears in the popular press that’s not going to happen. Even if President Trump’s department heads bring these facts up in testimony, it still requires the press to report them. Rooting out what amounts to a religion isn’t going to be easy.
Steve Do not forget Trump now bypasses the MSM routinely. He goes direct to the American people via Twitter and Facebook. I would not be surprised if he also starts doing ‘fireside chats’ like FDR did.
With the MSM losing control of WHAT the masses actually get for information it will be harder to keep gaslighting the public. Rasmussen Reports has already shown that people are NOT willing to pay any more for ‘Climate Change’ mitigation. Trump can easily work with that. Do you really think the inner city and union types who are out of work really give a rat’s behind about CAGW??
Voters Won’t Back Their Global Warming Worries With Cash
Voters Won’t Back Their Global Warming Worries With Cash
OOPs this is the second link.
Americans Still Unwilling To Save Environment With Their Wallets
Don’t forget the Progressives like to spend OTHER PEOPLE”S MONEY and not their own. When it comes to their own pocket they are very stingy compared to Conservatives.
So did Obama. Does anyone listen to the President’s Saturday morning radio talk. The internet has made a difference, that’s for sure. But a lot of people still get their news from ABC CBS NBC CNN NPR etc. Until some reality shows up on those venues there won’t be a lot of change. I’ve been saying we are in for some very interesting times, but mostly there is going to be an incredibly ugly fight between the Trump administration and the so-called mainstream media.
Do you really think the inner city and union types who are out of work really give a rat’s behind about CAGW??
You’ve reminded me, a while back at the grocery store the lady who’s my age is my packing grocery bag, asks “Paper or plastic” I said, “Plastic, let’s save a tree today.” Without missing a beat she said, “I don’t believe in that shit.”
AHHhh
But Trump is entertaining and tries to talk in a language normal people can understand.
Also if the MSM tries to lie they may be in a world of hurt. Trump has already suggested he wants to hold the press to higher standards of truth and with the ‘Fake News’ crap hitting congress, the press may just find they walked into a large trap.
These AGW scientist who did this need to be prosecuted for fraud and misrepresentation. The costs they have imposed on present day society are huge!
Yes. They need to be in prison.
Likely not!
The simple metric of air temperature was not meant for the purpose to which it has been applied.
Movements, drop-outs, changes in instruments, additions, and in-filling have intensified the “not fit for purpose” aspects.
The real offenses have been made by the likes of Maurice Strong (dead) and Paul Ehrlich (~85). James Hansen is 75. Then there are folks such as Al Gore and John Kerry, younger and non-scientists. Politicians won’t be held accountable. Next are those that established the UN creed of ‘man is responsible’ and nothing else matters – investigate that and that only. Who are those people?
Then governments and foundations provide the money (lots and lots of money) and research and papers follow. The edifice grows uncontrolled. It would be easy for any of the underlings to say, simply, I did what I thought was good at the time I did it.
We (The World) face very serious problems. For example: By 2050, Germany’s working age population will shrink 23%, Russia and China’s by 21%. Then there is the are the Sunnis and Shiites divide, and the Islam versus the West divide. Western governments have plenty to deal with, without a sideshow of taking dozens of “climate scientists” to court. I don’t think anyone will go to jail or be flogged.
What Tony Heller, Jo Nova, Paul Homewood, and others are doing is the best solution. Daily, Tony shows how these folks have made fools of themselves. Some will die, others will drop out, and still others will be repurposed.
While the World moves on.
A potential impediment to legal justice could be the reluctance of Trump to pursue ‘criminal’ action against climate scientists who were on the US gov’t payroll, because that could open up vast compensation cases, met by the US taxpayer. I’m just speculating there)
Without a doubt these guys deserve to be in jail and because of the US plea bargaining culture the threat of a 30-stretch may well focus some older minds. Shall we say 2 years and out in 12 months if you co-operate, Mr Hansen/Schmidt/Mann/Mears/Karl….et al? (A full confession of data manipulation or ‘errors’ is all Trump needs to irrevocably declare AGW theory DEAD.) Who’d crack first, eh? That could be a VERY positive source of information on the behaviour of some of the biggest players on the Team.
You are correct the say politicians will not be held responsible and neither will the major media. If for example, it becomes clear that AGW is wrong and the people are more and more convinced they’ve been played for fools, the politicians and the media will turn on the alarmists and begin pointing fingers at Hanson and Schmidt and say they trusted these scientists, because they were scientists in climatology. How could they know these “scientists” were fudging the data?
Schmidt should worry, his buddies in Washington will prosecute him to the fullest to cover for themselves.
Never understood why these days a shrinking working age population should be a problem. We need less people to fabricate more stuff. Just look at agriculture where 2% of the population can feed the rest.
The problem is not production but TAXES. Less people means less tax revenue.
That means cutting out all the fat in the budget AND sticking the criminals for the trillions in debt THEY ran up instead of the US tax payer.
In 2015, Iceland sentenced dozens of bankers to a combined 74 years in Jail. In the USA tax payers got to foot the bill for the bank bailout while bankers ended up getting large bonuses.
No one had any fingers pointed at them.
Goldman Sachs Had Bigger Role in AIG – WSJ
Funny, Goldman Sachs was also lurking behind the 2008 Food Crisis. How Goldman Sachs Created the Food Crisis
So why in heck should tax payers get stuck with the bills Goldman Sachs runs up when they make gambles… AND lose?
Gavin cannot be sleeping well.
That Wigley email where he says they need to eliminate the entire “1940s blip” *is* the smoking gun that strongly suggests that ALL their data manipulations are fraudulent and serve only their partisan purpose.
With the 1940s cooling blip restored, and all their fraudulent “adjustments” eliminated, and accounting made for the overwhelming head island effect, it’s becoming clear that, worldwide, the 1930s were hotter than today. That makes the whole global warming theory a ludicrous joke.
I wonder if the Trump Administration has the balls to revise these phony charts that show hockey stick warming?
I believe the word you are looking for is “correct”, as in “correct these phony charts”. We have all had more than enough revisionism of late.
Every Australian knows you can’t believe a word that comes out of Canberra !
A cancer is no problem as long as it is small.
Tony,
This figure of yours isn’t quite right, meaning it isn’t an apples to apples comparison:
https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Screen-Shot-2017-01-10-at-7.15.39-AM-2.gif
The NAS graph is clearly one of LAND data, not land+ocean (which is a much more recent temperature product).
Here is NAS 1975 versus GISTEMP LOTI 2017, NH LAND (1200 km smoothing), annual means:
https://okulaer.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/screen-shot-2017-01-10-at-6-48-48-am1.gif
As you can see, what GISS have done is rather flattened the originally dropping 1940-1970 trend, so that around 1970, their graph lies about 0.3 degrees higher than the original.