It is apparent that tampering of climate data at NASA/GISS is ongoing to make the past temperatures appear cooler to support their worldview that recent temperatures are increasing.
I wrote a blog post in 2011 showing how the actual NASA/GISS temperature station data don’t support the Global Warming (now called Climate Change) thesis and I thought it’d be good to compare the graphs I screen captured in 2011 to the graphs shown on the NASA/GISS website now to see if this data has been altered.
I’m using the NASA/GISS link here to obtain graphs of temperature station data so you can verify everything I discuss in this post. Note that I’ll highlight the differences between the 2011 and 2018 graphs with red ellipses on the 2018 graphs.
The Augusta/Bush temperature station data.
In 2011, the graph looked like this:
Now it looks like this:
The Winnsboro, SC temperature station data.
In 2011, the graph looked like this:
Now it looks like this:
The Columbia, SC temperature station data.
In 2011, the graph looked like this:
Now it looks like this:
The Darlington, SC temperature station data.
In 2011, the graph looked like this:
Now it looks like this:
The Wasco, CA temperature station data.
In 2011, the graph looked like this:
Now it looks like this:
The Tejon Rancho, CA temperature station data.
In 2011, the graph looked like this:
Now it looks like this:
Are you starting to see the trend?
Past temperatures have been adjusted down and some past temperatures (if they were extremely high) have been removed.
Is this what Science looks like?
Climate Change is a fraud perpetrated by dishonest climate “scientists” and one day history will reveal this. Mother Nature always wins in the end and the fraudulent claims made by charlatans will eventually be exposed in the white hot light of actual data.
cosmoscon 
The classic alteration is Reykjavik Iceland and the altered temperature record infuriated local meteorologists. On another front – wildfires – comes this Gem:
https://realclimatescience.com/2018/03/abuse-of-climate-data-on-the-increase-in-the-us/
Wow, thanks for that wildfire link!
Despite what Mr. Obama stated, I don’t think the “science is settled”. The mere fact that data must be manipulated (Remember the Mann “hockey stick” graph?) tells me all that I need to know, and that is, they have a conclusion, and simply need to gerrymander the data to support their conclusion. That many of these “scientists” have substantial grants (present and future) resting upon their data supporting the desired end-conclusion, tells us a bunch.
I remember in the 70’s that the “science was settled” that we would, by now, be entering into an ice age. And, somewhere back in the past, the “science” was also settled that the world was flat. What really irks me is the number of useful idiots they get to buy into this tripe.
Cosmocon, you may tear NASA data apart as much as you like, but how do you explain the following? In the 1980s I skied in Stubai, Austria, on this massive glacier. A while ago I pulled a film on Netflix that is titled “A flight over the Alps” (or something like that). I could not believe my eyes when they showed what was is left of the Stubai glacier: Grass and brown mud all over the place, caterpillars pulling giant tarps over the remaining ice to protect it from melting even more rapidly. And they are not doing this for fun. This whole operation costs a lot of money. Equally, the Swiss are pouring millions into new fortifications against melting water to protect their precious mountain villages that would otherwise be swept away.
Across the Rhine river from where I grew up, vintners are now planting merlot, a grape that has its home in regions much further south. As a child, I was able to toboggan down the street in front of my parents’ house, but no serious snow has been seen in decades. In 2007 I took my family to the Austrian Alps where we were sweating like out in the Arizona in the desert. I have been in those mountains many, many times, but never experienced prolonged heat of such proportions.
Sure, you may say, just anecdotal evidence. If you doubt the NASA data, look at the photos of glaciers on this site:
https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/4/
They must be pretty good at photoshopping…
“Institutionalized science” has become corrupt and perverted. It will take years and years to restore the lost credibility.
Thanks for providing even more evidence.
Washington Post article found on MSN web site:
Few places have served as a locus for the public’s anxiety about climate change as much as the Svalbard Global Seed Vault. The seed ark, popularly known as the “Doomsday Vault,” is embedded deep in the permafrost of a northerly Norwegian island and stores nearly a million samples from around the world for safekeeping in the event of war, famine, disease and, yes, climate change. It backs up gene banks around the globe, a fail safe for the fail safes.
It is supposed to be indestructible, the frigid landscape serving as a natural coolant for the genetic material it protects. And yet, climate change has been profoundly affecting the region, causing permafrost to melt, avalanches to strike and, on one notable occasion, water to collect and freeze at the beginning of the tunnel to the vault.
That latter phenomenon led to a flurry of panicked headlines in 2017; on the Internet, where such events can take on an ominous significance, the pessimistic conclusion was that if the Doomsday Vault is doomed, so are we.
Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post
The vault is probably going to be okay. But its occasional troubles put a focus on a much bigger problem: Its home is undergoing rapid change thanks to the warming climate.
A report on climate change in the Svalbard archipelago released this year by the Norwegian Center for Climate Services and commissioned by the Norwegian Environment Agency states that “from 1971 to 2017, a warming of 3-5 degrees Celsius has been observed … with the largest increase in winter and the smallest in summer.” The estimated average temperature for Svalbard is -8.7 degrees Celsius.
“We know that the warming in this area has been very fast during the last five decades, seen in a global perspective,” said Inger Hanssen-Bauer of the Norwegian Meteorological Institute, who was one of the editors of the study.
Currently, Svalbard’s glaciers are “losing more ice through melting and calving than they are accumulating through snowfall,” according to the report. “All of the well observed glaciers are shrinking.” The warming of the surrounding ocean “has halted sea ice from forming.”
But the predictions for the future are even more stark. The report projects changes from a period of 1971-2000 until 2071-2100 based on various scenarios for global warming set out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). “Under medium to high scenarios for future climate emissions,” the annual air temperature will increase by approximately 10 degrees Celsius under high emissions and 7 degrees Celsius under medium emissions, scientists found.