Gridding Does Almost Nothing To The US Data Set

I am considered a heretic by some on both sides of the global warming debate, because I refuse to tamper with the raw US data.

I have already shown why you can’t detect baseline tampering using anomalies, and thus should not use them. I have also shown how infilling missing data massively biases the US data towards warming over the past 20 years.

Now I am going to show why gridding is unimportant. The graph below shows my ungridded USHCN final averages in blue, and gridded NCDC temperatures in red.

The slope is almost identical, and the offset is probably mainly due to NCDC’s extra co-op stations. Gridding is unimportant for US data, because the stations are fairly evenly spaced, by design.

ScreenHunter_603 Jun. 21 19.57

On the other hand, the data tampering being done by USHCN is huge. People on both sides of the debate should quit focusing on meaningless precision in tampered data, and instead focus on the huge inaccuracy created by tampering.

ScreenHunter_235 Jun. 01 15.26

With large data sets with a random distribution of error (like missing data) real scientists do not attempt to make corrections. As soon as corrections start being made, the door is opened to confirmation bias at best – and it gets worse from there.

Leave the data alone. You are falling for an old NOAA mind trick.

About stevengoddard

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

16 Responses to Gridding Does Almost Nothing To The US Data Set

  1. A couple of years ago I looked at the most recent 15 tears of Canada’s data and used a 1×1 grid and a 5×5 grid.

    The 5×5 grid showed warming. The 1×1 grid showed cooling.

    But Canada’s data is much sparser than the USA.×5-warming-and-1×1-cooling/

  2. Shazaam says:

    Science is working with only the data you have measured accurately.

    Criminology/climatology is creating the data you believe will most likely secure the next government grant.

    In either case, a deliberate choice is made. Honesty vs. fraud.


  3. Owen says:

    The data tampering is blatant fraud. The people doing should be in jail. They are criminals.

  4. NotAGolfer says:

    You are right, Steven. Keep up the pressure and good work!

    The continual adjustments and homogenizations are avenues for corruption and bias. Using the few surface stations that have been in place consistently for 100+ years and meet the requirements of a good station, eliminating all that have been moved or corrupted by bad placement, would give a much better sense of how the climate is or is not changing. Our datasets are complete garbage, though. So many sites have been moved and “upgraded” that we don’t have a baseline, much less a sense of how much variation there is due to natural noise. and much much less a sense of how much is due to increasing CO2.

  5. Andy DC says:

    You have made your points repeatedly and accurately while they are creating straw men.

  6. tom0mason says:

    Science relies on the guesses we make (hypotheses) being tested against reality, if real measurements are not made and logically used then it is not science.

  7. _Jim says:

    … better thread to ask this question in …

    When did the first known/recognized use of gridding appear?




  8. R. de Haan says:

    These are bad times for clear thinking people who know their math.
    Washington has been infested with parasites, freeloaders, morons and war mongers, the scientific world has been infested with activist who have lost any connection with reality (if they ever had any connection with reality) and the electorate has bend over to be screwed and fleeced.

    Just wait until drinking water, food, fuel, electricity, iPhones and Nike shoes get scarce.

    That should wake up some people.

    For now defend your fortress on the web and keep all guns blasting.

    The debate is over, we’re at war.

    • _Jim says:

      re: R. de Haan June 25, 2014 at 12:59 am
      Just wait until drinking water, food, fuel, electricity, iPhones and Nike shoes get scarce.

      Not going to happen; we have a lot of inertia still left in the system even if it is on an overall ‘decline’.


      • Gail Combs says:

        It is already PLANNED.

