Massive retrospective alterations have been made to surface air temperatures by GISS, one of the main global databases run by the U.S. space agency NASA. Professor Ole Humlum has discovered that in the period January 1915 to January 2000, GISS changed past warming from 0.45°C to 0.67°C. This was a massive increase of 49%, which meant that almost half of the apparent warming in most of the 20th century was due to administrative changes made years after the initial measurements. On such evidence is the need for a global Net Zero collectivisation being promoted.
In his recently published 2023 climate report, Humlum notes that clearly such adjustments are important when evaluating the overall quality of the various temperature records. But such ‘evaluation’ is entirely missing from most mainstream media and science. It would seem they are afraid to question organisations such as the U.K. Met Office which collect corrupted data from unsuitable monitoring sites and regularly adjust the records on a retrospective basis. The lack of investigative inquiry points to the central role that temperatures play in terrifying populations to accept the appalling lifestyle changes needed to achieve Net Zero in less than 30 years.
If the adjustments showed rises and falls spread evenly throughout the record, suspicions about the practice would be considerably less. But almost invariably the changes cool a past period and warm the subsequent record to the present day. Humlum provides the graph below to show the accumulated effect of administrative changes made since May 2008 to the GISS global surface air temperature record, which extends back to 1880. The blue lines show where historic temperature measurements have been adjusted downwards and the red lines where they have been adjusted upwards, just in the last 16 years.
The massive adjustments made can be clearly seen with overall changes between –0.2°C to +0.2°C. Massive cooling has been forced into the record from around 1900 up to the 1970s and substantial heating added over the last 50 years. GISS is not alone in adjusting its database in this fashion. ‘Hockey sticks’ tend to rule in the world of climate science activism. The Met Office runs a similar global collection called HadCRUT, and in the last decade it has made two substantial revisions adding around 30% extra warming to the recent record. In doing so it removed an inconvenient temperature pause from around 2000 to 2012, a pause still visible in the satellite record.
Emeritus Professor Ole Humlum is a distinguished physical geographer and his annual climate report is a welcome antidote to the politicised and biased narrative found in the mainstream. He notes that the complex climate has remained in a quasi-stable condition within certain limits for millions of years. “Modern observations show that this normal behaviour is also characterising recent years, including 2023, and there is no observational evidence for any global climate crisis.” Believing that one minor constituent of the atmosphere, carbon dioxide, controls nearly all aspects of climate is “naïve and entirely unrealistic”, he adds.
The great service that Humlum does every year is to put recent weather and climate events into much needed perspective. Arctic air temperatures have increased since 1979, but Antarctica recordings have remained essentially stable. The largest warming of the oceans at about 0.2°C is in the upper 100 metres, and mainly in the regions near the equator where the influence of the sun is most pronounced. Since 2004, the northern oceans between 55°-65°N have, on average, experienced a marked cooling down to 1,400m, and slight warming below that. Across the globe, the upper 1,900m of the ocean has seen net warming of about 0.037°C.
Global precipitation varies widely across the planet, from one year to the next and from decade to decade, “but since 1901 there has been no clear overall trend”. Storms and hurricanes display variable frequencies over time, but without any clear global trend towards higher or lower values. Global snow cover has remained “essentially stable” from the start of the satellite observation era in 1979, although with important regional and seasonal variations. Global sea ice extent has been quasi-stable since 2018, “perhaps even exhibiting a small increase”. Air temperatures in 2023 were noted to be the highest on record – since 1850, 1880 or 1979, according to the particular data series – but recent warming is not symmetrical and is mainly seen in the northern hemisphere.
To conclude, it might be added that the northern hemisphere is where a lot of the naturally warmer land is to be found, and where many of the urban-heat-corrupted, and frequently boosted, temperature measurements are sourced.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
There is no debate to be had this is a scam perpetrated by the Marxist left to kill the market economy. I’m sick of being polite to or about the opposition when they are the ones reordering society for the worse on the back of palpable nonsense. Reasoned debate with psychopaths is not actually possible as they consider rational ppl Nazis or something. Here’s how mad it is, they even pay for some clown on here to put the “other side” (hi mtf) here in the daily sceptic comments section, yet where is the other side on the BBC etc?
The one good thing about that “other side” that you suggest might be a plant is that the absurdity is there for all to see. I am surprised there are actually not a few more of those hurling abuse at all the “deniers”.
Ok so people get very concerned about things like 2 pence on a loaf of bread. They worry over an increase in council tax, they hate when beer goes up or when a tenner is added to their weekly shop etc etc. ——-Trust me all of that is a drop in the ocean. The great big Elephant in the room is NET ZERO. This policy was waved through parliament with no debate and no vote by our Pretend to Save the Planet Political class. It is costing us collectively several TRILLIONS. The excuse for this is the manufactured science of “Climate Change” . ——Imagine if some “science” all funded by the Fossil Fuel Industry came to the conclusion that global warming was not really much of a problem and nothing to worry about. The entire Climate Industrial Complex would scream blue murder. They would spit blood from their eyes that the Fossil Fuel Industry had an agenda and was simply using science to protect it’s profits. ————-But hold it right there. What makes these same people think government has no AGENDA? ————Ofcoures they do. It is called Sustainable Development. This is the idea that emanates from the UN that there needs to be a world government of unelected technocrats managing all of the worlds wealth and resources. In order to get away with this you need a very plausible excuse. That excuse is “Climate Change”, and as we see in this article and all of the others by Chris Morrison and in hundreds of reports and books it is a largely manufactured problem in support of the Politics I just mentioned. ——So people worrying about their future prosperity should focus entirely on this FRAUD and realise that Chancellors tinkering about the edges in budgets where they give you 10 pence here and take away 15 pence there pales into insignificance as long as this Eco Socialism masquerading as science is being imposed on us.
Agree entirely and beautifully put, small quibble I prefer eco Marxism to eco socialism but I’m splitting hairs.
Funnily enough the term “Cultural Marxism” is used often by me on this site. But it is actually a broader term including things like Race, Gender, Equality etc, whereas Eco Socialism is a term more targeted to the issue of climate, since it is about wealth and resources and how those are distributed. ——I give you the example from a lead author at the IPCC Ottmar Edenhoffer “One has to free oneself from the illusion that climate policies are environmental policies anymore. We redistribute the worlds wealth by climate policy” —–Which is why I prefer to call it Eco Socialism
Yes ok, it’s collectivism, IE a cult leader is stealing “on behalf” of the plebs off the plebs.
Well lets focus on the SCAM rather than what we might call the SCAM.
It is a complete scam. A shameful one. Hucksterism.
wink
So it turns out that most of the warming has actually been in the adjustments. But even then the claimed 1 C rise in “global temperature” since about 1860 (whatever that is supposed to mean) actually means that temperature has been quite stable over that 160 year period. And ofcourse half of that alleged warming could not have been caused by humans as we were not emitting that much CO2 till after the second world war. So all of the fuss is really only about 0.5 C of a temperature rise at best. Then there is the problem the alarmists have which is this —-Just because something warms does not means humans warmed it.
Yes and also most of the alleged warning is the heat island effect anyway.
Massive cooling has been forced into the record from around 1900 up to the 1970s and substantial heating added over the last 50 years.
This is rather a crude description. More accurate would be:
1880 to 1905 – upward
1905 to 1940 – downward
1940 to 1970 – slightly downward
1970 to 2010 – upward
However, the important point is that from 1970 onwards adjustments may have been upwards but they are fairly consistently upwards. So they would not affect the temperature trend from 1970 at all. And it is from 1970 that the sharp rise of concern takes place.
Carbon Brief has a very readable piece on temperature adjustments:
https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-data-adjustments-affect-global-temperature-records/
We are in an ice age, co2 is around 15 times lower than during the Cambrian when multi cellular life evolved and we are a species evolved in the tropics who show much higher excess mortality in winter. Further Co2 cannot possibly be earth’s thermostat since it’s has a lag effect Vs temp as shown by the Vostok ice cores for the last 600k years in line with Henry’s law. I don’t know who is paying you to post this drivel but it’s ridiculous, and you rightly get routed on this site.
Your comments have nothing to do with adjustments to the temperature record which is the subject at hand. There are rebuttals to everything you write and they can be easily found on the internet so I hope you will understand if I stick to the subject.
I don’t know who is paying you to post this drivel but it’s ridiculous, and you rightly get routed on this site.
No one pays me (worse luck). I like to engage with opposing points of view as it sharpens my understanding of the topic. You appear to prefer not to hear or read opposing points of view. That’s fair enough. You don’t have to read what I write.
I do read what you write and it’s painful. You make simpering arguments whilst not questioning the motivation behind said adjustments. Weird to adjust temps up in a time of increasing urbanisation, surely it would make far more sense to adjust the temperature down during such a period. Regardless these adjustments do not alter the fact you were born, live and will die in an ice age that makes life for you impossible at this latitude without clothing, heat and shelter. Some emergency.
I note you fail to answer my other points because they are inconvenient to your hysterical gospel. Please answer entire points rather than the selective method you adopt, answering the bit you want to whilst ignoring the other pertinent questions. How is ignoring inconvenient facts sharpening anything? This is why you are downvoted.
I will continue this debate if you commit to cutting out the insults – “simpering”, “hysterical” etc.
Those are not insults merely accurate adjectives and descriptions. When you say things like adjusting the data up, in a time of huge increases in urbanisation, doesn’t alter the trend you are taking ppl for fools. That nonsense is making a small uptick in temp appear far more dramatic that it is, yet the appropriate adjustment would actually be to adjust the data down to account for increased urbanisation.
I gather you are not prepared to make that commitment so I am afraid I will leave this discussion.
I gather you are not prepared to explain why data would be adjusted up during a period of frenetic urbanisation, which shows you to be slippery.
Yours is the typical arrogance of someone who thinks an opposing view is so preposterous that the person holding that view must be getting paid.—–But in science you are supposed to question everything no matter who might or might not be paying you. ——As it happens almost all climate change “science” is funded by —-Government. Government with a clear political agenda and there is very little questioning of any of it. In fact there has been clear deception as we saw in Climategate emails, and the Hockey Stick graph eg where the authors refused to release their data, computer code and methodology which in science, if that is what it is supposed to be about is a complete NO NO. Plus we see very little questioning from mainstream media who have mostly just become climate activists. And none at all from the BBC who are funded by all of us, not just climate alarmists. ——-PS So no one is paying you and no one is likely paying any one else on this site. You seem to be upset when someone uses terms like “simpering” in regard to yourself but happy to accuse people of dishonesty and accepting payments, which is every bit as offensive.
Varmint I’d highly recommend not paying the TV tax, I persuaded Mrs Woke around 5/6 years back and we’ve not regretted it.I contribute to sites like this instead even though sometimes Tobes annoys me on subjects like Sam Melia or 2020 mail on ballots fraud, no one is perfect and I’m sure I’m wrong from time to time. Mostly I think Tobes is trying to protect himself from the woke mob who prize his head.
I am not sure what you mean there. —–I have not been critical of you. Have you read the wrong comment?
Yours is the typical arrogance of someone who thinks an opposing view is so preposterous that the person holding that view must be getting paid.
But it was wokeman who suggested I was being paid. It never crossed my mind that any of the commentators on this site were being paid.
Ah so you are still here,praise the lord, can we get an answer from you why you think it’s reasonable to adjust thermometer temperatures up during a period of intense urbanisation?
OK I see now that the line in your comment was a quote. it would be better if you put inverted commas around quotes and they would be easier to see on a small tablet
So presumably it is wokeman who “thinks an opposing view is so preposterous that the person holding that view must be getting paid.”?
Ah so you are now answering points wrt to myself to other ppl but fail to answer my simple question as to why temp would be adjusted downwards during an intense period of urbanisation.
As for your existence on here perhaps you are a genuine subscriber but perhaps not. Why someone dyed in the wool in AGW theory is contributing to Toby Young’s site seems a tad strange, especially when pointing to billionaire funded sites like carbon brief dot org. I must assume though you are genuine and not lying so my profuse apologies for suggesting something so utterly scandalous.
On this, the most important issue for our prosperity, health and lifespans moving forward I see only 3 people have passed comment till now. This is quite disappointing.
As I said elsewhere, we cannot judge the effectiveness of any article by the number of comments it stimulates! The Daily Sceptic staff work hard to provide a wealth of articles and News Round-Up links for us to read and consider, not necessarily taking time to write a comment, nor to read every single comment that is put up on this website.
I in no way am criticising DS staff. ——— I am just disappointed that more people are not on here passing more comments on highly important issues, and I consider NETZERO to be the most important issue of all when it comes to our standard of living and future prosperity. Plus the more subscribers and commenters there are the more funding will come to the site.
There’s a war in Europe which may very well extinguish the lot of us within a decade but few comment on that either and I don’t blame them. Some things, particularly those involving the evil and stupidity of mankind, can just be too depressing, quite literally, for words
I think Chris Morrison’s articles are brilliant and, occasionally, thank him for them. I read them with interest and admiration. I enjoy them and entirely agree with them. I’m not sure, though, that expressing those things adds much so I don’t normally bother.
Just this morning, I was admiring the investigative journalism by Sky News and the Daily Mail that exposed two different scandals, and today’s article by Chris Morrison provides a third one, exposed through the Daily Sceptic’s Freedom of Information requests and dedicated sleuthing, as detailed in previous articles. All of these examples are worthy of the highest praise. Here are the other two, although in one I couldn’t bear to see the photos:
Horizon IT scandal: Post Office officials knew of instruction for Fujitsu to remotely change sub-postmaster accounts 10 years ago, leaked recordings suggest | Business News | Sky News
Inside the sordid world of monkey torture: How global network of monsters including a Brit bird-lover living with her parents, an Alabama grandmother and the ‘Torture King’ bonded over depraved videos of baby monkeys being horrifically abused | Daily Mail Online
More significant, but less headline grabbing than the changes to the temperature trend introduced by adjustments is how they erase 20th century variability to match the smooth, monotonic increase in temperatures ‘hindcast’ by climate models. Hindcasting is where models are run from initial conditions loosely matching a time in the past, with the results compared to actual temperature data from the same period to see how well they match up.
The main purpose of these adjustments to reliably recorded temperatures is to allow climate alarmist institutions to claim their computer models of the past two decades have been validated for past climatic behaviour, so must be valid for predictions of future behaviour. If you can’t get the simulation to agree with reality, just change the reality.
The main purpose of these adjustments to reliably recorded temperatures is to allow climate alarmist institutions to claim their computer models of the past two decades have been validated for past climatic behaviour, so must be valid for predictions of future behaviour.
Everything which can happen on earth must have happened in the last 20 years is an amazingly preposterous claim.