Spectacular January Data Tampering By Our Friends At NCDC

NCDC turns a strong January cooling trend (orange) into a strong January warming trend (blue) by simply altering the data.

ScreenHunter_454 Jan. 29 00.21

The tampering trend since 1930 is an impressive 2.9 degrees per century. Enron accountants would blush at such blatant fraud.

ScreenHunter_455 Jan. 29 00.26


About stevengoddard

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

13 Responses to Spectacular January Data Tampering By Our Friends At NCDC

  1. Andy Oz says:

    Enron accountants would be pocketing their bonus, blushing or not!

  2. Paul says:

    Before the collapse …….. I’m sure 97% of Enron accountants said the company finances were fine – and they would know – because they were the experts.

  3. geran says:

    “7:35 p.m. EST Tuesday: Alexandria, La., breaks a 110-year-old record with 1.2 inches of snow on Jan. 28. The old record was 1 inch, which was set in 1904, the National Weather Service at Lake Charles, La., said.”

  4. I agree with you, but neither of the two trends shown in the first figure are “strong”. Only the noise in the data is strong. Draw a horizontal line through it , at around 31 degrees–that is the best that real science can do, “31, plus or minus 3 degrees”.

  5. Judy F. says:

    Nicely done charts in Broncos colors.

  6. Jason Calley says:

    The “adjustment” chart showing the constant move to bend the trend upwards is a true travesty. Can any real scientist give a plausible reason to think that the scientists of the 1930s were so incompetent that taken as a whole they averaged a full two or three degrees low on their readings? How is it that the same CAGW cultists who always try to invoke the law of large numbers to show why they know global temperatures to mere hundredths of a degree go somehow uncomprehending when they hear that the thousands upon thousands of reading from the Dust Bowl are somehow overwhelmingly several degrees to high? Even worse, do they think that the scientists of the 1980s were the only ones who could read correctly? How do they explain that the new digital thermometers are getting worse and worse these days — and overwhelmingly biased toward reading too low now?

    It is madness! No… If they were honest mistakes it would be madness — but as it is, this is not mistake. This is fraud on a massive scale.

  7. Andy DC says:

    The adjustments will have to be superexponential to account for this January.

    • Don says:

      Don’t worry, they’re working on them even as I write this. Eventually there will be a straw that breaks the camels back from the AGW crowd.

      OT The Michael Mann initiated lawsuit will continue, the court refused defendant’s (Mark Steyn) motion to dismiss.

  8. Ian George says:

    I just check NCDC Jan-Dec 2013 US temps. How can that translate into a + 0.3C anomaly?
    And they also say:
    ‘On a local level during 2013, approximately 26,100 daily warm temperature records were tied or broken (10,100 warm daily maximum records and 16,000 warm daily minimum records); while approximately 28,800 daily cool temperature records were tied or broken (16,900 cool daily maximum records and 11,900 cool daily minimum records).’
    So most of the country is below average or near average, the cooler temps outnumber the max temps – and 2013 is ranked the 37th warmest since 1895!
    What gives?

  9. Luke of the D says:

    Mr. Goddard, I keep seeing these maps and I’m just as frustrated as you, but there has to be a reason (beyond the political one) that they make these adjustments – do you know why? I am just a mere geologist so know not why one would adjust temperatures of the past anyway (except possibly down due to UHI, but then the current temps would go down even further… so that can’t be it). There has to be a reason for these adjustments… there has to be. Can you please provide something that might help me understand at least why they are doing what they are doing?

    • Anto says:

      Luke – it’s a criminal enterprise, pure and simple. They’ve been adjusting the past downwards for ages. What’s amazing is that they were supposed to stop the TOBS adjustments after 1990. However, each and every year since then they have adjusted the raw data upwards. That means these adjustments are so large that they totally neutralise the UHI adjustments (which as you say must be downwards), then add some more. In some years, (eg. 2009) the total Final minus Raw adjustment above is adding 2F to the Raw temperature trend. Assuming that there is some downward adjustment to the Raw data for UHI, what could possibly have happened to the monitoring network during 2009 that the Raw data was more than 2F too cool?

      Moreover, it seems that there is a trend for the temperature recording equipment to be running progressively cooler than what NCDC believes is the actual temperature as time goes by – evident by the upward slope of the adjustments post-1990. I remain incredulous that such errors have apparently been creeping into the equipment for the past 24 years, yet nobody has considered this to be a problem – just adjust the Raw data upwards and – hey presto! Problem solved.

    • Jason Calley says:

      Hey Luke, you say “Mr. Goddard, I keep seeing these maps and I’m just as frustrated as you, but there has to be a reason (beyond the political one) that they make these adjustments – do you know why?”

      I really do not want this to sound harsh, but you need to wake up and smell the coffee. You are dreaming if you think that the current so-called “climate scientists” are practising good science. The Global Warming push is a scam, a lie, a distortion of the truth. I know — it is hard to believe that anyone with scientific credentials would do such an anti-scientific thing, but every profession (even science) has those members who are willing to lie for money or power.

      I have a sister-in-law who is a devout Catholic. For years she refused to believe that a priest, any priest ever, would abuse a child. “That can’t be true! They are men of God!” You are in a similar state. You cannot believe that a scientist would break every rule of ethics and science and present falsified data as real. I am sorry, but you need to wake up, to do some serious research into the subject and to face the facts. You are being lied to by experts, but you have the ability to find the truth.

  10. Ian George says:

    I am no expert either and I only check data, etc to test their claims.
    But for what other reason would they do this?
    This is De Bilt, the only Dutch w/s that GISS NASA use.
    The first graph is the ‘raw’ temperature.
    The second graph is the ‘homogenised’ data.


    As I said in the post above, how come last year was above average when it appears it was cooler.

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 )

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s