        42% of US electricity is produced by coal plants. The EPAs older regs (2011-12) will permanently shut down 10 % of our coal plants. That does not include temporary 18 month shut downs for upgrading with a three year window. Last I checked 12X3/2 = 18 so that means HALF of the coal plants will be down for THREE YEARS or ~20% of the US capacity. That does not include the possible shut down of 1/3 of the nuclear plants. Nuclear energy currently generates 19 percent of our nation’s electricity. If all 38 units at risk were prematurely retired, about one-third of our nuclear fleet would be shut down

        …several reasons for the retirements, but the largest factor affecting coal-fired generating units are new regulations recently imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). For example, the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards require the addition of costly environmental equipment, which will result in the retirement of the older, smaller units…

        Existing Coal Capacity
        Total net summer capacity (2011) 317,469
        Retired 2009 – 529
        Retired 2010 – 1,528
        Retired 2011 – 2,517
        Retired 2012 – 8,890
        Retired 2013 – 2,098
        Retired 2014 – 4,715
        Retired 2015 – 9,865
        Total planned = 30,142 or about 10%

        The question, of course, is whether these retirements are a detriment to the reliability and security of our national generating grid? The North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s (NERC) most recent long-term assessment found that existing and proposed environmental regulations affecting fossil fuel plants in the United States may significantly affect bulk power system reliability.

        NERC, the nation’s leading authority on electric reliability, evaluated four major regulations now being proposed or implemented by the Environmental Protection Agency and found them to expose the United States to significant energy vulnerabilities. NERC estimates that nearly a quarter of our coal-fired capacity could be off-line by 2018 and that as many as 677 coal-fired units (258 gigawatts) would need to be temporarily shut down to install EPA-mandated equipment.[ii] These EPA regulations must be implemented within a 3-year window and the mandated equipment takes about 18 months to install. Because EPA’s three year timeline is so tight and the regulations affect so many units, utility companies are not sure that they can meet the standards and ensure reliability of the electricity system at the same time….

        That was from a few years ago.

      • Gail Combs says:

        It gets WORSE….
        After wiping out over 10 to 15% of the generating capacity (If you also include loss of hydro) NEW plants can not be built except maybe Nuclear— If you can get past the foaming at the mouth protestors and Natural Gas -EEEK FRACKING!!!

        …The New EPA Rules

        The new rules proposed by the EPA will require new coal-fired plants to limit emissions of carbon dioxide to 1,100 pounds per megawatt-hour of electricity. The rule sets a threshold of 1,000 pounds per megawatt-hour for new, larger natural gas plants and a threshold of 1,100 pounds per megawatt-hour for smaller natural gas plants. For natural gas-fired power plants, the new rules limit their emissions to about what the new plants of their size would currently emit. For, coal-fired power plants, however, the new rules require a substantial reduction in carbon dioxide emissions that can only be met by installing costly carbon capture and sequestration technology that is not currently economically or commercially viable…..

        So Obummer has set up the next president with a royal FLUSH!

        Meanwhile I am glad I am sitting on part of NC’s natural gas formation….

      • Gail Combs says:

        _Jim, you are a heck of a lot more optimistic than I am.

        I lost my optimism when REPUBLICAN Senator Burr assured me he would not vote for the Food Safety Modernization Act and then turned around and not only co-sponsored the G^% D@#* bill he added in that the WTO would get to write the regulations American farmers would have to obey!!!

        In other words the Democrats AND the REPUBLICANS both want this country to crash and burn. I can see absolutely no other reason for the mismanagement of this country since Reagan and before. Especially when Pascal Lamy came right out and said the decision was made to eliminate National Sovereignty back in the 1930s.

        You don’t believe the Republicans want to eliminate our country? Then explain why Bush in June of 2007, president Bush signed a Framework for Advancing Transatlantic Economic Integration at a summit in Washington with the European Union? President Bush, speaking at the post-summit press conference, claimed that it was “a commitment to eliminating barriers to trade” and “a recognition that the closer that the United States and the EU become, the better off our people become.”

        Remember The EU began as a Coal and Steel Free Trade Agreement in 1951.

        You can ask Tallbloke how well that is working out for the UK. Original from from:

        This is a followup to a post about the issue of sovereignty and Britain’s membership of the EU I put up a while back. These are weighty issues the public needs to consider. Needless to say, the BBC won’t be promoting in depth debate about the matter, so it’s up to bloggers and journalists to do the job…..

