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.
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.
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.
No, Obama is all about destroying our energy, economy and the like, as is evident with Podesta’s proclamation that “Congress has ZERO chance of stopping Obama’s climate plan” (aka, kill the coal industry).
Obama is hell bent on destroying this country … period … this latest Podesta revelation is all the proof one needs.
Correct. So who is he working for? Is the reason to diminish the country to a state of weakness where it will be helpless? All forms of wealth creation are being stripped away, and dependency on foreign supply is being instituted. It appears to set the stage for collapse of the dollar and/or attack from abroad.
The dreams of his father.
re: ‘dreams of his father’
Frank. Marshall. Davis. I hear tell …
(or maybe not. But give me odds on Davis if we’re placing bets.)
Even money is the odds. I am not a connoisseur of turds, so I could not differentiate between the 2 presented.
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.
First Kenyan President of the UN but Africans always get that job.
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.
You might be right. Even more pathetic is that the public would believe that the AGWP (Prevention) is real.
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…
The fact that we call it “normalizing” makes it sound benign.
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?
You found a hockey stick!
Seriously: that’s beyond ridiculous; someone has some big explaining to do.
It is long past time for “splainin’ ” .. it is time for pitchforks and ropes.
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.
“..many stations where they have no raw data”
Offline? Someone forgot to read the thermometer? A dog ate it?
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?
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.
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¢…”
Interesting theory. Best part about it is, we do not have long to wait.
Old Soviet joke:
“The only thing more uncertain than the future is the past.”
What is the URL and/or procedure to reproduce this graph? Looks very interesting.
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..
It is the numerical average of all final monthly minus raw monthly temperatures published by USHCN
Thanks. I’ll do some number-crunching, and see if there are any weird patterns.
Either I’m badly misreading the data, or else there is something strange going on. Please check Saratoga, Wyoming station USH00487990 I get…
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
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?
The mystery has been solved. It isn’t tampering, but an artifact of late data reporting and method.