2014 Was The Least Hot Year On Record In The US

Last year recorded the smallest percent of stations to reach 90 degrees in US history. Only 84% of US HCN stations reached 90 degrees.  This was the first year when more than 15% of stations failed to reach 90 degrees any time during the year.

Compare to 1931, when less than 2% of US stations failed to reached 90 degrees. This metric is compiled from the same data set NCDC uses, and is not affected by time of observation issues.

ScreenHunter_5773 Jan. 04 17.33

The percent of daily readings above 90 degrees was also near a record low.


ScreenHunter_5772 Jan. 04 17.26

And it wasn’t just summer that was cool. Before NCDC data tampering, last winter was the 10th coldest on record, and coldest in 35 years.

ScreenHunter_5774 Jan. 04 17.37

NCDC says that 2014 was the hottest year ever.

About stevengoddard

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

26 Responses to 2014 Was The Least Hot Year On Record In The US

  1. Chewster says:

    It’s time for these expert climatologist criminals to spend some quality time with fellow cell mate Gyro Jerry, the Captain of Sphinter Therapy ;-).

    • Phil Jones says:

      This is GREAT STUFF!! NCDC is a pack of liars…. Anyone who has lived this year knows it’s been far from hot… Sure as hell not the “Hottest Year Ever” as liars, tools, and complete idiots shout from the rooftops… And write about in throngs in rags like NYT and Huff Po.

      Great work Mr. Goddard…

  2. SMS says:

    I’ll go with RSS and UAH before believing a contrived temperature history invented to save the reputations of a bunch of wanna-be climate scientists.

  3. gator69 says:

    NCDC is one sandwich board away from complete irrelevance.

  4. Jason Calley says:

    “NCDC says that 2014 was the hottest year ever.”

    NCDC and all the assorted alarmists can say whatever they wish — but unless they make public not only their data, but exactly how and why they ALTER their data, whatever they say is nothing more than empty assertion. It is not science. No matter how many pieces of paper they hang on their wall, assertion without justifiable evidence is NOT science.

    Thank you Tony, for keeping the light shining on them!

    • Steve Case says:

      It’s only shining for those of us who read this blog. None of this stuff sees the light of day in the main stream media.

      It’s my hope that a good objective book on the subject hits the market.

      • Phil Jones says:

        Yep… Time for a book and pushing into the Media Circus…

        A Court Case would help as well… Sue NCDC for fraud… Scientific Fraud and Misuse of Tax Dollars ..

    • Dave N says:

      According to Mosh, supposedly they do publish the how and why. I have been meaning to follow up whether he answered my question as to where they do.

      • Dave N says:

        Nope.. can’t find the comment I made (and hence whether he answered). I think it was on WUWT, though.

      • Jason Calley says:

        My understanding — and I am certainly open to correction by anyone who knows better — is that while they DO make some reasons publicly known, they do not reveal enough reasons to account for all of the adjustment. Additionally, they do not make their actually algorithm public. Lastly, their record of adjustments is suspicious; every year they do more adjustments on the same data; they take data that is decades old and continue to adjust and adjust and adjust — and the adjustments overwhelming serve to increase the trend of warming. Year after year they supposedly start with the same data, but year after year the adjusted data increasingly deviates from the raw data in a way that cools the past and warms the present.

        It is as if someone were trying to sell you a used car and you asked about the gas mileage.
        “This sweet baby gets 80 miles a gallon!”
        “How did you get that figure?”
        “Well, we drove it 20 miles, and it only used a gallon of gas!”
        “Then shouldn’t that come to 20 miles per gallon? How does that come to 80?!”
        “Well, we are pretty sure that the tires were under inflated, so we added an adjustment.”
        “Pretty sure? Which tires? How low were they? How much of an adjustment did you make?”
        “Oh, it was not just the tires. We probably had too heavy an oil in the motor. And also, our test driver likes to do those quick starts. All those things add up — but we have a formula for calculating the adjustments.”
        “Can I see the formula.”
        “It’s complicated — but it works!”
        “Can I see the formula?
        “It’s complicated, but it works!”
        “Can I SEE the formula?!”
        “It’s complicated — but it is working as designed!”
        So you walk off the lot in disgust. Three months later you come back and notice the same vehicle still on the lot.
        “What sort of mileage does this one get?”
        “This one? This sweet baby gets 115 miles a gallon!”

        Rinse and repeat. Rinse and repeat.