        It’s up to us to let the political class know we don’t take kindly to having our liberties, fought for since Magna Carta, signed away to an unelected foreign commissariat which subjects us to summary extradition through European arrest warrants, dictates how we (dis)organise flood defences, and forces us to put the ‘human rights’ of criminals before those of their victims….

        Many constitutional experts believe that Britain isn’t actually a member of the European Union since our apparent entry was in violation of British law and was, therefore invalid.

        In enacting the European Communities Bill through an ordinary vote in the House of Commons, Ted Heath’s Government breached the constitutional convention which requires a prior consultation of the people (either by a general election or a referendum) on any measure involving constitutional change….

        Britain’s entry into the Common Market (later to be transformed into the EU) was also illegal for another reason. The Prime Minister who signed the entry documents, Edward Heath, later confirmed that he had lied to the British people about the implications of the Treaty.

        Heath told the electorate that signing the Treaty of Rome would lead to no essential loss of National Sovereignty but later admitted that this was a lie. Astonishingly, Heath said he lied because he knew that the British would not approve of him signing the Treaty if they knew the truth. Heath told voters that the EEC was merely a free trade association. But he was lying through his teeth. He knew that the original members of the EEC had a long-standing commitment to political union and the step by step creation of a European superstate.

        Edward Heath received a substantial financial bribe for taking Britain into the EU when he was Prime Minister…..

        Heath committed an act of treason. He betrayed the Queen and he deliberately misled the British people.

        Does any of this really matter to politicians?

        Is there any hope that Parliament will repeal the 1972 European Communities Act and restore sovereignty to the people? Not in the immediate future.

        But the errors made by Heath and Wilson mean that when we want to leave the EU it will be very easy.

        Because, officially, we never joined….

        We all should take note of this comment:

        Schrodinger’s Cat says:
        June 17, 2014 at 7:15 pm
        ….Our integration with the EU has proceeded by stealth. The public is generally unaware of the extent to which we are ruled by Brussels and the Government and in particular, the BBC, avoids enlightening the public. Most people are unaware of the ‘competencies’, areas of legislation where the EU has total power over member states. These include trade, agriculture, food, transport, and employment law, to name just a few.

        I am old enough to remember when the MSM in this country reported debates on these matters as bills came up in parliament. Today, there are barely enough proposals within the responsibility of our politicians to produce a Queen’s speech. The MSM does not report the passage of new legislation because it takes place elsewhere and may alert the electorate to the fact that our democratic involvement in legislation is non-existent. This lack of any connection with the policy and law making process is actually the famous “disconnect” that voters feel with respect to politicians.

        The ‘stealth’ tactic has been very successful. when did your MP last tell you that the EU has taken over all major transport policies? Unfortunately, the MSM are to blame as well. Many people regard the EU as being, (yawn), completely irrelevant. Some believe that the UK is not in the EU….

        Unfortunately it is about to get worse. Right now any one country has veto power. New rules will be switching that to a majority rule and there goes the last of the UKs sovereignty.

        There is also a listing of all the activities that will be regulated by the EU and not the UK, like immigration, trade, agriculture, food, transport, and employment law. They are called ” ‘competencies’, areas of legislation where the EU has total power over member states”….. Not sure where I saw the actual listing but it was a very long list that means the UK as an independent country will cease to exist. It will have no more status than a state like North Carolina. Worse one of the ‘competencies’ combined with majority rule means the UK can not withdraw from the EU without agreement by the other countries in the EU.

        Think about this _Jim, the USA belongs to the WTO and a law was just passed that gave the power to regulate farming and food to the WTO. Farmers in the USA just lost their voice, vote, freedom and sovereignty and now are little more than serfs of an unknown unelected bureaucracy that isn’t even American! Isn’t that the same road that the UK traveled before us?

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 )

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