Skip to content

Temperature Adjustments In Greenland, Iceland & Norway

September 26, 2016

By Paul Homewood  






When I started posting about how GHCN and GISS were altering the historical temperature record a few years ago, many thought I was making it up.

Things have now gone well past that stage now, and now GISS actually offer a tool to chart actual and adjusted temperatures.

Below are the stations in Greenland, Iceland and Arctic Norway, which have data going back prior to 1950, and where historical temperatures have been adjusted downwards.

No stations in this part of the world have been adjusted in the opposite direction, and only one, Vardo, has been left unaltered.



ScreenHunter_4620 Sep. 26 12.11

ScreenHunter_4621 Sep. 26 12.12

ScreenHunter_4622 Sep. 26 12.13

ScreenHunter_4623 Sep. 26 12.14

ScreenHunter_4624 Sep. 26 12.15

ScreenHunter_4625 Sep. 26 12.16

ScreenHunter_4626 Sep. 26 12.17

ScreenHunter_4627 Sep. 26 12.17



Needless to say, GHCN have either been unable or unwilling to explain the reason for these adjustments. 

It is also worth noting that temperatures across all these stations were, generally speaking, as high in the 1930s and 40s as they have been recently.

  1. September 26, 2016 12:17 pm

    If first you don’t succeed…..lie, lie again.

  2. Don B permalink
    September 26, 2016 12:19 pm

    “It is also worth noting that temperatures across all these stations were, generally speaking, as high in the 1930s and 40s as they have been recently.”

    In the US, 36 of the 50 state maximum temperature records were set prior to 1940.

  3. Broadlands permalink
    September 26, 2016 12:21 pm

    Stykkishólmu, Iceland is particularly “awkward” because the lowering by the country for 1933 and 1939 (from the World Weather Records) had the effect of making 2010 its “warmest year on record”. GISS apparently has lowered them even more?

    NOAA did the same thing in the US when they lowered 1921 making 2012 the warmest.

    The problem exists almost everywhere.

  4. Tim Hammond permalink
    September 26, 2016 12:36 pm

    So where is the “better” data that allows such changes? It should surely be pretty simple for GISS ot provide us with the source of the better data? And an explanation as to why it is better?

  5. September 26, 2016 12:45 pm

    Any time you look at individual station records and compare adjusted to unadjusted data, the same pattern appears. Remember that “unadjusted” means records verified by the national weather services where the stations are located along with notations of missing (unreported) days. “Adjusted” means the data after the algorithms have had their way (changing, deleting, infilling, homogenizing). Here is an analysis of what happened to the highest quality US station records.

  6. Gerry, England permalink
    September 26, 2016 12:48 pm

    It is difficult to have any faith in the surface temperature records anymore what with the station issues and the fiddling.

  7. tom0mason permalink
    September 26, 2016 1:48 pm

    For all these stations the unadjusted temperature record is data, the adjusted figures are just statistical products derive from that real data.

    If anyone calls these data products the temperature records or temperature data they are plain, flat-out, WRONG!
    The adjust figures can at best be referred to derived products from statistical manipulation — they can never be called data!

  8. September 26, 2016 3:30 pm

    Were not these cheats taken to task by US congress? That seems to have been covered-over by the media.

    Temperature measurements are often adjusted for good and clear reasons, such as when a probe is losing heat by radiation so is indicating low, or to compensate for ambient temperature (e.g. cold-junction compensation). The adjustment is normally made clear , as the data are what is measured and any alterations in the values measured have to be clearly justifiable: that is basic scientific method.

    Even the humangenisation of the data do not hide the fact that temperatures have risen (and fallen) fast in previous decades.

  9. lapogus permalink
    September 26, 2016 4:47 pm

    Paul, I downloaded some GISS v2 data for some of these stations in 2012 (Bodo and Jan Mayen) , so could compare with V3. Jan Mayen looks like they have been adjusted down and back up again, but the historic temperatures for Bodo were adjusted down by about half a degree in v3. Email me and I can send you the speadsheets.

  10. Eoin Mc permalink
    September 26, 2016 5:20 pm

    While I totally accept there is wholesale temperature manipulation of historical data going on by the likes of GISS I am always perplexed as to how is it, if the warm 1930s and 1940s are being ‘disappeared’, the last century’s temperature has not lowered commensurately. While I suspect there is consequent upward manipulation of more recent temperatures – to account for the cooling of the Thirties And Forties – I feel that the full picture should be given, ad nauseum, to explain the contradictions to those who are less familiar with the known unknowns. Cheers

    • Broadlands permalink
      September 27, 2016 11:35 pm

      Eoin… It seems to boil down to changes in base periods?

      A “snippet” from the “Climategate” e-mails ten years ago…almost to the day.

      At 09:22 05/01/2005, Parker, David (Met Office) wrote:


 There is a preference in the atmospheric observations chapter of IPCC
AR4 to stay with the 1961-1990 normals. This is partly because a change 
of normals confuses users, e.g. anomalies will seem less positive than 
before if we change to newer normals, so the impression of global
 warming will be muted.”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: