NASA ConfIrms Their Own “Conspiracy Theory”

NASA and NOAA have been erasing the 1940s warmth in the Eastern Arctic for decades. This is what the raw data looks like.

V2 Measured

And this is what the adjusted data has looked like in various versions of GISTEMP.

V2 Adjusted

May 2018 Measured Vs. Adjusted

    

Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

Removing the warmth of the 1940s (without any justification) was discussed by the world’s leading climate experts in this Climategate email.

di2.nu/foia/1254108338.txt

In 2012, Paul Homewood contacted Trausti Jónsson of the Icelandic Met Office about these adjustments, and they were soundly rejected.

Another GISS miss, this time in Iceland | Watts Up With That?

In November, 2016, Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts queried Gavin Schmidt at NASA about the adjustments.

“In Australia, we have considerable concern about temperature adjustments made by NASA over many years,” Senator Roberts wrote, including charts from Icelandic stations at Vestmannaeyjar and Teigarhorn.

“In dropping the temperatures for the early period, the [Arctic] warmth for the 1930s and 1940s appears to have been removed,” he said. “What is your specific reason for doing this?”

Gavin Schmidt responded by insulting Senator Roberts, and saying that they don’t alter the data. Trausti Jónsson of the Icelandic Met Office magically reversed his story, saying the adjustments were “quite sound.”

NASA chief slaps down climate sceptic senator Malcolm Roberts: ‘You hold a number of misconceptions’

Gavin also said that NASA data isn’t theirs, it is actually NOAA data, and that they don’t take responsibility for it.

robertsnasags.pdf

Three years later, the Canberra Times has since removed this story from their website, and NASA and NOAA have quietly stopped tampering with Iceland’s temperatures – thus confirming what they actually were removing the 1940s warmth without justification.

Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (v4)

Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (v4)

Gavin told Senator Roberts they use NOAA data, yet the NASA web site claims that their data is independent, and that is proof that their graphs are real.

2018 fourth warmest year in continued warming trend, according to NASA, NOAA – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Evidence of climate fraud by leading government agencies is readily available all over the Internet. By using the term “conspiracy theory” – climate alarmists hope to keep people from looking at what is happening right in front of their faces.

Australian MP Craig Kelly also has pointed out to me that the thermometer at Reykjavik is located immediately adjacent to lots of asphalt and traffic.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to NASA ConfIrms Their Own “Conspiracy Theory”

  1. Robertv says:

    If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test

  2. Disillusioned says:

    Gotta love the ‘our data corroborates NOAA’s,’ when all along it was NOAA’s.

    It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.

  3. John Must says:

    Love your efforts to thwart the mis-information out there. While I love the graphs and data (I’m an engineer) the newspaper clippings and historical stories may be more palitable to the general public. Here’s an article from the Globe and Mail newspaper, Canada, thats related to health bunk but the same lessons would apply to climate bunk. Check it out. Anything that might get through to more people is worth at try.

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-to-win-the-fight-against-health-and-wellness-bunk-we-must-leave-the/

  4. Bob Hoye says:

    Very good detective work.

  5. John F. Hultquist says:

    The photo of the Reykjavik weather station, a street corner, is not the correct location.
    Should be 64°07.648′, 21°54.166′ (64.1275, 21.9028).

    This does not change the statement made about it,
    just that it is off by about 700 yards.
    The nearby (80 yds.) building is the Icelandic Met Office.

  6. Gator says:

    Looks like the station is located here…

    64°07’39.0″N 21°54’09.9″W

    Clearly UHI corrupted.

  7. Jan Goffa says:

    We owe you a nobel price.

  8. KevinPaul says:

    I would be very fearful if I were they, with climate mythology followers morphing into more sinister emotion fueled anarchist eco-thugs, the hydra will most certainly turn on its prophets & apostles and devour them.
    Revolution has its twists, Maximilien Robespierre comes to mind.

  9. Digger says:

    Good post Tony. Only bone to pick would be the precision of the coordinates on that last image showing the lat-lon of the Reykjavik thermometer. As nicely illustrated by XKCD (https://www.xkcd.com/2170/), using one decimal precision is what to use to point out something around the resolution of a city. In other words, that thermometer could be anywhere– “21.9W” is not very precise. So, it may or may not be right next to a highway.

    • tonyheller says:

      Nice rant. NASA reports it at Lat: 64.1331 Lon: -21.9000

      • Jim Church says:

        Tony, always appreciate you blog and posts. However I would confirm what Gator says below about the location of the Reykjavik station. It clearly shows up on Google Earth at that location.

    • Gator says:

      It’s here…

      64°07’39.0″N 21°54’09.9″W

      • Pål Elnan says:

        Looks like Gator is correct. The station is visible on Google Maps on those coordinates, and from Street View (from the road south of the station).

        More than 300 feet from the highway.

  10. Tyrannosaurus Rex says:

    Now that is how conspiracies are supposed to be, none of that tinfoil nonsense.

  11. Sir Gawain says:

    Interesting post, Tony. Truasti Jonsoon is quoted in the the Canberra Times articles as supplying this justification for the temperature adjustments, though:
    “During this early period there was a large daytime bias in the temperature data from Iceland as presented in this publication,” which accounted for much of the “discrepancy” at Teigarhorn and less so at Vestmannaeyjar, Mr Jonsoon said.
    For the latter station, it was relocated in October 1921 to a higher elevation. “Comparative measurements at both sites have shown that the later location is about 0.7 degrees Celsius colder than the former – this relocation has to be ‘adjusted’ for…I assure you that these adjustments are absolutely necessary and well founded although the finer details of the resulting series shown in your letter differ slightly from my own version,” he told Senator Roberts.”
    In principal, this sounds reasonable – akin to calibrating different devices – but what what are the caveats of this kind of temperature-record adjustment?

    • Martin says:

      That to me seems very reasonable as an adjustment.

      How dare you bring logic into an argument like that :) The conspiracy nuts won’t like this.

  12. eileen schulte says:

    Why are the YT comments turned off?

  13. BigAl says:

    Hi Tony

    Good post. Restating my query here, which hasn’t been answered.

    Truasti Jonsoon does give an explanation for the T adjustment (as below) – how is this not a reasonable explanation?

    “”During this early period there was a large daytime bias in the temperature data from Iceland as presented in this publication,” which accounted for much of the “discrepancy” at Teigarhorn and less so at Vestmannaeyjar, Mr Jonsoon said.
    For the latter station, it was relocated in October 1921 to a higher elevation. “Comparative measurements at both sites have shown that the later location is about 0.7 degrees Celsius colder than the former – this relocation has to be ‘adjusted’ for,” he said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.