My Theory About USHCN Data Tampering

Two things stand out about the current USHCN data tampering graph. The most obvious is the huge amount of tampering going on in 2014, but almost as bizarre is the exponential increase in tampering since about the year 1998.

ScreenHunter_226 May. 05 20.57

There is no rational reason for either of these – so here is my guess. Obama wants credit for healing the climate. He has been engaging in every imaginable form of BS to get an international agreement through this year or next, and after he gets the agreement he will tell NOAA to stop tampering – and will then take credit for the drop in temperature.


About stevengoddard

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

31 Responses to My Theory About USHCN Data Tampering

  1. Andy Oz says:

    Why does he bother with only 2 odd years to go? Unless his next job in 2017 is with either a carbon credit bank or a enviro multinational. He is wasting time and money when he should be getting the US economy going again.

    • Obama is all about image, not reality.

    • Keitho says:

      We think he is going to try and be the new Secretary General at the UN. He wants to make the SG’s role much bigger so he can be King of The World. Kind of obvious when you think about it.

    • Gregory says:

      The closest thing to eternal life is a government program. If the US finally implements a climate change / carbon tax the rest of the world will follow (except for Canada, Australia, etc). His legacy and the destruction of the Constitution and capitalism will be complete.

  2. SteveO says:

    You might be right. Even more pathetic is that the public would believe that the AGWP (Prevention) is real.

  3. Phil Jones says:

    Why is the raw data even tampered with? Instruments for the past 100+ years show consistent/accurate readings… It can ONLY be for Politics…

    Yet almost NOBODY knows that Temp and Sea Level data get “normalized” BEFORE BEING PUBLISHED!!

    How lame, how dumb are we… What a scam…

  4. au1corsair says:

    I keep asking “what is NORMAL climate” and keep getting the cold shoulder. There can only be “anthropogenic climate change” if there is a “normal” climate without human tampering. So where’s the NORMAL climate change data–and how were these data points arrived at?

  5. Dave N says:

    You found a hockey stick!

    Seriously: that’s beyond ridiculous; someone has some big explaining to do.

  6. NikFromNYC says:

    Prove it, that you are not just forwarding a routine temporary artifact.

    • Same as two weeks ago, with two weeks more data available. They publish adjusted data for many stations where they have no raw data.

      • Dave N says:

        “..many stations where they have no raw data”

        Offline? Someone forgot to read the thermometer? A dog ate it?

      • David A says:

        Mr. Goddard, I wish to be as clear as possible in sharing this. Is this all USHCN comparing station to station? Or is this all continuously active stations over the period of the graph? (In which case this also is comparing each station to each station? Do you eliminate the stations with no data, and compare only the stations that have both, giving an adjustment for those stations?

        • Dave N says:

          It’s comparing the raw averaged temp for each month with the adjusted value for each station.

          It doesn’t matter whether they’re continuously active or not; if there’s no figure for a year/month, there is nothing to adjust, so the difference is zero.

  7. tom0mason says:

    Are there any financial aspects to this for the USA that POTUS could claim? Some rebate from the UN maybe, from the carbon climate tithe, perhaps?

    Can you not just hear it?
    “…and let us not forget, that because of my pushing through this nation’s carbon reduction mandate, a battle I won against the flat-earth believers by enacting EPA mandates. I have won us a rebate from the UN for $25 and 14¢…”

  8. philjourdan says:

    Interesting theory. Best part about it is, we do not have long to wait.

  9. Ron C. says:

    Old Soviet joke:

    “The only thing more uncertain than the future is the past.”

  10. Walter Dnes says:

    What is the URL and/or procedure to reproduce this graph? Looks very interesting.

  11. Steve:
    Where did you get your graph above? Did you make the graph yourself? or is the graph copied from the USHCN Version 2 Serial Monthly Datasets page. If so, where? I did not see it there. thanks..

  12. Walter Dnes says:

    Either I’m badly misreading the data, or else there is something strange going on. Please check Saratoga, Wyoming station USH00487990 I get…

    RAW data
    1907 has 10 months of data
    1908 has 5 months of data
    1909 has 1 month of data
    1910, 1911, 1912, and 1913 are missing entirely
    1914 has 6 months of data
    1915, 1916, 1917, and 1918 are missing entirely
    1919 has 2 months of data
    1920 is missing entirely

    ADJUSTED data
    1907 through 1920 are fully populated with estimated data?????

    And as they say in the infomercials… “But wait, there’s more”. The RAW data starts in 1900 and ends in 2007. The ADJUSTED data starts in 1893 and is still going strong as of April, 2014 !?!?!? Are they splicing stations?

  13. Anthony Watts says:

    The mystery has been solved. It isn’t tampering, but an artifact of late data reporting and method.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s