Data Tampering, the New Scientific Method

[wirebender]

Tampering with the data has apparently worked so well for mann, hansen, jones, et al that it seems to have become the new "scientific method".

NDIC has jumped on the bandwagon.

Breaking News : NSIDC Gets In The Data Tampering Act | Real Science

This graph from approximately 9:00 am on april 16, 2012

later in the day, they changed the data to look more like this:

An overlay of the two graphs reveals that not only did they cut off the last part of the ice growth, but they raised the bar for the 1979 - 2000 standard.

In addition, it seems that the satellite data for sea level has been undergoing some cosmetic work of its own. Here is a graph showing the various years of data and the progressive changes in the upward direction that have been done.

THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Analysis finds satellite data has been continuously 'adjusted' to exaggerate sea level rise

 

[IanC]

the NSIDC answered Watts query about that with an explanation that would not cause those effects. apparently they are averaging every point with the four days previous to cut down the wiggle at the end points. that should not affect the 1979-2000 average. the new 'adjustments' were not supposed to be online yet.

the satellite producing the Envisat data has been lost. they quickly jacked up recent data by a significant amount and the next satellite that comes on line will be calibrated against the new 'fixed' readings. same old story.

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL.......who's losing in this forum??

 

[IanC]

the warmists may be in a bunker but they are still pumping out disinformation that could trick those that are too lazy to investigate.

 

[skookerasbil]

Ian and Wirebender FTMFW!!! These guys dominate this forum with posts that nuke the obsolete crap posted up by the environmental radicals. The radicals who spend their lives posting up stuff from the dinosaur age of global warming bomb throwing.

Domination!!!!!!!!


Sheeeeeeeeeeeeet.............at least you'd think the k00ks would post up something a bit more compelling!!!!


Losing.

 

[IanC]

a more complete response from Walt Meier is up at WUWT. NSIDC’s oops moment – uncoordinated changes make for an interesting 24 hours | Watts Up With That?

Willis has a great comment to the response-

My only other comment to Dr. Walt, about his final comment:

As a final, personal note let me make a more general comment. I am saddened that some people have become so cynical about climate scientists and climate data. I can appreciate that scientists have brought some this on themselves. And of course, a healthy dose of skepticism is essential to science. But it is disappointing to see people immediately jump to conclusions and assume the worst. I hope people will take from this explanation that NSIDC, and scientists in general, are working hard to the best we can, both in understanding the science and communicating it.

Dr. Walt, people distrust climate scientists because, as climategate made perfectly clear, we were lied to and cheated by the leaders of the AGW movement, the key players in the game.

And while I am very clear that you are a good guy and an ethical scientist, and while I know you were not one of those that lied and cheated, you were indeed one of the many who said nothing after the lies were exposed. You are one of those who continues to act towards the people who did lie to us as though they had never done anything wrong. Very few climate scientists have spoken out against the outrageous scientific malfeasance and even lawbreaking by the AGW glitterati. Even fewer climate scientists have tried to get those that lied and cheated to apologize, or to pay even the slightest price for their actions. Y’all still fete them and invite them to address the conferences as though nothing untoward every happened.

So I’m sorry, Dr. Walt, but you are condemned by your silence and by your inaction to be subjected to the same opprobrium and the same mistrust as those who actually did lie, cheat, steal, subvert the IPCC, destroy evidence and encourage others to do so, pack the peer-revew boards, and try to get editors fired for publishing science that they disagreed with.

Next, we are not “cynical” about climate scientists. We are realistic about climate scientists. We got screwed by your fearless leaders, and you and most of the rest said nothing, not one damn word of protest … now you seem surprised and say you are “saddened” that we don’t trust you. Mistrust is the realistic and expected response to being lied to, it is not cynicism in any form.

 

[wirebender]

a more complete response from Walt Meier is up at WUWT. NSIDC’s oops moment – uncoordinated changes make for an interesting 24 hours | Watts Up With That?

Willis has a great comment to the response-

My only other comment to Dr. Walt, about his final comment:

As a final, personal note let me make a more general comment. I am saddened that some people have become so cynical about climate scientists and climate data. I can appreciate that scientists have brought some this on themselves. And of course, a healthy dose of skepticism is essential to science. But it is disappointing to see people immediately jump to conclusions and assume the worst. I hope people will take from this explanation that NSIDC, and scientists in general, are working hard to the best we can, both in understanding the science and communicating it.

Dr. Walt, people distrust climate scientists because, as climategate made perfectly clear, we were lied to and cheated by the leaders of the AGW movement, the key players in the game.

And while I am very clear that you are a good guy and an ethical scientist, and while I know you were not one of those that lied and cheated, you were indeed one of the many who said nothing after the lies were exposed. You are one of those who continues to act towards the people who did lie to us as though they had never done anything wrong. Very few climate scientists have spoken out against the outrageous scientific malfeasance and even lawbreaking by the AGW glitterati. Even fewer climate scientists have tried to get those that lied and cheated to apologize, or to pay even the slightest price for their actions. Y’all still fete them and invite them to address the conferences as though nothing untoward every happened.

So I’m sorry, Dr. Walt, but you are condemned by your silence and by your inaction to be subjected to the same opprobrium and the same mistrust as those who actually did lie, cheat, steal, subvert the IPCC, destroy evidence and encourage others to do so, pack the peer-revew boards, and try to get editors fired for publishing science that they disagreed with.

Next, we are not “cynical” about climate scientists. We are realistic about climate scientists. We got screwed by your fearless leaders, and you and most of the rest said nothing, not one damn word of protest … now you seem surprised and say you are “saddened” that we don’t trust you. Mistrust is the realistic and expected response to being lied to, it is not cynicism in any form.

The issue is still not settled. Steven Goddard downloaded the high res NSIDC map and pixel counted the excess areas vs the deficient ones. The count was 3544 pixels in the excess column and 2941 in the deficient column. They should be showing arctic sea ice slightly above normal rather than below normal.

A Look At The High Resolution NSIDC Map | Real Science