A Good Visualization Of US Temperature Fraud

If NCDC didn’t tamper with the data, the warming scam would collapse instantly. Measured temperatures in blue. Reported temperatures in red.

ScreenHunter_37 Feb. 14 23.52

About Tony Heller

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

39 Responses to A Good Visualization Of US Temperature Fraud

  1. r says:

    If we didn’t have a lying crook of a President it wouldn’t have mattered:

    Obama in 2006
    We Fought A Revolution in 1776 So The President Couldn’t Unilaterally Ignore the law.


  2. Andy Oz says:

    Shock news: Western Australian meteorology department forecasting performance called rubbish by the public. – March, 1909

    ” It is safe to say that out of four
    forecasts published in Perth, three are
    wrong. A greater scientific scandal could
    hardly be imagined.”

    It used to be limited technology at the Bureau of Meteorology causing less than adequate performance. Now it’s outright dishonesty, from a infiltrating bunch of climate alarmists.

  3. JFB says:

    If CO2 curve don’t fit temperature trend, then the temperature trend must fit CO2 curve.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Actually they manipulated BOTH to fit the story line!

      The CO2 data has been much much easier to manipulate:

      …We saw how Callendar was able to set a baseline of about 290 ppmv by rejecting values deviating more than 10% from his desired value.

      It was believed that snow accumulating on ice sheets would preserve the contemporaneous atmosphere trapped between snowflakes during snowfalls, so that the CO2 content of air inclusions in cores from ice sheets should reveal paleoatmospheric CO2 levels. Jaworowski et al. (1992 b) compiled all such CO2 data available, finding that CO2 levels ranged from 140 to 7,400 ppmv. However, such paleoatmospheric CO2 levels published after 1985 were never reported to be higher than 330 ppmv. Analyses reported in 1982 (Neftel at al., 1982) from the more than 2,000 m deep Byrd ice core (Antarctica), showing unsystematic values from about 190 to 420 ppmv, were falsely “filtered” when the alleged same data showed a rising trend from about 190 ppmv at 35,000 years ago to about 290 ppmv (Callendar’s pre-industrial baseline) at 4,000 years ago when re-reported in 1988 (Neftel et al., 1988); shown by Jaworowski et al. (1992 b) in their Fig. 5….

      The “Ice Core CO2” data is just as munipulated as thetemperature data. This is how they did it:

      Two important observations were made in these early studies. It was found that the CO2 content of the air trapped in pre-industrial and ancient ice is rather high, and has a very wide concentration range of about 100-7400ppm (Table 1). Even more important was the finding that several physical and chemical processes (such as melting, the presents of liquid brines in capillary-like interstitial voids, the presence of carbonates, over-pressure in the air bubbles, and solid deposition of super-cooled fog, combined with large differences of solubility of different gases in cold water, and mobility of CO2 in ice) lead to differentiation of the original atmospheric ratios of N2 O2 Ar and CO2, and to depletion or enrichment of CO2 in the ice (coachman et al., 1958; Hemmingsen 1959; Scolander et al., 1961; Matsuo and miyake, 1966: Raynaud and delmas, 1977)….

      Three different methods of gas extraction were used, and they produced different results. This is illustrated in Fig.2. It can be seen that in air from the same section of a pre-industrial ice core, after 7h ‘wet’extraction of melted ice, the CO2 concentration was up to about 1000 ppm, and it was 1.5-4.5-times higher than after the 15 min ‘wet’extraction. The ‘dry’extraction, consisting in crushing or shaving the ice samples at about -20c, produced results similar to the 15 min ‘wet’extraction. The short ‘wet’and the ‘dry’ extractions recovered about a half or less of the total CO2 present in the ice….


    • Gail Combs says:

      CO2 measurements cont.

      Historic data was manipulated by Callendar who ‘Selected’ the data he would use and present to the world. GRAPH

      At the Mauna Loa Observatory the measurements were taken with a new infra-red (IR) absorbing instrumental method, never validated versus the accurate wet chemical techniques. Critique has also been directed to the analytical methodology and sampling error problems (Jaworowski et al., 1992 a; and Segalstad, 1996, for further references), and the fact that the results of the measurements were “edited” (Bacastow et al., 1985); large portions of raw data were rejected, leaving just a small fraction of the raw data subjected to averaging techniques (Pales & Keeling, 1965).

      Mauna Loa Observatory even say they do.

      4. In keeping with the requirement that CO2 in background air should be steady, we apply a general “outlier rejection” step, in which we fit a curve to the preliminary daily means for each day calculated from the hours surviving step 1 and 2, and not including times with upslope winds. All hourly averages that are further than two standard deviations, calculated for every day, away from the fitted curve (“outliers”) are rejected. This step is iterated until no more rejections occur.

