NCDC Hiding The Decline In US Temperatures By Data Tampering

US thermometer data used by the National Climatic Data Center, shows that afternoon temperatures have dropped sharply over the past 95 years. This doesn’t suit their global warming agenda or funding needs, so they simply alter the data to make the long-term US cooling trend appear to be warming, and release the altered data to the public.

USHCNReportedVsMeasured Reported : ushcn.tmax.latest.FLs.52i.tar.gz
Measured : ushcn.tmax.latest.raw.tar.gz

They accomplish this reversal of US trends through a spectacular hockey stick of adjustments, which they don’t ever mention in their state of the climate press releases.

ScreenHunter_8678 Apr. 17 12.05

Altering data to actually reverse a trend (and not prominently making clear that is what you are doing) would get someone immediately fired and likely prosecuted in most industries, but in US government climate science it is just business as usual.

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

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

61 Responses to NCDC Hiding The Decline In US Temperatures By Data Tampering

  1. omanuel says:

    Thank you, Steven, for using your talents to benefit society.

    • omanuel says:

      Data tampering started seriously in 1946, the same year George Orwell started writing “Nineteen Eighty-Four.”

      The internal composition of the Sun was changed from
      _ a.) Mostly iron (Fe) in 1945 to
      _ b.) Mostly hydrogen (H) in 1946

      The definition of nuclear stability was changed from
      _ c.) Lowest value of Aston’s “nuclear packing fraction”
      _ d.) Highest value of Weizsacker’s deceptive “average nuclear binding energy.”

      Thus was mankind isolated from the benevolent “Creative Force” that sustains our lives from the pulsar core of the Sun.

      • omanuel says:

        Consensus lies and data tampering were Stalin’s favorite techniques to promote the Big Communist Lie beyond the boarder of the old USSR after winning WWII: There is no Power Higher than Big Brother!

        FEAR & CHAOS in Aug-Sept 1945 [1], following Aston’s warning [1] about the nuclear annihilation on 12 Dec 1922, allowed Stalin to unite nations (UN) and national academies of sciences (NAS) worldwide in 1945 to take totalitarian control of humanity and knowledge of the Sun by promoting two consensus ‘science’ LIES in 1946:

        _ i .) H-fusion powers the Sun

        _ ii.) Neutrons attract neutrons

        Fear of self-incrimination keeps NAS members and winners of Nobel and Crafoord Prizes from now addressing the precise measurements [2] that expose both the CREATOR & THE TWO 1946 LIES.

        They are not at fault. Everyone who has a job – policemen, school teachers, janitors, construction workers, university professors, research scientists and ordinary bureaucrats – works for Big Brother now. We must work together to restore integrity to science and constitutional limits on government.

        Blaming each other will only delay the restoration of government by the people to protect the basic rights of humans to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

        References:

        1. “Aston’s WARNING (12 DEC 1922); CHAOS & FEAR (AUG 1945)” https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/CHAOS_and_FEAR_August_1945.pdf

        2. “Solar Energy for school teachers,”
        https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Supplement.pdf

  2. Steven, where can we get these datasets?

    How can we know which ones are actual vs adjusted Temp Readings??

    • MikeW says:

      The link below takes you to the USHCN site. Select a state and click “Map Sites” for a list of sites. Select a site and click “Get Monthly Data”. The Plot Data section lets you plot raw and adjusted temperatures. But I don’t know how to get average temperatures for a state or the US. Can that be done from this site?

      http://cdiac.ornl.gov/epubs/ndp/ushcn/ushcn_map_interface.html

      • gator69 says:

        Nice link Mike! The NASA link I used to use was taken down, and then put back up, but without the raw info. Thanks!

      • LCC says:

        Very nice, thank you.

