More on temperature data “adjustment”

Walter Dnes (WUWT) examined American temperature “adjustment” by the USHCN (United States Historical Climate Network), and found that said adjustments were not just annual, but monthly as well (i.e., different months were “adjusted” differently).

Among his more interesting findings…

  • Winter months were adjusted upward more so than summer months, since 1970 (it’s quite possible their could have been a correlation between average monthly temperature and adjustment, but Dnes didn’t examine that). Dnes noted that “talk about winters in the USA getting warmer may be an artifact of the adjustments.”
  • Since 1970, the adjustment slope in annual terms is over 1 degree Celsius. In other words, when anyone talks about warming over the last forty-plus years, 1C of it comes from humans alright – human manipulation of the data
  • Annual adjustment for the 1930s (the decade the gave us the Dust Bowl and the most massive dust storm in American history), were over half a degree Celsius downward. As Dnes notes, “one wonders if this an attempt to disappear the heat waves and droughts of ‘The Dirty Thirties’ in a manner similar to attempts to disappear the Medieval Warm Period. It’s hard to talk about ‘the hottest ever’, when there’s ‘inconvenient data’ around, showing that the 1930s were hotter.”
  • Since 1970, the number of actual data points for temperature has fallen. In fact, we have 20% fewer raw data points today than in 1970. Yet final data points are unchanged, meaning there’s quite a bit of estimated data, a problem I’ve discussed earlier.
  • From about 1895 to 1930, “final” data points are well above raw data points (in 1896, the raw data points were about half the number of final data points

There have been more than a few posts here on the various and sundry problems with temperature data thanks to global warming alarmists. Dnes’ analysis is just the latest example.

Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal

About these ads

7 thoughts on “More on temperature data “adjustment”

  1. I heard this morning that those lying earthquake scientists are also “adjusting” the numbers for the quake…

    oh.. and those hurricane scientists – they keep “adjusting” the hurricane forecasts also…

    looks like the entire field of science is full of SOB “data changers” , eh
    ;-)

    and the really funny thing – FAUX news is not saying a world about the earthquake and hurricane data changers.. not a word!

    and that’s not the worst of it – now FEMA is “adjusting” data:

    “Survey shows Hampton Roads residents have the wrong idea about flooding, flood insurance” :

    ” Two surprises cropped up in a new survey on perceptions about sea level rise in Hampton Roads: Fewer people than last year believe flooding has increased and, when it does flood, they believe their homeowner’s insurance will cover it.

    Wrong on both counts.

    Those misconceptions are included in the results of the 2014 Life in Hampton Roads survey conducted by the Social Science Research Center at Old Dominion University in Norfolk. Part of that survey was to gauge how people feel about environmental issues, particularly sea level rise and flooding.”

    ” What actual [govt] data show, Richman said, is a “substantial increase in flooding in Hampton Roads over the last 30 years. It is considerably higher, with markedly more frequent flooding incidents.”

    http://www.dailypress.com/news/science/dp-nws-odu-survey-climate-20140824,0,2906678.story

    it’s becoming crystal clear – all the agencies of govt are engaging in a gigantic conspiracy!

    hurricanes, earthquakes, flooding.. what else? global warming?
    ;-)

    • well.. that figures!
      ;-)

      you certainly can’t trust government or science when they are “adjusting” data, right?

    • you’d make decisions. if you believed the data, right? My point is that when we’re dealing with measurement data for a dynamic environment – “adjustments” are normal and expected and we don’t consider that process to be a conspiracy.

      right? do you think when the hurricane forecasters give you a “cone” of probability that they’re lying?

      Do you think when USGS comes out and says the original earthquake was a 6.0 but further “measurements” have indicated it’s 6.2 – do you think they’re lying?

      when NOAA says it’s going to rain tomorrow afternoon and it does not- is that an indication of government/science malfeasance?

      How come some measurements about weather and climate are conspiracies and others not? (or maybe some thing they all are?)

  2. “How come some measurements about weather and climate are conspiracies and others not?”

    Because there is not the political push to bring the government in to “fix” that problem, as there is for “climate change”.

    When we DO have such political pressure (such as fracking’s causing earthquakes), then you DO see such “adjustments”.

    The government has been caught fudging the unemployment numbers, too.

    • a worldwide global govt conspiracy to make
      climate “adjustments”? All the OECD countries are in on it?

      Has FEMA been”caught” -“fudging the flood maps also?

      shouldn’t FEMA be getting of out the subsidized insurance business also now that FEMA has been “adjusting” the flood maps?

Comments are closed.