      Unfortunately Lucy Skywalkers Greenworldtrust.org with some really good info., has been recently taken over by Eco-nuts. DARN! However Dr.Ball has an article Why and How the IPCC Demonized CO2 with Manufactured Information

      If we manage to survive this mess, it will go down as an example of how science can be corrupted on a large scale.

  4. Bob Greene says:

    Has any official challenge to the data manipulation been made? I’ve seen some dismissive comments about Steve’s work in blogs.

  5. gator69 says:

    Another reason why I prefer to listen to AC/DC over NCDC.


  6. I. Lou Minotti says:

    “. . . but their climate models are just not worth a damn,” he said. “They’re just too easy to manipulate” (William Happer, Princeton University).


  7. omanuel says:

    Thanks, Steven, for recognizing and reporting the disturbing facts about the demise of integrity in science.

    The bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Aug 1945 first scared world leaders into

    1. Forming the UN on 24 Oct 1945
    2. Forbidding knowledge of energy in cores of
    _ a.) Heavy atoms like Uranium
    _ b.) Ordinary stars like the Sun

    After the USSR exploded the Tsar bomb in Oct 1961 (>1000 times more powerful than the bombs that had destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Aug 1945)


    Frightened leaders of both political parties apparently agreed, “BETTER RED THAN DEAD !”


  8. wwlee4411 says:

    Reblogged this on wwlee4411 and commented:
    Truth be told.

  9. SMS says:

    And if you properly correct for UHI, we are a cooling planet.

    Australia has a few weeks of hot weather and it’s “climate change”, the US has month’s of bitterly cold weather………..and it’s “weather”. People, especially young people, cannot grasp the extent in variability of everyday “weather”.

    I am gob smacked each and every day by how naïve people can be. One day they follow Jim Jones to Guyana and the next they follow Jim Hansen down a rabbit hole.

    Steven, you do a fine job of trying to show how variable weather can be. Keep up the good work. Maybe someday people will wake up and start doing some proper investigating instead of relying on charlatan scientists, lying politicians and environmental zealots for the information they use to make personal decisions.

  10. thallstd says:

    Not doubting your chart but would love to have the source for each to quiet the naysayers…

  11. E. Martin says:

    Perhaps some ethical climate scientists could collect all this data and put it into into a scientific paper that would clearly expose all the data cooking as well as those responsible for it.

    • nigelf says:

      That’s not going to happen because the gatekeepers at the journals are the same ones pushing this fraud. Climategate exposed this in detail.

  12. Hugh K says:

    What we need here is someone highly proficient in the nefarioous ways of fraud to look at these adjustments. If only CAGW chief climate ethicist, admitted fraudster, Peter Gleick would weigh in on this one. Sadly, he remains silent on this issue. Why?

  13. That chart needs to be posted everywhere. People don’t know how huge the deception is.

    Best. Chart. Ever.

  14. omanuel says:

    The real purpose of fudging global climate data has now been exposed:


    John F. Kennedy and his brother were two politicians who would not be bluffed into submission.

    Both were assassinated before Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon conceded to the USSR and China in 1971 and ended the Apollo Space Program.

    The rest is history.

  15. aetheressa says:

    “Your temperature readings do not match our models. Therefore, your readings are wrong. ”

    “As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man —
    There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: —
    That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
    And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

    And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
    When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
    As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
    The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!”

    Rudyard Kipling-1919-The Gods of the Copybook Headings

  16. Gail Combs says:

    I got an even better one Steve:

    As most know we got plastered with snow on the east coast this week. I have mentioned several times at WUWT that the weather station near me 24 hours later reports temperatures 2 -4 °F higher than I actually saw during the day.

    Well that B@$T@rd Jeff McMasters (Wunderground) is reporting the snow we got this week as Precipitation (P)!!! And yes there is a separate category for snow.

    Please note I can WALK to the %$#@ weather station, it is THAT close to me:

    “The official story” is
    Tues; 11th -0.01 (P) 0.0 SNOW – Max 35 °F = Min= 29 °F
    Wed; 12th -0.37 (P) 0.0 SNOW – Max = 31 °F Min= 24 °F
    Thrus 13th -0.36 (P) 0.0 SNOW – Max = 34 °F Min= 30 °F

    We had at least 6 inches and it certainly was not above freezing or even close to 32 °F on Wednesday. Heck we STILL have snow on the ground. I had to chop the ice, 2 inches thick out of my stock tanks on Wednesday and carried warm water to my animals to make sure they got at least one warm drink for the day.

    So now we know how the US weather service deals with the temperature “adjustments”

    They sweep the Snow under the rug!

