Joe D’Aleo sent this over. NCDC shows -5.5F anomaly in Connecticut as near average, but +2.6F in California as much above average.
![Screen shot 2014-03-25 at 1.56.50 PM[1]](https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/screen-shot-2014-03-25-at-1-56-50-pm1.png)
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
Recent Comments
- Jehzsa on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Peter Carroll on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- arn on HUD Climate Advisor
- spren on HUD Climate Advisor
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Tel on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Petit_Barde on Ellen Flees To The UK
- dm on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Gamecock on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on The End Of Polar Bears
Ouch! Yes, California at +2.6 is “MUCH above average”, but Montana has an anomaly a full 10 degrees larger, at -12.6, yet it is a simple “below average”.
Fraudsters, not scientists.
They can’t even get the misinformation right. What of the -12.6 in Montana? Apparently they color the map by whatever their feelings are as they’re coloring.
http://hallofrecord.blogspot.com/2009/01/decadal-occurrences-of-statewide.html
In addition to the actual numbers, the coloring scheme is quite an indicator as well.
Just like the temperature delta charts. Any minor amount in the plus is yellow to hysterical red, while below normal starts pale-green, green, blues to purple…
I would have chosen pale green for slightly above normal and green for slightly below normal, but that scheme doesn’t alarm the sheep enough I guess.
It’s not science anymore. Propaganda 101 is the new climatology analysis tool.
http://hallofrecord.blogspot.com/search?q=statewide+minimum
UN-F-ING believable. I live in Ct. And trust me it’s been MUCH below average, still is as a matter of fact.
Yes!
I am in Mid North Carolina and it was below freezing this morning 31 °F (They already upped it by 1°F) and last year it was the same, 30 °F actual low with 43 °F average low and a record low: 22 °F (1940)
Well, at least they aren’t lying about the actual numbers……or are they?
Upstate NY gets -5F but I’m thinking much worse than that
Yes they lie about the numbers too. I am at a rural station (I can walk to it) and the temperature is ALWAYS raised at least 1°F and more often 2 – 4°F by the next day. Unfortunately it doesn’t stop there. Last summer had five degrees at 90 °F and above when I checked in September. I checked again a few weeks ago and now there are fifteen day 90 °F and above.
Darn target would sit still!
I suggest to everyone they start documenting the data. Write down the temp when you get up and see if the next day the low is the same temp or below or if it is above the number you recorded. Prove to yourself that the data tampering is going on.
Gail
Log in here
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/quick-links
And click “No 2″ & then ” Individual Station Record”
And you get the print out of each month’s daily record. You can even see the original hand written records from Year Dot.
Go play! You’ll soon see how much warmer things were in the past.
Paul
Above average = +0.6 to +3.0
Below average = -2.3 to -12.6
Much above average = + 2.6 to +4.8
Much below average = -8.8 to -12.3
Sloppy science or intended deception? Untrustworthy in either regard.
This is the original NCDC map:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/February-2014-US-Divisional-Temperature-Ranks-Map.gif
Did Joe D’Aeo add the numbers? If so, where did he get them from?
I ask because I call up the NCDC to question them.
Those were NWS anomalies for various cities.
I live in Connecticut and on my electric bill my supplier shows the temperature difference for each billing period compared to the previous year same period. The temperature for my last three bills show this year being colder by 7F, 7F, 6F than last year.
The anomalies in New England are only off by a fact of 2 or 3. So it’s typical good science.
I live in Montana, just below the ‘minus’ sign on the map. So, when WUWT posted this, I googled the terms ‘history’ ‘wunderground’ and ‘(my town)’ . I got the Wunderground site for my closest station with daily max, min and average temperature, including the historical averages. I simply calculated the departure of each day from historical average and then averaged the values. Came out something like -11.9 departure from normal … very close to the value on the map. We also had a record low on the 6th of -34. I just cannot see how a minus 12 temperature anomaly only qualifies for the slightly below normal category. Anyway, this takes ten minutes and anybody can do it. We should make our own map.
I think they did very well!
They’ve crayoned the colors right up to the very edges of the boundaries.
That’s very clever of them.
.
🙂
It is amazing how temperatures respect state boundaries.
… and maybe some county boundaries too!
It looks to me like the boundaries are for what the NWS calls County Warning and Forecast Area (CWFA) or just CWAs, see
http://forecast.weather.gov/glossary.php?letter=c
A sample map here:
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/gjt/?n=cwa
General info here:
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/geodata/catalog/wsom/html/cwa.htm
Under this large map, click on CONUS to see the lower 48 states and the 3 letter code for the area and city of reference.
One of the tricks to fool your eye, Color coding. Also scaling changes on graphs – small changes can be made to look big by reducing the scale of the graph. Good thing we still have some intelligent people who can see through the BS.