NCDC Blows Away All Records For Data Tampering

Despite record cold and Great Lakes ice, NCDC thinks they can get away altering the US temperature record to make the past winter just below average temperature.

ScreenHunter_546 Mar. 13 16.28

Climate at a Glance | Time Series

74% of the US was below normal temperature this winter, much of it 10 degrees below normal.


Last3mTDeptUS.png (688×531)

It was actually the ninth coldest winter on record, and the coldest in 35 years.

ScreenHunter_547 Mar. 13 16.38

NCDC bumped the winter up to 34th warmest, through an amazing 4 degrees of tampering relative to 1949.

ScreenHunter_545 Mar. 13 16.25

These adjustments are about 5 times larger than what they show in USHCN documents.

[Anthony Watts pointed out that the HPRCC map above uses a different set of stations and different baseline period than the NCDC graph. This is a valid point and affects the 74% of US below normal I mentioned, but seems unlikely to account for more than a about half a degree difference in the regional anomalies.]

About Tony Heller

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

14 Responses to NCDC Blows Away All Records For Data Tampering

  1. The Iconoclast says:

    This is fraud. Perhaps Obama’s Justice Department will investigate? As soon as they wrap their Fast & Furious, IRS, and Benghazi investigations, I’m sure they’ll be all over it.

  2. Dave N says:

    I’m interested to know whether adjustments have been made to the same data i.e. to particular years, over and over, and by how much? If someone at a given point says “the record is good”, I’m curious to know why they’d have to go back and adjust past temperatures again; did the record become no longer “good”?

    • Scott Scarborough says:

      Sometimes their methods involve adjusting all previous data to match up with a station change. For example if a station burns down and is rebuilt and they find out that after it is rebuilt it measures temperature 2 degrees cooler they rectify the situation by moving all past data down by 2 degrees and record future data without adjustment. The problem seems to be that ALL adjustments always seem to make the past colder and the present warmer. One would not expect such changes to be equally distributed, both warmer and colder except for urban heat island effect which, when adjusted for, should always make the present temperature colder and/or the past warmer. I don’t know of any adjustment that should always make the past colder and the present warmer.

      • Jason Calley says:

        Hey Scott, what you say is correct, but I could never see why they adjust any past data because of present changes. The point is, when the station changes you have a new station. That does not change the past. Past data (with the exception of known, systematic, describable, and calculable errors) is still as good as you can ever get. Changing the past just because a different set of instruments years later shows a differing trend is just crazy! Especially when what you are supposedly trying to calculate is trend changes! They need to leave the data unmolested, and when a station changes, it becomes a new station.

        I share your scorn for these clowns.

  3. The Iconoclast says:

    The impunity with which they do it… The lack of need that they feel to explain themselves… The complicity of the press… Is there no limit?

    Interestingly, people in Western Europe, the ones who have received the most AGW indoctrination for the longest, aren’t buying it, so I guess there’s still hope.

  4. Anthony Watts says:

    bear in mind it is not just USHCN station but data from GHCN and COOP stations and ASOS all combined here in climate divisions

    They aren’t in the same mode you are with data. Data selection would be a better phrase than data tampering here.

    • It is data tampering. When I run the analysis on USHCN monthly raw and fully adjusted data I see almost exactly the same alterations. NCDC data is a fixed offset from the USHCN adjusted data, but the slope is identical. The stations you are referring to have essentially no impact on the slope, and they shouldn’t.

      • Chad Wozniak says:

        Steven, I hope you or someone is preserving the raw data sin a safe place so that the fraud can be demonstrated when the polit9ical environment permits.

    • Eric Barnes says:

      Your sophistry makes me fell much better Anthony. I’m sure there’s perfectly valid explanation for their “Data Selection” over the last 70 years.

  5. NikFromNYC says:

    It’s carbon hockey sticks all the way:

  6. Ian W says:

    Is NCDC ISO- 9000 certified? Do they have any externally audited quality management system? It would appear not from what is being described.

    • Shazaam says:

      It wouldn’t matter a whit if they were ISO-9000 certified.

      Any institution with abysmally bad procedures and results can easily get an ISO-9000 certification if they take the time and spend the money to document that they use the same abysmal procedures without modification all the time. And demonstrate that all employees know and use those abysmally bad procedures exactly.

      The climate fraudsters could easily get their temperature tweaking procedures certified. Given that they always cool the past and consistently warm the present there is no obstacle to then getting an ISO-9000 certification beyond the time and expense, and that is no obstacle to them. After all, tax money is free and more is printed every year.

  7. Hugh K says:

    “NCDC thinks they can get away altering the US temperature record to make the past winter just below average temperature.”

    So do I. Who is left to stop the NCDC in this Administration that backed Senate Majority leader Harry Reid’s Senate rules change that would block the minority party from forcing a 60-vote threshold and filibustering any nominations other than those for the Supreme Court? Other than destroying the essential framework of freedom and liberty protection that was cemented into the building blocks of our government by Thomas Jefferson, Reid’s move allows President Obama to put the most radical of the federal judicial appointments on the DC 5th circuit. The DC 5th district court of appeals hears most of the cases surrounding constitutional issues and challenges against legislation stemming from Washington DC. In short, with stacked courts, any future judicial action against all government agencies is mute. That certainly made Lois Lerner and her IRS employer happy. And based on Holder’s dismal history of refusing to seriously investigate other scandals (think Gleick as relating to climate fraud), it appears there is no other resource available to bring NCDC to task.
    The only solution I can think of to stop NCDC and the rest of the ‘hockey team’ is the voting booth but in the meantime…nada.

  8. D. Self says:

    NCDC – Government management at it’s finest.

Leave a Reply