    • darrylb says:

      Steve—yep great visualization.

      Gail– Jeff Masters science: When temps were in the upper one third of the normal range for 13 months running at one location, he stated that the odds of that happening were 1/ 3 to the 13th power. Good example of white and red data (and stupidity)

    • rw says:

      The silver lining in this is that they are moving into Baghdad Bob territory. (It’s hard to smooth out the rug with all that snow under it.)

      They may, in fact, be deceiving themselves as along with everyone else.

      • Gail Combs says:

        NOT reporting 6 inches of snow that paralyzed my nearby city is not ‘Deceiving themselves’ It is outright LYING!!!!!

        I hope like heck I am not the only one how noticed the lying.

    • aetheressa says:

      Gail, did you call him out? I would SO make it clear to him or any audience he has, that he is at least wrong where you live!

    • What station? Is it a coop station?

      • Gail Combs says:

        It is an airport. I really do not like giving out my exact location because of the fruit loops. I have already had several run-ins with and have learned to be more careful.

        I am not going to leave this alone though.

  17. markstoval says:

    What I don’t understand Steve is how this massive fraud can exist out in the open and no one at all gets into any trouble. It looks like this should be a felony on many levels but nothing happens.

    Since this information “informs” congress, are they not guilty of lying to congress?

    • Shazaam says:

      There is a real double standard in place with the so-called justice system today.

      Those who work for/in government (i.e. tax parasites) are generally exempt from the law. Just look at the fact that cops have killed more citizens than terrorists since 2000. They generally get a paid vacation and another notch in their gun for these killings. In between, the cops fill their time with some puppycide for kicks. There are no criminal or administrative penalties for those tax parasites graced with the umbrella of “sovereign immunity”.

      The average citizen faces 70,000-80,000 pages of new laws and regulations annually with the “Ignorance of the law is no excuse”. Contempt of cop can be fatal. Contempt of government might not be very safe anymore……

      • NikFromNYC says:

        It has been said that the ignorance of the law being no excuse is of great historical irony since its origin as an idea was coincident with the actual public posting of a couple of pages of written laws, so back then, indeed ignorance of those very limited laws was then not a valid excuse. That it was a short list was the whole point of the idea. This principle held fairly until the modern era of massive legislation which rendered it capricious and cruel as we further slide into tyranny.

    • omanuel says:

      I have been sending information to the Congressional Space Science and Technogy Committee.

      They have three figures of precise experimental data on pages 19-27 of my autobiography that falsify the standard (“settled science”) models of

      1. The nucleus of atoms
      2. The cores of stars.

      After that information was sent to Congress, Nature published a news report saying some stars may have pulsar cores (although Nature had refused earlier to even review our paper saying the core of the Sun is a pulsar – which it is).

      • Jimbo says:

        Omanuel, you maybe correct. The problem is that you keep on playing the same obsessive record and people here have learned to switch off. How can you tell? Answer = where is the traction? Try another technique, bombarding someone else’s blog with your ideas is growing weary. I have tried to ignore you but it is just too much now. Please ease off on your stuff a bit. PLEEEEEEAAAAASSSSSEEEEE!!!!!

  18. David, UK says:

    It’s all part of the brainwashing. Just this week at work, a girl in her mid-twenties commented to the rest of us “Isn’t it strange the way winters have changed over the years; I remember as a kid when it used to snow as early as November and now it hardly snows at all!” (Side note: It’s hardly snowed at all in the north of England this winter, although ironically we did actually have light snow in November!) I told her I’m in my 40s, and I know very well that even pre-xmas snow was always a rare thing, and November snow was virtually unheard of. I told her to cast her mind back over the last three years of heavy snow we had in the UK and reconsider if it “hardly snows at all.” It made her re-think, but unfortunately she’s just one of millions of brain-washed sheeple.

  19. Woody says:

    “Clover asked Benjamin to read her the Sixth Commandment, and when Benjamin, as usual, said that he refused to meddle in such matters, she fetched Muriel. Muriel read the Commandment for her. It ran: ‘No animal shall kill any other animal without cause. Somehow or other the last two words had slipped out of the animals’ memory. But they saw now that the Commandment had not been violated; for clearly there was good reason for killing the traitors who had leagued themselves with Snowball.” — Animal Farm, George Orwell

    Revisionist history in the name of the “the cause” is as old as Statism itself, whether it be temperature data, the Constitution, IPCC reports, whatever it takes.

  20. SA_NYC says:

    Apologies, but can someone explain to me how to interpret this chart? Is the point that in the past the temperatures were incorrectly reported as being lower than the actual observed temperatures (hence red line below blue) but that’s no longer happening?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *