USHCN Data Tampering – Much Worse Than It Seems

Yesterday I did a post showing how more than 40% of USHCN monthly temperature is fabricated from non-existent raw data, and the percentage is rising exponentially.

ScreenHunter_236 Jun. 01 15.54

Taking this a step further, I analyzed the temperature trend since 1990 of only the fabricated data – and compared it to the measured raw data. The actual thermometer data shows no US warming since 1990, but USHCN’s fabricated data shows more than 1.5 degrees warming.

 

ScreenHunter_259 Jun. 02 21.12

Just how bad is their cheating? They are tampering with the data at a rate of 7.6ºF per century. They have introduced a huge warming bias by introducing fake data which has no thermometer data to back it up.

ScreenHunter_261 Jun. 02 21.21

*Mosher says this is all golden.

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

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

28 Responses to USHCN Data Tampering – Much Worse Than It Seems

  1. geran says:

    This could be even bigger than Climategate.

  2. Jfisher says:

    Need some help from more knowledgable commenters. When arguing on another site about the “no warming for 17 years” they invariably say “well that’s because you’re using RSS data, the only one out of four that show no warming-the other 3 do.” What would be the rebuttal? Thanks.

  3. Truthseeker says:

    “Golden” as in it is the goose that lays the golden eggs of government funding …

  4. gregole says:

    Fabrication is all they have. Models have all failed. Every prediction of catastrophe failed.

    What warming? Miniscule. Not happening at all for over 15 years while CO2 rises.

    It is a real shame the bad name these charlatans are giving to science. And why oh why does MSM just play along?

    • Dave N says:

      “..why does MSM just play along?”

      Because scary news sells: few are interested in reading about how normal everything is.

      Disclaimer: I am not an expert in psychology. On a related note, it is interesting that a news source might report on something controversial and/or shocking, only to have it corrected later by other sources, or by themselves. Many people, instead of considering the possibility that the first report was perhaps a little too far fetched, and breathe a sigh of relief, postulate that there’s a “cover up”, and hang on to the premise for dear life.

      Sometimes I think the MSM do it on purpose in order to ride the wave of attention.

      • Gail Combs says:

        The MSM does it because they are OWNED by the bankers and corporations who are making big $$$$ from the scam.

        He who OWNS the press CONTROLS the news and the news we get is the propaganda they want us to here. It is not the truth and it is in the best interest of the corporations and banksters except for a bit from the “Controlled Opposition.”

        Agian SEE: http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/martin-cohen-new-york-times-has-vested-interest-in-climate-alarmism/#more-10301

        and E.M. Smith’s “Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism”

        Note that in all of this what is missing is the rights of the smallest group, the individual.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Grumble, John Dewey’s trashing of the education system strikes again.

          Here ===> Hear

        • rw says:

          So there was no Long March by the Left through the institutions (in particular, the universities)? Or were they merely carrying out the will of the bankers? (If you think so, you don’t know much about the psychology of the Left.)

          So Barry Rubin’s book, Silent Revolution is all wet? Not to mention David Horowitz’s books. Can’t wait to see your book that will set us all straight.

          And what about the bankers that were being harassed by HUD officials in the 80’s? Was Roberta Achtenberg really working for the bankers she seemed to be harassing? Were her crazy left-wing antics just for show? Was she working for the bankers when earlier she tried to prevent gay bath-houses from being closed down? (This seems to have been her main achievement before she landed a job at HUD.)

          Taking this a little further, was Lenin “OWNED by the bankers”? Is that what the Soviet Union was all about? I already knew that history is in many ways a hall of funhouse mirrors, but I didn’t realize how great the curvature actually was.

        • rw says:

          (I should add, for those who don’t know the story, that officials on the West Coast were trying to close down gay bathhouses to prevent the spread of AIDS. It seemed like a reasonable action to take, and then Roberta came along …)

        • Gail Combs says:

          rw ….Taking this a little further, was Lenin “OWNED by the bankers”?….

          Lenin certainly traveled across Germany in a sealed train with $10 million in gold thanks to bankers like Max Warburg, the brother of Paul Warburg, who gave us the Federal Reserve act of 1913.

          A subsequent document5 outlined the terms demanded by Lenin, of which the most interesting was point number seven, which allowed “Russian troops to move into India”; this suggested that Lenin intended to continue the tsarist expansionist program. Zeman also records the role of Max Warburg in establishing a Russian publishing house and adverts to an agreement dated August 12, 1916, in which the German industrialist Stinnes agreed to contribute two million rubles for financing a publishing house in Russia.6…..

          [Another interesting bit]
          the Sisson Documents were almost all forgeries:
          …One puzzling aspect in the light of the story in this book is that the documents came to Edgar Sisson from Alexander Gumberg (alias Berg, real name Michael Gruzenberg), the Bolshevik agent in Scandinavia and later a confidential assistant to Chase National Bank and Floyd Odium of Atlas Corporation. The Bolshevists, on the other hand, stridently repudiated the Sisson material. So did John Reed, the American representative on the executive of the Third International and whose paycheck came from Metropolitan magazine, which was owned by J.P. Morgan interests.10 So did Thomas Lamont, the Morgan partner who owned the New York Evening Post. There are several possible explanations. Probably the connections between the Morgan interests in New York and such agents as John Reed and Alexander Gumberg were highly flexible. This could have been a Gumberg maneuver to discredit Sisson and Creel by planting forged documents; or perhaps Gumberg was working in his own interest….

          On January 22, 1918, Robert L Owen, chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking and Currency and linked to Wall Street interests, sent a letter to Woodrow Wilson recommending de facto recognition of Russia, permission for a shipload of goods urgently needed in Russia, the appointment of representatives to Russia to offset German influence, and the establishment of a career-service group in Russia….

          In brief, the tug-of-war in Washington reflected a struggle between, on one side, old-line diplomats (such as Ambassador Francis) and lower-level departmental officials, and, on the other, financiers like Robins, Thompson, and Sands with allies such as Lansing and Miles in the State Department and Senator Owen in the Congress.

          So the bankers in Europe and the USA certainly aided the Bolsheviks and without that aid the Soviet Union would not have existed.

          Heck, Karl Marx was supported by Lion Philips (b. 1794 d. 1866) while he wrote his Manifesto. Phillips was active in the tobacco business and was a banker at Zaltbommel in the Netherlands. The Marx genealogy gets quite interesting with the Rothschilds mixed in for flavor. “Nanette, Marx’s grandmother, & Hannah Rothschild nee Cohen were first cousins.”

          And Trotsky was sure Funded by the bankers TOO!

          These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this Country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. Those bankers took money out of this Country to finance Japan in a war against Russia. They created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia, and thus drove a wedge between the allies in World War. They financed Trotsky’s passage from New York to Russia so that he might assist in the destruction of the Russian Empire. They fomented and instigated the Russian Revolution, and placed a large fund of American dollars at Trotsky’s disposal in one of their branch banks in Sweden so that through him Russian homes might be thoroughly broken up and Russian children flung far and wide from their natural protectors…. ~ Congressman McFadden 1934

          What the reasoning of the bankers was and how close the ties I haven’t the foggiest but the ties were certainly there.

        • gator69 says:

          Money follows power. It is very simple. There is no need for the myriad and boring web of conspiracies.

  5. tom0mason says:

    Obviously part of the ‘Hope’ you don’t notice that we ‘Change’ the temperature data making it ‘necessarily skyrocket’ thus keeping the $cam money rolling in.

    Can we $cam you?
    ‘Forward!’
    ‘Yes we can!’

  6. It’s a bit confusing exactly what your claim is. These are not just yearly late reporting, right? What exactly are they, I wonder? It’s not just some crazy hockey stick artifact I surmise but what is really going on? Do stations really get shut down but they are continuing them by infilling their values somehow? Are there really fewer stations in the raw data versus the final version, after the year is past and all stations have reported? Or do they never really report at all after being infilled due to delays? I guess you already clarified it:

    “The graph below is generated by counting the number of reported monthly temperatures in the final and raw data sets. The have lost 30% of their station data since 1990, but still report adjusted temperatures for the missing data.”

    Padding stations may allow them to use the exact same list to continue their averaging, but then where is the source of the upswing in such padding, if it’s not from the stations that really are reporting?!

    Is a completely separate issue from any late reporting effects?

    There are 1218 data files in the both the raw archive and final archive so there must be more recent zombie data in the adjusted files than in the raw files. What are the first few files with this problem? Sorry, no software on my end to parse this stuff but I’d like to see which stations are involved.

    This is very strange indeed.

    • More than 40% of the USHCN V2.5 monthly data is now fabricated without the benefit of monthly raw data. I calculated the average of all of the fabricated data per year, and the average of all of the raw data per year.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Nik, perhaps it is part of the “dying of the thermometers”.

      E. M. Smith’s AGW is a thermometer count artifact

      2010 Thermometer Langoliers Hit List
      Well, I found a CRU letter that describes the update process (in comments below) and it’s not pretty. It looks like there is no particular “ready date” for the GHCN data set. While the data are supposed to be ready a few days after the end of the month (the first distribution of monthly data between national meteorology departments is supposed to happen the 4th of the month) the process as described by Phil Jones in one of the ClimateGate emails is far more ersatz and has no specific bounds on when data are to be thought ready enough to use. In particular there is a second distribution that is supposed to happen between the 18th and the 20th of the month (implied as a quality update) that might well have entirely missing records included. So it looks like you never know when the data are ‘ready’. It isn’t when the data set appears, nor even when it is updated, nor even the end of the month. So at this point we’ll have to treat these as “missing in action” lists rather than KIA….

      Don’t know what to make of this list yet, other than it directly ‘gives the lie’ to the assertion that thermometer ‘drops’ were / are entirely an artifact of GHCN being a creation at a historical moment in time (i.e. made in 1990′s era so that’s why they drop out then in The Great Dying of Thermometers – which itself ignores The Lesser Dying in 2006).

      It also shows that the excuse of things being dropped for not electronically reporting is pretty much a lie, too. I note that Dallas Fort Worth Airport is on this list and I’m pretty sure they have electronic reporting… From the NASA / GISS web site, as confirmation:

      Jo Nova: The Great Dying of Thermometers: ‘It’s obvious how well documented temperatures were (once) in US. The decay of system in last 20 years is stark’

      The Great Dying of Thermometers It’s like watching the lights go out over the West. Sinan Unur has mapped the surface stations into a beautiful animation. His is 4 minutes long and spans from 1701-2010. I’ve taken some of his snapshots and strung them into a 10 second animation….

      From Digging in the Clay:

      The ‘Station drop out’ problem
      Now that I’ve produced a series of colour coded maps showing the warming/cooling trends in the NOAA/GISS GHCN data for three distinct time periods i.e. 1880 to 1939, 1940 to 1969 and 1970 to 2010 (as well as for the whole 1880 to 2010 period), I’ve noticed that a number people commenting on the ‘Mapping global warming’ thread here are unaware of the NOAA/GISS station ‘drop out’ issue and how it may affect the warming/cooling trends.

      The primary purpose of this new thread is to show charts of the number (i.e. count) of stations by year in the NOAA (and so therefore more or less GISS also) GHCN raw and adjusted datasets…….

      Lots of people have done a “Dig Here” on the ‘Station drop out’ problem. That is just a smattering.

      Climate Audit by Steve McIntyre has a listing on information about station data HERE. that maybe very useful to you Nik if you have not already seen it.

  7. Send Al to the Pole says:

    I agree this could be huge. But all the other scams are huge too and some of them aren’t well known beyond this blog.

  8. Andy Oz says:

    The fewer country towns with temp records the more UHI will influence the averages.
    Like Sydney- in 1872 the record June high was 74.7 F (22.3 C). When it was a big town with no concrete or blacktop.
    Now, it gets to 22 and the weather bureau freaks out. It’s a meaningless record and useless data.

    • Gail Combs says:

      It also depends on what stations are dropped, since they use stations 500?Kilometers away to infill

      For example take the state of North Carolina right now. Drop:
      Asheville North Carolina ….77.9 °F
      Cherokee, North Carolina ….80 °F
      Boone, North Carolina …..68.6 °F
      Newland, North Carolina . 63.2 °F

      And instead use Wilkesboro, North Carolina @ 86.7 °F after all it is “only ” 32 miles between Boone and Wilkesboro and “only” 54 miles to Newland….

      E.M. Smith caught them doing this type of “smearing” in South America.
      GHCN – GIStemp Interactions – The Bolivia Effect

      This is why I link to this site on the practice of “Krigging”

  9. C3 Editor says:

    This article linked to by C3headlines.com

  10. Gail Combs says:

    gator69 says….
    Money follows power. It is very simple….
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    That makes ZERO sense. Lenin and Trotsky and the rest were exiled riff-raff hiding from the czars agents. Their owly “power” was their ability to instigate chaos.

  11. Gail Combs says:

    gator69 says….
    Money follows power. It is very simple….
    >>>>>>>>>>
    I should come at that in a different way.

    My question is WHY Communism? (And that is the hoped for end result of socialism.)

    If you look at this article and read the quotes from ‘History of Plymouth Plantation,’ the governor of the colony, William Bradford, makes it clear they tried a form of communism and it failed miserably. That was in the 1620s almost four hundred years ago. It has been tried several other times and it always fails. So why with all the evidence stacked against this miserable idea are we saddle with having another international effort of shoving it down our throats once again?

    Communism HAS TO convey something of value and it has to convey it to those of wealth and power or it would have been dead and buried 350 years ago. It doesn’t convey anything of use to the peons because those of wealth and power don’t care about us. SO why have the movers and shakers taken Communism (or at least socialism) to their collective bosom?

    This 1911 cartoon from Communist Party member Robert Minor and run in the St. Louis- Dispatch makes it clear there was a connection between Wall Street and Marxism as do several of the articles I linked to above.

    CAGW is just a minor battle in the war for control over every aspect of our lives. A war we are losing because the money and power WANTS Socialism/Communism. If they did not want it communism would be a minor foot note in some dusty history text.

    Our greatest weapon is figuring out and exposing to the light of day WHO is behind the scene pulling the strings and why.

    (And yes I know I get some of this stuff wrong. As I said before I hated history in school.)

    • gator69 says:

      Gail, why do so many wealthy people vote Democrat? It is a mental disorder. Period.

      Some very wealthy bankers are insane. Period.

      It ain’t rocket science, but then again, if you are a rocket scientist it could be.

      Humans lack the ability to be perfected. We will always have wolves, and we should always have defenses. Blame the banks and you get nowhere, blame the government and you defend your progeny.

      • Gail Combs says:

        You are missing the point.
        WHO is the Government?
        People.

        Where do they get the ideas they then make into law?

        And THAT dear gator is the very very critical point.

        WHERE do these ideas come from?
        They do not arrive in a politician’s brain fully formed out of nowhere.

        You guys want to know what happen to America? You want to know how our culture was destroyed?

        Well Nicole Johnson, with five pages of supporting references for her document, shows how it was done.

        Remember Lenin identified independent farmers as the linch-pin of individualism and capitalism.

        “The Socialist Revolution in the US cannot take place because there are too many small independent farmers there. Those people are the stability factor. We here in Russia must hurry while our government is stupid enough to not encourage and support the independent farmership.’ ~ V. Lenin, the founder of the Russian revolution

        Stalin took him at his word.
        “The Collective Farm Policy was a terrible struggle, Ten million died. It was fearful. Four years it lasted. It was absolutely necessary.” ~ Joseph Stalin

        And in the USA the MSM made sure farmers were laughed at and called hicks, rednecks and hayseeds.

        …the result of organized plans developed by a group of highly powerful — though unelected — financial and industrial executives who wanted to drastically change agricultural practices in the US to better serve their collective corporate financial agenda. This group, called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in 1942. [This is one of “Milner’s Round Table Groups” link – Note Carroll Quigley was bill Clinton’s mentor.]

        — representatives from every sector of the economy with the key exception of farmers themselves — CED determined that the problem with American agriculture was that there were too many farmers. But the CED had a “solution”: millions of farmers would just have to be eliminated.

        In a number of reports written over a few decades, CED recommended that farming “resources” — that is, farmers — be reduced. In its 1945 report “Agriculture in an Expanding Economy,” CED complained that “the excess of human resources engaged in agriculture is probably the most important single factor in the ‘farm problem'” ….

        To solve that problem, CED offers a program with three main prongs.”[4]

        Some of the report’s authors would go on to work in government to implement CED’s policy recommendations. Over the next five years, the political and economic establishment ensured the reduction of “excess human resources engaged in agriculture” by two million, or by 1/3 of their previous number….

        Their plan was so effective and so faithfully executed by its operatives in the US government that by 1974 the CED couldn’t help but congratulate itself in another agricultural report called “A New US Farm Policy for Changing World Food Needs” for the efficiency of the tactics they employed to drive farmers from their land….

        CED’s plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. They also resulted in a massive migration to larger cities. The loss of a farm also means the loss of identity, and many farmers’ lives ended in suicide…

        CED members were influential in business, government, and agricultural colleges, and their outlook shaped both governmental policies and what farmers were taught. Farmers found themselves encouraged to give up on a farming system that employed minimal outsourced inputs and capital and get “efficient” by adopting instead a system that required they go into debt in order to purchase ever more costly inputs, like fossil-fuel based fertilizers, chemicals, seeds, feed grain, and machinery…..

        Farmers, meanwhile, were and continue to be squeezed on both ends: by input suppliers putting upward pressure on selling prices and by output buyers exerting downward pressure on their buying prices. This analysis is confirmed by the Keystone Center, an establishment think tank with representatives on its board from Monsanto, DuPont, Shell, Coca-Cola, Dow, General Electric and the Rockefeller Foundation, to name a few. The organization’s 2001 report “The Keystone National Policy Dialogue on Trends in Agriculture” observes that “Agricultural policy in many respects supported the concentration of farming into larger and fewer units. Some would say agricultural policy is biased toward bigness.” [8]
        http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/History-HACCP-and-the-Foo-by-Nicole-Johnson-090906-229.html

        • gator69 says:

          I’m not missing any points Gail, I just don’t buy your silly overbuilt conspiracy theory. It’s called ‘human nature’.

  12. Mark Albright says:

    I am at the Univ of Washington. I would like to replicate what you have done here. I’m suspicious since I know in the Pacific Northwest temperature has DECLINED since 1990. Here is the time series from Hanford in eastern Washington, perhaps the highest quality rural climate station in our region: http://www.atmos.washington.edu/marka/hanford.1945-2012.png

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