UPDATE: Repaired – see below
What happened to that image? Back in 1999, Dr. James Hansen of NASA penned a report on surface temperatures still located on their servers. However, the critical figure for the report, a GIF image, has mysteriously become garbled. Steve Goddard has the back-story at his blog Real Science: “Data Corruption at GISS”
In 1999, Hansen wrote a report which was largely inconsistent with his current claims. Twelve years ago he understood that the US climate was hotter and more extreme in the 1930s. He also knew that 1934 was the hottest year in the US.
Steve McIntyre of ClimateAudit discussed part of the issue with GISS data adjustments back in 2007 with a post here at WUWT, see:
Regardless, help NASA fix this “clerical” error, as the original image exists all over the internet:
UPDATE: Steve Goddard reports that it has been repaired:
It now has the original file date, too. I’d sure like to know who modified the file on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 at 6:33:14 PM.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It’s climate burtation.
Ryan, you are a ‘real’ academic and yet you think a messed-up graphic on an old web page is redolent of corruption, and deserving of an email barrage to the GISS? This is pathetic.
Glad you are covering this! Just read about it at Steven Goddard’s site after seeing it mentioned in a comment at Delingpole’s.
This seems to be a “smoking gun” that anyone can understand.
Did anyone aware of this just contact GISS and let then know that a file on their server appears to be damaged?
E-mail: James.E.Hansen@nasa.gov
Phone: (212) 678-5500
You forgot the contact info!!
Do they get yet another mulligan?
The Iconoclast has a most excellent post about this on Steve’s blog……………..
Have you sent a note to the website curator?
I just did, informing him of this blogpost and the corrupted figure 1 in the article.
Just out of curiousity, I used a “page freshness” tool to look at the file for the figure,
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/fig1x.gif
It responds with “The server indicates that the page was last modified: 01/18/2011 15:33:14”
I’m sure NASA will quickly correct this minor technical glitch.
I’d suggest using the same Y-axis on the two graphs. Makes comparisons easier.
Bad spot on the disk. Not all that uncommon on images that stick around for a long, long time. Somebody emailing them about it might be a bit more productive, however.
was this a trick to hide the decline………………..
…..or just a travesty
Are NASA hoping that we’ll forget the graphic ever existed?
Do they think that by removing it from their site, that we will no longer remember it?
Remember what?
What site?
Who are they?
As the headpost says, click on the link to Steve Goddard’s website for the backstory on this.
I’m surprised that the article here on WUWT doesn’t include the key graphic: a blink comparator GIF file showing what was in the article for US temps vs the current revised historical temps: http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/1998changesannotated.gif?w=500&h=355&h=355
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/1998changesannotated.gif?w=500&h=355&h=35d
fredT says:
February 15, 2011 at 10:51 am
Ryan, you are a ‘real’ academic and yet you think a messed-up graphic on an old web page is redolent of corruption, and deserving of an email barrage to the GISS? This is pathetic.
=======================================================
I don’t know Fred. It’s been this way for almost a month. It isn’t the original image file. It’s a different one. It seems that on both sides of the pond, they are playing with the websites. Moving things, changing stuff, altering original files. You don’t think things like this matter? That’s fine. Personally, I’m not fond of my government entities sending anything down the memory hole. And, if there are changes of information that warrants a change in the graphics, I want it annotated and explained. This is what we pay them for. I’m truly sorry you don’t see things in this manner.
All is right with the world. The image has now been restored.
It reports a modification time of Fri 27 Aug 1999 01:20:25 BST. This means the anybody who has loaded the “bad image” may keep on getting it served up from their cache (or proxies cache) as the bad image has a later timestamp
Mike86 : “I’d suggest using the same Y-axis on the two graphs. Makes comparisons easier.”
Indeed. The current presentation is chartsmanship at it’s best. It may not be ‘hiding the decline’ but it is definitely ‘making the increase seem bigger than it actually is’.
geo says:
February 15, 2011 at 11:26 am
Bad spot on the disk. Not all that uncommon on images that stick around for a long, long time. Somebody emailing them about it might be a bit more productive, however.
=======================================================
I think the e-mailing has already been done. I like your generous approach to image file. However, I’m fairly sure it is a different .gif file altogether rather than a corruption of the old one. A commenter on Steve’s blog has the details.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/data-corruption-at-giss/#comment-37899
fredT says:
February 15, 2011 at 10:51 am
Ryan, you are a ‘real’ academic and yet you think a messed-up graphic on an old web page is redolent of corruption, and deserving of an email barrage to the GISS? This is pathetic.
############
Fred, i’ve been “defended” or rather trying to explain how changes in the data used for the chart made in 1999 and the algorithm used for the chart made in 1999, are responsible for the change. Basically, Hansen used a different algorithm in the 1999 paper and he used different data. Both the quality of the data and the quality of the algorithm improved. Of course the answer is different. And of course Steven and others have not listened to somebody who actually lobbied to have hansens code released. Of course they havent listened to somebody who has read the papers, read the code, and run the code. Having said all that, it disturbs me a bit that NASA is quiet about this. Hansen could well explain the reason far better than I can. But he wont. And now this.
For the Y-axis challenged:
Look at 1930………and look at the black dots
In light of the information given by the commentator Iconoclast, over at Mr. Goddard’s place, it appears to me that an appropriate response to this so-called “corruption” of a .gif file is <b"GOTCHA!".
Bugger! Missed the >. “GOTCHA
James Sexton–
Well, well. In the words of the immortal Arte Johnson –“Veeeeeery interesting.”
Personally I find this posting very offensive in the use of innuendo and implied accusation of deliberate foul play, on the basis of zero evidence. Whereas on the one hand there is the cry for engagement and reconciliation etc., on the other hand there’s this stuff which just serves to alienate and reinforce the polarization.
Poor showing Ryan, is my view.
Is the first image what they mean when they talk about “Climate Disruption”?