      • RealOldOne2 says:

        Be aware that the adjusted numbers change every month.
        In Feb. 2015 the adjusted numbers for Providence RI showed a warming trend of 4.0C/century for the period 1900-2013.
        In Apr. 2015 the adjusted numbers for Providence, RI now show a warming trend of 2.9C/century.
        The current “adjusted” temp for 1900 is 49.6F.
        In Feb. the “adjusted” temp for 1900 was 48.4F.
        This constant changing of historical temperature data makes the adjusted numbers essentially useless for scientific purposes, since it makes replication impossible, and a correct conclusion that you draw from data today, may be incorrect in the future.

      • mbe11 says:

        The states of Alaska and Hawaii are not on the site. Sent them an email asking where is the data but no reply as of yet.

  3. Tony B says:

    Some good news from Texas: the Texas Senate votes to remove some of the state renewable energy subsidies. Senate Bill 931. The Republicans are saying that the purpose of the subsidies has been a success and that subsidies are no longer required. I can’t help thinking they are sticking it to the EPA and WH while they can. If the EPA wants to regulate energy in Texas, then perhaps it should be responsible for funding more of it too. Causing a little consternation at ThinkProgress of course.

    • stpaulchuck says:

      Tony, what a marvelous strategy for getting rid of all those subsidies – declare victory then kill off the subsidies due to ‘victory’. Ha ha ha ha, hoist by their own petard.

    • Disillusioned says:

      Ironically, Texas is one of the six states, along with California, where their state utility requires your house to be on a “smart meter”. Some states are slowly introducing them – with the paltry incentive of a $25 summertime rebate in order to be able to take control of your thermostat during the hottest summer days.

  4. gator69 says:

    NCDC: Nazis Constantly Distorting Data

  5. ACR says:

    Steve ,,, When I first saw your “hockey stick” charts showing that the past has consistently been cooled by 1+ degrees, I thought the fraud was unsustainable. First, so-called climate scientists can’t very easily increase recent/current temperatures by a significant amount. People would recognize significant adjustments to recent temperatures. Secondly, there is a limit to how much the “scientists” can cool the past. I mean, they can’t very well cool the past by 4-5 degrees below the measured rates. Even in the distant past, that would be noticeable.

    I’ve come to a new conclusion. The adjustment fraud can be sustainable. All the fraudsters need to do is have the inflection point in the adjustment hockey stick at 30-40 years ago. Temperatures 70-100 years ago need not be further adjusted downward. Keeping the inflection point at a point 30-40 years ago will always show the false trend that the warming hoaxers want.

    • Snowleopard says:

      True enough, but once you need icebreakers to get into New York harbor in the winter, they will need to start revising history also. It will be interesting to see how they arrange that.

      • I’ve long taken the position that the present-day low-information crowd has been so in-dumb-nified that there could be 9-foot-thick icebergs floating into Biscayne Bay after making a clockwise semicircle around the North Atlantic, and they will still parrot that this is the strongest evidence ever for catastrophic warming.

        With such a crowd, reason has to take a back seat, because at some point, inevitably we each come to realize that no type or quantity of evidence or argument will change their mind.

        They may actually start ‘lowering’ historical sea levels in places like Miami (if they haven’t already done so) just to bolster their temperature arguments.

        If we continue to be a semi-effective check on their efforts to take control of the private sector, they will probably ultimately unleash a storm of SLAPP suits, spurious DMCA actions and other spurious legal attacks against us. They cannot tolerate effective dissent, because it is a strong antidote to their efforts.

        RTF

        • Disillusioned says:

          “With such a crowd, reason has to take a back seat, because at some point, inevitably we each come to realize that no type or quantity of evidence or argument will change their mind.”

          Bingo! I discovered that inconvenient truth after I became disillusioned about CAGW. Naively, I believed all I had to do was share the overwhelming, disillusioning data with my friends, and they would see exactly what I discovered. Instead, they refused to consider any of it, and rebutted with the same propagandist talking points that I also once believed. That was disillusionment ‘part deux’ – CO2-phobic climate alarmists are the consummate “science deniers.”

          ‘There is none so blind as he who refuses to open his eyes and see.’