  5. smamarver says:

    Some say it different. Like in “the hottest year ever”, US included here. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hottest-year-ever-5-places-where-2014-temps-really-cooked/?nocache=1#postcomment Maybe it’s time for the scientist to speak the same language and to agree about this issue. Just saying….

  6. buhhhday says:

    Well… Percent of days above a certain temperature doesn’t really matter when yearly average temperatures are concerned, to be fair. It could have been 89 every day at every station and those first two charts would read zero. It isn’t really fair to pick an arbitrarily high temperature and use that as a baseline for determine if it warmed or not. On the flip side, for example, anchorage didn’t have a day below zero in all of 2014. That doesn’t technically mean it was a warm year, per se. Therefore that factoid shouldn’t be used to say that it was. The same the graphs in this article can hardly prove it was a cold year.

    And the data shown is only for the US. It needn’t be the hottest year in the US for it to be the hottest year for the planet. The NCDC was referring to the entire planet, I believe.

    I’m not going to argue about anything, I’d just like to point out that even if you agree with the clear position taken by the article (I do not, but I hardly think that delegitimizes the above statements), the way this article approaches the matter is rather flawed. Regardless of what you think of the NCDC I don’t see how this at all directly proves anything.

    Besides, the temperature data hasn’t been officially released yet (I don’t believe it has been anyway). This article is literally saying that everyone is wrong without even waiting to see if that’s true or not. The only thing I could actually find where the NCDC said it would be the hottest year on record was a prediction from November based on the January-October data. Now, perhaps I am wrong and the NCDC has clearly stated that 2014 was the hottest year ever, but I think that regardless of my own potential mishap there it’s still rather unfair to use those first two charts to draw any conclusions about “average” temperatures and the third one is rather misleading, as it shows US data when the NCDC is referring to the entire planet (which as I said, I’m not sure that they actually definitively said this, but I could be wrong. My point does not hinge on that part being correct.)

    So… Be fair and reasonable is all. I don’t believe the appropriate conclusions are being drawn from the first two graphs, nor do I believe the third graph is appropriate for the statement associated with it. None of the comments above mentioned this, so I figured I might as well point that out. I suspect there will be several replies to this (not so) kindly informing me of my inability to read graphs, but I hardly think that’s fair. I think anyone would agree with what I pointed out. Feel free not to. If you do, please be reasonable in your response. The lack of diversity in opinion on this article (and I assume this site) is likely due to unreasonable responses to any opinion that doesn’t align properly with the opinion endorsed by this site. I say lack of opinion, which is a conclusion I’m drawing from the fact that no one mentioned how this article is so biased, and that everyone instead immediately agreed with its conclusions, rather than looking at how it got to them. Be fair and reasonable. I don’t agree with this article, but regardless; don’t agree with something that is right, but for the wrong reasons. As I said, I am not saying it was a warm year for the planet because of the fact that a single city in Alaska had no days with temperatures below zero, in the same way one should not say it was a cold year for the planet because of the fact that some stations in the US had fewer days with temperatures above 90. No matter which of those is correct, they would be right for the wrong reason. It would also be unfair to say that Alaska as a whole was warm because of the temperature data from Anchorage, in the same way that it is unfair to say Earth as a whole was cold because of the temperature data from the United States. Even if they’re correct statements, the logic behind them is questionable at best.

    I would like to reiterate, as I fear my main point will be ignored, that I’m pointing out how this article is incredibly biased (and no one felt the need to mention that) based on the first two graphs not being relevant at all, and the third one being misused. That is all.

  7. bleakhouses says:

    I’m left wondering how “they” can with one breathe acknowledge and even embrace “the pause” and with the next scream “hottest year ever?”

    Clearly we are dealing with bold faced liars who do not care about those that see through the sham; they’ve got a host of toadies croaking along.

  8. BobW in NC says:

    Am I imagining it or is there a clear trend to declining temperatures from about 1930 to today shown in Figure 1? Hmmm.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Why do you think they wanted to get rid of the 1930s-40s blip? It shoots down the whole Global warming Con Job.

  9. we averaged 4.5F per day cooler over the entire year in 2014 in West Central Wisconsin

  10. rah says:

    Well just speaking from personal experience it did not seem that way to me in Indiana. I would say in my little part of the world at least as far as the coolest summer goes it was 1992 after the Mt. Pinatubo eruption. 2014 was close but did not seem a cool to me as the summer of 1992.
    Man I sure remember there were a lot of days during that summer the sun was red even though it was high in the sky.

  11. Greg Hansen says:

    Looks like even out here in His Royalty’s 57th state is havering a cool time.

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