NCDC Setting Up the Big July Lie

With five days to go in July, preliminary data show that the heat could top records set decades ago: “The warmest July for the contiguous U.S. was in 1936, when the nationally averaged temperature was 77.43 degrees, 3.14 degrees above average,” said climate scientist Jake Crouch of the National Climatic Data Center.

The actual average temperature for July 1936, before they adjust it down – is 77.93 degrees. They knocked it down half a degree from the measured daily temperatures.

Preliminary data from the center show the national temperature for the first three weeks of July was 3.63 degrees above average. If the heat continues, and after the data are more closely analyzed, that would top July 1936.

How horrid? July on pace to be hottest month on record – USATODAY.com

Complete bullshit. July, 1936 was much hotter, but they now upwards adjust more than 1.5 degrees on to the monthly temperature relative to 1936.

Compare the huge region of +10 and +12 degrees in 1936 to the tiny region of +8 in 2012. The area of +10 was probably two hundred times larger in 1936. There is no +12 in 2012. Every band +2 or above was much larger in 1936.

This July isn’t even close to 1936, but by tampering with the data they get the political result they are looking for. I doubt that July 2012 is even in the top five without their tampering.

 

docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/064/mwr-064-07-c1.pdf

MonthTDeptUS.png (688×531)

Just another huge climate scandal in the making.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to NCDC Setting Up the Big July Lie

  1. johnmcguire says:

    Their theory is to tell the lie often and loudly and the morons will believe it . Their trouble now is that there aren’t that many people out there that are bigger morons than the ones telling the lies.

  2. 02 Jan 2010 –
    “Britain is bracing itself for one of the coldest winters for a century with temperatures hitting minus 16 degrees Celsius, forecasters have warned.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/6921281/Britain-facing-one-of-the-coldest-winters-in-100-years-experts-predict.html

    As I recall the record cold temperature for Britain was either meaningless short term weather noise, or the record cold was caused by global warming.

  3. Don Gaddes says:

    We were told by the ‘obedient’ News/Weather Reader last Tuesday that it was the warmest July for Australia in five years.
    Tomorrow we expect heavy snowfalls in the ‘Alps’ and – 4 degrees C

  4. Andy DC says:

    1936 is the champ by a wide margin.

  5. AaronC says:

    Maybe the 1936 departure map was based upon a departure from the possibly lower July average temp of the 1901-1930 “climate normal”. If so, then that would show larger departures compared to departures from the present, warmer, 1981-2010 “normals”. Not making excuses for NOAA/NCDC’s shenanigans, but I wonder if that is the case with that old map.

  6. Jason Calley says:

    @ AaronC “Not making excuses for NOAA/NCDC’s shenanigans, but I wonder if that is the case with that old map.”

    I think you make a good point, and one that highlights the worst part of the ongoing tampering with the temperature error. Like our highly esteemed host, I believe that the 1930s were significantly hotter than the present, but it seems that every year that goes by allows the Powers That Be to further distort and tamper with the record. This data is “adjusted” by some unspecified and never explained or justified amount. After “adjusting”, the new temperatures are compared to some equally mysterious “normal” to produce a cryptic “anomaly.” Even worse, some of the “data” is simply produced whole cloth. This is not science; this is bald assertion. The result is that when we look at historical maps of reputed temperature data, we are not looking at facts, we are looking at artifice.

    My highest respect and sympathies to Mr. Goddard. He is doing extraordinary labors and the best that can be done with the information available — but unless and until we have a complete and new analysis of the record starting with the original (and I do mean original) data, all historical comparisons have to be considered provisional.

    • I am using the original daily data for my analysis. As far as I can tell, it hasn’t been tampered with.

      • Jason Calley says:

        Hey Steven, first of all, thank you so much for your efforts here at your blog; I am continually impressed by your work.

        Now, you say, “As far as I can tell. it hasn’t been tampered with.” Yes, and you may be correct that it has not, but how much certainty can we put in that? (By the way, that is not rhetorical; I honestly do not know what level of certainty it deserves.) Was the “original daily data” collected and collated by the same people (or friends of the same people) who make the increasingly bizarre “adjustments”? If so, should we even trust the veracity of the “original data”? I know that it is probably not practical, but if we want to have a truly trustworthy analysis of the past readings, I do not see any other way but to start over with the original handwritten records. You certainly know much more about the quality of the data than I do. In your opinion, can we be certain (or even confident) that the original daily data is a true compilation of the actual recorded measurements made?

        Maybe I am just too cynical at this point, but if CRU or GISS told me that the sun was shining, I would want to see my shadow before I believed them.

  7. johnmcguire says:

    I agree with Jason Calley , there are good reasons to not trust anyone in any of the government agencies as they have all been politicized and brought under the control of radical corrupt warmists and front people for the new world order.

  8. gary says:

    Seems to me that back in June, “they” were setting up the “Big June Lie,” as well.
    June ended up the 14th hottest June on record.
    Will it be deja vu?

  9. I can verify that the 1930’s were hot and dry because I lived through it without an AC or even a fan. That drought lasted 5 or 6 years and the Great Depression was on then also.

  10. So Steve, if you can take the raw, daily data from 1936 and the same raw daily data from 2012, with some reasonable weighting, you could release the result, data, and code a few minutes after the last daily data is available, and make a pretty coherent pre-emptive strike on the BS masters. You could even announce (and even interview) days in advance with media outlets that you will be countering the inevitable announcement from NOAA, except that you will be using the real historical data with the result to be posted at X time (assuming the answer is that 1936 is warmer and nothing will change that in the last few days). You don’t have to tell NOAA but they probably read your blog. You could even predict your result and their result with error bars every day.

    This of course would highlight the huge differences between historical and “adjusted” data, which many people don’t know about. It would give you an opening to show the huge adjustments, and with 3 studies out this year showing that about half the trend (if not more) is due to faulty adjustments, would really increase awareness among the general public of what’s going on. You could even show a chart of what the adjustments are, including TOBS, homogenization, and the “mystery adjustment” which is now the largest component.

    Libs will respond by wanting to put a lock and key on the data, of course.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s