By Steve Goddard
From reading the press and some blogs, one would think that the hot week in early July on the middle Atlantic seaboard was a rare or unprecedented event. Some believe that the weather used to be perfect before the invention of the soccer mom.
One of my favorite stories growing up was told by my New York relatives. The reason why movie matinées became very popular during the 1930s was because movie theatres were the only place that was air conditioned. People would go to the theatre just to get out of the oppressive heat. I tend to trust historical accounts from reliable sources, but for those who want data – keep reading.
Prior to being corrupted adjusted in the year 2000, this is what the GISS US temperature graph looked like.
The 1930s was by far the hottest decade. After being “adjusted” in the year 2000, it magically changed shape. The 1990s became much warmer. 1998 added almost half a degree – ex post facto.
The video below shows (in reverse) how the graph was rotated in the year 2000. Older temperatures became colder, and newer temperatures became warmer.
Rewriting history is not a good approach to science. It was very hot during the 1930s, as anyone who lived through it can tell you. Someday Hollywood will make a blockbuster movie about the global warming hysteria of the early 21st century.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ted,
What is the source of your blink map? The 199os temperatures in the base graph had already been adjusted upwards considerably from the one I used :
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/fig1x.gif
It appears that there was an intermediate adjustment prior to 2000.
Re Mike says: July 23, 2010 at 6:06 am
“Feb. 16, 2010: Urban adjustment is now based on global nightlights rather than population as discussed in a paper in preparation.”
Doesn’t that rather contradict your earlier statement that:
“If you think the adjustments where wrong you need to present your analysis of the methods used.”
So until this mythical nightlight paper is revealed to the world, then that method used is unknown, other than the way it appears to amplify warming. Then we could perhaps compare IR imagery of urban night scenes to visible light, and question whether it’s a reasonable way to adjust temperature. If it’s not lit, it must be rural, and ignore councils/local governments that are helping save the planet, energy and light polution by turning lights off at night.
In a recent talk on climate that I gave I had the following as a PowerPoint slide:
**********
HELP IS ON THE WAY…..
Authorities realized that the existing U.S. temperature network was faulty.
A new U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) of 114 stations was set up by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
**********
The new network is guaranteed to have sensors located in good positions. The problem is that we will have to wait a further 30 – 50 years to know what is REALLY happening with the US climate. (And that this averages only two sensors per state.)
IanM
Josh Grella says:
July 23, 2010 at 6:35 am
Mike says:
July 23, 2010 at 6:06 am
You are obviously new to this blog.
I will leave with this parting question for you, though. Why is it that all of Hansen’s adjustments tend to make the pre-1970s temps colder and post-1970s temps warmer?
———————————————————————————-
Because it is correct? Do you have proof that it isn’t?
Mr. Goddard,
If you were to ask me, I would say that you should have presented an overlay with the axes clearly marked to indicate to which data set each belongs. I presume from the text that the data were rotated counter-clockwise but the movie and the depicted overlay (on the movie link) imply a clockwise rotation. In fact, the movie uses a clockwise rotation and, to anyone such as myself who is used to time progressing from THEN to NOW, the impression is the later temperatures which are being lowered. I doubt you intended that.
PS. The 1930 temperatures (among others) do not coincide under any rotation and cannot be explained by it. Try grabbing the slider and wiggle it back and forth to see what I mean.
Mike
Presumably you are a proponent of the tradtional school of climate alarmist thought: “If the data does not support the model or theory, then the data needs to be changed,”
Sam the Skeptic says:
July 23, 2010 at 6:37 am
It is about finding the money to pay the national debt.
Even if it was cooling, it would be blamed on CO2.
It is a win, win game.
davidklein40
What am I doing? I am spotting questionable and unreliable science.
Most companies go to great lengths to get their bugs out before releasing a product. In climate science, they have nothing but a sloppy and incestuous “peer review” process. Can you imagine if a corporate accountant made an after-the-fact adjustment like that? He would end up in court.
Sam the Skeptic says:
July 23, 2010 at 6:37 am
Mike — you may be right (and then again …)
I don’t know whether climate science is a con because I’m not a scientist; I do know that what the climate scientists do with figures bears more than a passing resemblance to the old street con-trick called ‘Find the Lady’!
————————————————————————————
So, what about the (few) sceptical scientists, all above board?
You mean the ‘dust bowl’ years were the hottest years – how can that be? Are you not aware of the climate change narrative – you are bursting their bubble of literally ‘hot air’
I much prefer Anthony’s blink comparator; really drives the point home.
