You can’t make this stuff up.
At 8:56 am MDT, NSIDC showed that April 16 Arctic ice extent was about to cross the 1979-2000 mean.
Sometime during the day today they changed their data, and pushed extent much further from the mean line.
N_stddev_timeseries.png (1050×840)
The composite below shows what they did. I overlaid the new April 16 graph on the one from this morning, with the blue line (ice extent) normalized. NSIDC shifted the dates of their mean line to the right, which raised the bar for reaching normal.
Additionally, they knocked the most recent data off their graph. The graph below is the same as the one above, but shows this afternoon’s version in pink and this morning’s version in blue. The original April 16 data has disappeared. Somehow they lost data during the day today.
Here is a different view, with the axes normalized and this afternoon’s data in pink. In this view, the April 16 extent data lines up, but all the other data doesn’t. Amazingly, they have actually compressed time towards the left. Einstein would be proud.
NSIDC is partly funded by NASA. I wonder if they got a call?
No doubt it is just a coincidence that both sea level data and ice data have been adjusted io favor the alarmist point of view during the past two weeks.
Talk about shifting the goal-posts !
I wonder if any other mean-lines are being similarly “adjusted” ?
These guys suck.
My theory that you can never trust a guy who parts his hair in the middle continues to hold true.
http://cafescicolorado.org/Serreze.htm
LMAO!
Someone else hiding a decline.
1979-2000 average – nuf said!!
everything else is a 30 year mean, but we cannot have that now can we….
It looks like they Strove to hide the incline.
Yes, just ask her and she will tell you that the data actually shows a death spiral!
I have two problems with this…
When they go back and change the past…they are saying you shouldn’t have trusted us then…..
…and do these morons know that less ice opens up the Arctic to more oil and gas drilling LOL
Looks like Obama must have read my other recent post and got the Airforce to starting bombing the sea-ice.
I noticed that “someone” moved it today too.
A$$ Holes.
And the hits keep rolling! Go team! I don’t suppose they left a note explaining anything?
So NSIDC don’t even know what day it is!
Have anyone tried to ask them about it?
Utterly scandalous. It has been obvious now for many years these charlatans simply cannot hack the truth. Instead, they’re perfectly prepared to blatantly continually gerrymander and outright falsify such are their pathological deviances. It’d be laughable were it not so tragic.
If you have to adjust the data, it ain’t science.
It is all so simple, so educational. When data goes off the preferred rails, it needs to helped to get back on the path of true and righteous climate hysteria and indignation.
This isn’t wrong, just a case of good data parenting.
Because the end justifies the means when you are doing good.
Am I right in thinking that NSIDC have now also removed the grey +/-2SD area too?
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
My mistake, the images with +/-2SD are different URLs.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
<— Speechless!
Perhaps NSIDC wanted to create a diversion for their pals at the GSA?
Everything is being adjusted!
Check this:
http://notrickszone.com/2012/04/13/hansen-shocks-adjusts-antarctica-temperatures-changes-warming-trend-to-cooling/
Read the comments. I wrote the article less than two weeks ago and GISS has already changed the past for the seventh time in a year.
You can not adjust the fluid results of a computer model run. We are not talking about temperatures here but what if scenarios provided by a computer model that is primarily based on extrapolations, using some temperature measurements as guides. Each time they run the model the results for any particular location during any month or year will have changed. This is not record keeping in any form, it is just “what if scenarios”.
It is based on the Al-Gore-Rhythms they use to Hansenize the results.
GISS is not the only guilty group, they all do this, it is SOP in the climate field.
Being on topic because it is how NSIDC provides their reports. One change in a parameter and the results change.
They are not measuring real ice but Ice that is depicted on a computer generated image That is somewhat based on satellite imagery.
Steve – Doesn’t A. Watts have an open line of communication with a Dr. at NSIDC? Could he possibly ask him what gives with these changes?
Whoops – disregard last comment, thanks.
Thanks Steve, great work; NSIDC caught in the act!
I am quoting from this post in my article “Time series of Arctic and Antarctic Sea Ice Extent”, at http://www.oarval.org/ClimateChangeBW.htm
Yes, they seem to want to sweep everything under the rug. We have been so stupid to deserve it. Want some more?
This is hilarious. True or not…
Never confuse devious actions with stupidity for it makes you look stupid and devious too. This is most likely a stupid thing, even if it may be devious. Still funny as heck.
I think Michael Mann should have a look at this!
And how often do they do this I wonder?
Is this post a storm in a teacup? There may be innocent reasons for this small alteration.
At the NSIDC site, this announcement is dated 18 April (which I presume means this very day, which is 19 April in New Zealand):
“NSIDC has updated our processing of the daily sea ice extent graph. NSIDC calculates daily extent using a five-day average of the data. Previously, this average was a five-day centered mean, meaning that the final two days of data in the series were extrapolated from the previous three days.
The new method takes the average of the previous five days, so that readers will see fewer “wiggles” in the tail end of the data series (see animation, left). The value of the trailing mean lags the actual data values, so sea ice values will appear lower when ice extent is increasing, but will appear larger when ice is decreasing. The climatology is a 9-day running mean rather than a 5-day, so the climatology line also shifts slightly with this change.
While the averaging changes the data points on the graph, the underlying data remain unchanged. This change does not affect the monthly average data, which scientists use for longer climate comparisons.”
I don’t know whether this answers the objections set out in the post and will have to wait for others to comment. But it sounds as though it might.
Cheers,
Richard Treadgold.
I was right to be cautious. See http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/18/nsidcs-oops-moment-uncoordinated-changes-make-for-an-interesting-24-hours/ for an explanation from NSIDC.
Glad someone posted that link from WUWT.
Sorry, I meant to include the url:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Need to insert vertical reference-lines depicting, a) These charlatans’ surreptitious slipping of the median line some notches back; and, b) Their concomitant “adjustment” of the raw-curve data forward, so that the two series will seem to diverge rather than to overlap.
Comment would be superfluous.
Steven,
Congratulations! Your hit is on WUWT
Cheers
Treadgold Unfortunately you are wrong because they do this EVERYTIME ice gets close to normal just check past adjustments. it NEVER occurs when ice is going down/below anomaly. So yes it is attempted fraud to deceive the public. Thanks be to HHH that S Goddard is taking these guys on full on.
Hide the incline.
Thanks to Anthony Watts.
Yes, it was a mistake and it has been corrected. Thanks to alert skeptics.
I jumped to the worst conclusion based on the general behavior of the “climate community”.
Now that the wrong has been righted, I’m back to distrusting and verifying.
EXCELLENT work Steven. Unbelievable, the front on these guys… Was their funding under threat or something? Seriously, this will go down as the biggest fraud in history. Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits:
“There has been no global warming since 1995″
“Data for vital ‘hockey stick graph’ has gone missing”
“Warming periods have happened before – but NOT due to man-made changes”
And this was in 2010, yet they still keep the myth going. Check out the link below folks.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html#ixzz1tHZ996Ft
PS… Keep up the good work Steven.