Friday, January 15, 2010

Diddlin With The Data

In a post at Watts Up With That a commenter looked at the e-mails found at this link [pdf] and had some interesting things to say.

Ira (17:00:53) :

The UK CRU version of Climategate centered around whether the 1990’s were warmer than any time in the past 1000 years. The US GISS version could be about whether 1998 was warmer than 1934!

It seems the temperature readings were adjusted six times after analysis in July 1999 indicated that the temperature anomaly for 1934 was nearly 60% higher than for 1998. I’ve graphed the seven versions to show how GISS systematically adjusted 1934 down and 1998 up until 1998 was warmer than 1934 (the January 2007 analysis) or at least virtually indistinguishable (the March and August 2007 analyses).

And this is just from one email in a treasure trove of 216 pages of them!

In the UK CRU case, the Medieval Warm Period vanished to present a “nice tidy story”. In the US GISS case, a nearly 60% temperature anomaly difference vanished to show that 1998 was as warm as 1934! Are these guys serious scientists or just skilled magicians?
In another comment further up thread:
Walter Cronanty (16:50:08) :

Am I correct when I look at the first, complete e-mail and see that in July 1999, they have 1934 at a plus anomaly of 1.459, and 1998 at a plus anomaly of 0.918? And then, by August 2007, they state that the plus anomaly for 1934 is down to 1.249, while the plus anomaly of 1998 has risen to plus 1.226? Is that what it says?

I’m somewhat familiar with the issues of diddlin’ with the data, and don’t understand the whys and wherefores of most of it, but some of it I understand. But if I am interpreting this e-mail correctly, that’s some heavy- duty diddlin’ of data. Why are historical figures changed this often, and changed to this degree?
I guess they were too embarrassed to make the change all at once.

It seems to me that if you are going to commit a fraud you should be really bold about it. This edging up to the desired results just invites more scrutiny.

It appears that the folks involved are bad at science and worse at fraud. Isn't it about time we had some competent criminals working this scam? It is an outrage that government funds are paying for this level of incompetence.

I like this suggestion:
Michael In Sydney (15:53:58) :

If I was a US citizen and I wanted a cultural change at NASA I’d write to my congressman demanding that NASA’s budget be cut then write to NASA and explain that the manipulation with US/Global temp data evident at GISS is why I’ve taken the action I have. Nothing talks like money.
So here are some useful links towards that end:

House of Representatives
The Senate

Cross Posted at Classical Values


Help me keep blogging at no cost to yourself. Order your Amazon purchases through this link: Amazon.I get a small percentage which helps me buy books and electronic maintenance items (like printer cartridges).


linearthinker said...

Is it too much to hope for that James Hansen, the arrogant asshat at NASA, will be hoist on his own petard? As in prosecuted?

BTW, I note this at the wiki entry for him:

[Hansen] used these codes to study the effects that aerosols and trace gases have on the climate.

If I recall correctly, the impertinent cellar dweller, 99%, claimed a doctorate in that same specialty. Perhaps our young friend is a protege of the [hopefully] soon-to-be defrocked high priest of the Church of Gore.

Or perhaps our 99% is a Hansen sock puppet?

Wouldn't that be special?

M. Simon said...

Funny you should mention Hansen.

Some one was just discussing his arrogance at Watts Up With That.

Our 99 does seem to fit the profile.

BTW I have suspicions that a certain poster at CV may be Bill Ayers. He is rather disdainful of most commenters but he accords me respect despite our vast political differences because he knows of my UChicago connection. I have seen a similar response from other UChicago folks elsewhere.

And the commenter had a Chicago url. But it is only speculation.

Ayers is definitely of the Leopold and Loeb mold. I have no interest in meeting him. But should we meet I'd expect quite an interesting conversation.

And I gave the commenter a very oblique hint that I knew who he was (only he or someone very sharp would have gotten the innuendo) and his comments stopped.

Any way. Good observation. I'll file it away for future reference.

BTW our 99 claims a Colorado venue.

linearthinker said...

BTW our 99 claims a Colorado venue.

Poor babe! He'd better behave.

Silverfiddle will spank him.

Anonymous said...

Well, the conspiracy wheels really are turning now, aren't they??? Who is 99? A Hansen protege? Hansen himself....hmmm...

Anonymous said...

I have seen several comments left by a '99' over at RealClimate, but the demeanor of that poster is differs dramatically from the 99 seen here. Maybe he is one of the flock. o.

Anonymous said...

I have seen several comments left by a '99' over at RealClimate, but the demeanor of that poster is differs dramatically from the 99 seen here. Maybe he is one of the flock. o.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

Hi Simon,

As a foreigner it's quite interesting to see how differently mr Ayers is treated compared to the treatment of mr McWeigh or mr Kaczynski - all native US 'activists' utilizing similar methods to attain their goals.


M. Simon said...


Ayers was politically connected. The other two not so much.

And Ayers had a wealthy father.

Unknown said...

So it's all connection and nothing ideology?

I'd think some part of it also was the 'general sympathy for the goals if not the means' -thing.


linearthinker said...

Simentt, your perspective as an outsider looking in raises interesting questions.

The foundations here would argue against your premise, but the institutions have been infiltrated.

The answer is probably a combination of Simon's "connections" and your suspicions as to ideology. A rich daddy always helps, too.