Here’s an idea:
Send a copy of the blink comparator to Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-WI, so he can do a follow-up on his amendment calling for a report from NASA on their data integrity. (See: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/22/while-cap-and-trade-dies-nasa-giss-gets-a-congressional-amendment/ ). Tack on some visual aids, such as photos of that quality station in Carefree, AZ.
stephen richards says:
July 23, 2010 at 6:44 am
Mike
It doesn’t matter how much BS you throw at it altering historical data is a criminal scientific act.
————————————————————————————
A criminal scientific act? You use the word altering (with sinister connotation) while adjusting is the proper word. Have you any data to prove that data was ‘altered’ to create a false result? Are you aware that this is about US temperatures and not global.
GISTEMP Movie Matinées
Posted on July 23, 2010 by Anthony Watts
By Steve Goddard
————————————————————————————-
Can you provide the source data for the graph in the video and who produced the graph.
Scott B says:
July 23, 2010 at 6:50 am
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.B.lrg.gif
Is that it?
Northern Latitutes up 1.2 C in 110 years.
Low Latititudes up 0.6 C in 110 years.
Southern Latitudes up 0.8 C in 110 years.
Seriously, that’s the warming we’ve seen? And this is supposed to be a crisis? Even if I accept that Hansen’s adjustments are all perfectly reasonable, that is not enough warming for me to worry about. Is this a joke? Haha, very funny. You had me going for while…
———————————————————————————–
Yes, you should worry. Excess energy is stored in the oceans and they will remind us for hundreds of years to come.
Steve et al,
If you don’t understand why the adjustments where made, do some research and find out. I did not say you where wrong, I said you had no basis for your claim. (I suspect you are wrong, but I have not shown that.)
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/
Figures on this page were prepared by Dr. Makiko Sato. Please address questions about the figures to Dr. Sato or to Dr. James Hansen.
See also:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/ushcn/
If I needed money to investigate some dubious issue, Hansen would be the man to contact, no doubt. Like e.g. the bacteria flora around the rectum of the Polar Mice.
But would I buy an “Old, Used Climate Model” from him? No, I dont think so.
http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2010/03/hansenist-climate-alarmism
FREEZING on the North Yorkshire moors in yesterday’s fieldwork (for a July afternoon, one would never imagine that this is the hottest year ever on Planet Earth). I noticed that the photos of the Lion Inn near Westerdale from the very cold years of the 1960’s had record snows (up to the roof level)-this during years with highly negative North Atlantic Oscillation indices (cf. also AO, PDO, etc.). Just some weather notes from over here….
Why do GWrs. statistics graphs always end in the year 2000?…
Mike says:
July 23, 2010 at 6:06 am
Mike, everyone here would love to see exactly that: The true RAW data, and an explanation of every single adjustment or algorithm applied to it; Not just at GISS, but NOAA as well. Just because Hansen penned out a “reason” for the “adjustment” doesn’t mean anything. Those of us who’ve followed this know exactly the monkey business that seems to pervade those “adjustments”.
Mike: July 23, 2010 at 6:06 am
Feb. 16, 2010: Urban adjustment is now based on global nightlights rather than population as discussed in a paper in preparation.
The tree-rings were proven to be a lousy proxy for temperature, so now they’re using lumens, regardless if the source is incandescent, phosphorescent, fluorescent, bioluminescent, low-intensity sodium, LED, or photon torpedoes — because all those sources radiate at the exact same temperature…
*a-hem*
The exagerated application of adjustments will become unsustainable.
When the charts say we are 5 degrees warmer in 2020, which is what they will need to say to maintain current trend, but the snow still falls in winter and the glaciers still grow and shrink, … then this cult will be put to rest.
All I needed to know was that the GISS adjustment for Urban Heat Island effect INCREASED the recent temperature anomalies. That, folks, is the wrong way. If I am wrong on this, would somebody please explain why.
Then I looked at the monthly average temperatures published by Hadley, the HadCRU temperatures, for 80-plus cities in the lower 48 states in the USA, and found that there was essentially zero warming. I don’t think even Hadley would dare manipulate those temperatures since those are very easy to check. But anomalies are far easier to fudge. I posted the 80-plus temperature graphs on my blog.
What little warming is to be found is due to what I call the Abilene Effect, where unusually cold winters in the late 1970s and early 1980s, followed by normal temperatures give the appearance of a warming trend.
Maureen Matthew says:
July 23, 2010 at 7:03 am
You mean the dust bowl years were the hottest years how can that be?
How much asphalt did they have back then?
What no sprinkler systems for the crops as well?
This is what Sensenbrenner should be going after.
davidklein40 says:
I don’t believe this is your real name but however, The 2 datasets that steve uses are the official ones, correct? They have been altered historically as steve proves, correct ? Altering historical data, when I was a commercial researcher, was a criminal act punishable by a fine or prison and lose of job and pension.
N’importe quoi la raison être it is illegal, steve has proven the fact using your data. BS and strawmen aside it is indisputable.