  6. I quickly noticed something about your chart showing the amount of adjustment. Looks an awful lot like the CO2 concentration chart over the same period. Its a manufactured trend, to match the CAGW hypothesis.

    • AndyG55 says:

      SG has another chart that shows an R^2 of about 0.99 between the “adjustments” and the CO2 level.

      As you say…… the AGW story is a fabrication, a lie, a fairy tale.

      • omanuel says:

        Data adjustments were used by Stalin to rule:

        1. The USSR before WWII, and
        2. The rest of the world after WWII

        That is why George Orwell wrote:

        1. “Animal Farm” about Stalin’s rise to power
        2. “Nineteen Eighty-Four” about his return to power

      • omanuel says:

        Communists are atheists that deny both physical and spiritual evidence of a Power Higher than the current Communist leaders.

        That is why they still seek to hide or ignore irrefutable evidence that the force in the Sun’s pulsar core is the creator, destroyer and sustainer of every atom, life and world . . . and exerts dominant control over the climate of each planet in the solar system today.

  7. Eric Barnes says:

    Rather than “business as usual”, I’d say “Furthering the Cause”.

  8. Winnipeg Boy says:

    My 16 year old daughter is doing an argumantative paper on climate change. She thinks the news and her teachers are full of hot air. Will be refering her to the data here.
    Hold fast, there is hope, the young ones aren;t convinced.

  9. R. Shearer says:

    It’s said that Tom Karl, head of NCDC, inflated his academic credentials several years ago. Anyone have a good reference?

  10. Reblogged this on Richard T. Fowler and commented:
    A good couple of questions to ask CO2-skeptical presidential candidates would be:

    1. Will you state before the primaries and cauci begin who would be your first choice for Attorney-General?

    and

    2. Will you condition your appointment of the person on their drafting and signing a written memo laying out the case for prosecuting various individuals for climate research fraud, and agreeing in writing that as Attorney-General he will use all the powers of his office to make that happen, including (should it prove necessary), personally prosecuting the defendants himself?

    If no one holds the winning candidate’s their feet to the fire before the candidate clinches the nomination, he will likely feel free to ignore the issue of climate fraud prosecution for the duration of his term of office.

    • Disillusioned says:

      Unfortunately, I don’t have the faith that a Constitutionally conservative candidate (who is not beholden to the interests keeping this fraud going) has a snowball’s chance to make it through the Republican Primary, let alone the general election. I think that’s what it would take – Including a cabinet of like-minds, and a couple of successful Supreme Court nominations.

      I project the primary election will emerge with the establishment Republican with the largest coffers will have a propaganda media machine that makes sure to annihilate all competition, and will be the one who comes out on top.

      I pray I am wrong. I just don’t see it coming out any other way.

      I think the four years after January 2017 will be a huge wake-up call.

  11. Fred says:

    They will change history by burning the books to stay warm.

  12. mbe11 says:

    How the heck do you open the two links you have in the article to the.tar data sets? I just go round and round trying to open them to see the data you have in the grafts.

  13. stpaulchuck says:

    yeah, but the climate clowns will not be convinced by facts. I see this all over the blogs and news sites. There’s always several buffoons touting the reported temperatures and when you point them to the tampering facts they go ballistic.

  14. baconman says:

    I’m curious how much tampering is going on with North Dakota temperatures. Have you looked in to this? There has been some talk over the past year or so about how well corn grows up there now and they are pinning almost all of it on what they admit is a 0.27 degree increase over the last 10 years. This is supposed to account for an additional 2.5 weeks of growing season. The crap detectors are blaring.

    • gator69 says:

      Obviously they are not talking to farmers, or DuPont…

      Hybrid genetics provide the basis for tolerance to cold stress. High seed quality helps ensure that the seed will perform up to its genetic ability. Pioneer concentrates on selecting the best genetics for consistent performance across a wide range of environments and producing high quality seed. However, even with the best genetics and highest seed quality, environmental factors can still dictate stand establishment. Pioneer provides research-based advice that can help growers make informed decisions and better manage their field operations to maximize stands.

      https://www.pioneer.com/home/site/us/agronomy/soil-temp-corn-emergence/

    • mbe11 says:

      You can find out at NOAA climate data center mentioned by a later commenter. Use the mean raw data and than adjust it for the elevation of the site you are looking at and use the precipitation data to adjust for adjusting the elevation change. Snow or rain use 3.3 degrees more for every 1000 ft instead of 5.4 on those days. Of course you will have some error as the snow or rain could have been at night but just assume it is all day to adjust the raw data. Make sure you pick a small town to avoid heat islands and the NOAA adjustment will pop right out when compared to the NOAA adjusted data. Keep in mind NOAA starts with a mean that could be higher than the mean from other sources. Since you will have to do that for every year with snow or rain I suggest keeping it to a current year or so. Take a look at all the plugs in the older years when comparing the raw and adjusted data. TOBS data is adjusted but not for all sites to 1880 for some reason I do not understand. It is still the same as the adjusted data which is not labeled adjusted just data, I suspect to hide the adjustment from the general public by misdirection. From the limited number of sites I looked at in the lower 48 the adjustment is around 1 degree F upward in 2014, in the arctic the adjustment is higher about 1.5 degrees for Barrow Alaska which may hold for all arctic stations as Hanson and a lot of the AGW folks believe the data is cold biased especially in the arctic. to get Alaska or Hawaii you have to use the Berkeley Giss data site for the raw and adjusted data as the climate data center does not have those two states.

  15. DHF says:

    What´s amazes me the most, is that the adjustments still keeps increasing in magnitude. Can those who believe that these adjustments can be justified by Time of OBServation changes, Station moves, erronous temperature readings or Urban Heat Island effects please raise your hands? But before you do so, please be aware that you may be advised to redo some classes in elementary logic.

  16. gofer says:

    Just heard on radio, that March was hottest on record, following Obama talking about rising seas being a national security issue.

    • mbe11 says:

      Here is the truth. Weather history Quincy Ca. mean Temperature 2014, 55 F. NOAA mean temperature raw, 52 pretty close, NOAA adjusted Temperature 68.6 F. They simply added 16.6 degrees to make California and the US look hotter to fit the AGW religious belief. They did this to thousands of measurements all the way back to 1880. In any other profession except climate they would be in jail for fraud.

  17. mbe11 says:

    The grafts are not specific to an actual measurement. Here is the truth. Weather history Quincy Ca. mean Temperature 2014, 55 F. NOAA mean temperature raw, 52 pretty close, NOAA adjusted Temperature 68.6 F. They simply added 16.6 degrees to make California and the US look hotter to fit the AGW religious belief. They did this to thousands of measurements all the way back to 1880. In any other profession except climate they would be in jail for fraud.

  18. Eric Simpson says:

    Steven, this is the type of headline I like as it is ready made for promoting the article elsewhere, like I just left this comment at hotair (on the amnesty / climate change pushing “Republican” Michigan governor Rick Snyder):

    Snyder walks hand and hand with the leftists on … being a big fan of costly “renewable” energy to “combat climate change.”

    Now we’ve had 18+ years of no warming. Record ice extent or growth at both poles. Record cold through much of the country, and record ice for two years straight on the Great Lakes. And with the leaked Climategate emails we uncovered the data manipulations and ideological (leftist) underpinnings of the whole global warming scare. Yet still Snyder is toeing the line with the leftists on this? Insane. This out just today: NCDC Hiding The Decline In US Temperatures By Data Tampering. https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/04/17/ncdc-hiding-the-decline-in-us-temperatures-by-data-tampering/

  19. Andy Oz says:

    I have decided to cool my past 30 years of income and ask for all my taxes to be paid back to me, as, based on my homogenised income data, I wasn’t really earning anything back then. I’m sure the tax office will approve as I will point out this approach is standard procedure for scientific government data processing. I’m just saving them the time and effort of going through my old tax statements. They can trust me like I trust NASA and the NCDC. ;D

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