I am considered a heretic by some on both sides of the global warming debate, because I refuse to tamper with the raw US data.
I have already shown why you can’t detect baseline tampering using anomalies, and thus should not use them. I have also shown how infilling missing data massively biases the US data towards warming over the past 20 years.
Now I am going to show why gridding is unimportant. The graph below shows my ungridded USHCN final averages in blue, and gridded NCDC temperatures in red.
The slope is almost identical, and the offset is probably mainly due to NCDC’s extra co-op stations. Gridding is unimportant for US data, because the stations are fairly evenly spaced, by design.
On the other hand, the data tampering being done by USHCN is huge. People on both sides of the debate should quit focusing on meaningless precision in tampered data, and instead focus on the huge inaccuracy created by tampering.
With large data sets with a random distribution of error (like missing data) real scientists do not attempt to make corrections. As soon as corrections start being made, the door is opened to confirmation bias at best – and it gets worse from there.
Leave the data alone. You are falling for an old NOAA mind trick.
A couple of years ago I looked at the most recent 15 tears of Canada’s data and used a 1×1 grid and a 5×5 grid.
The 5×5 grid showed warming. The 1×1 grid showed cooling.
But Canada’s data is much sparser than the USA.
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/12/09/canada-grid-square-choices-5×5-warming-and-1×1-cooling/
Science is working with only the data you have measured accurately.
Criminology/climatology is creating the data you believe will most likely secure the next government grant.
In either case, a deliberate choice is made. Honesty vs. fraud.
😉
The data tampering is blatant fraud. The people doing should be in jail. They are criminals.
You are right, Steven. Keep up the pressure and good work!
The continual adjustments and homogenizations are avenues for corruption and bias. Using the few surface stations that have been in place consistently for 100+ years and meet the requirements of a good station, eliminating all that have been moved or corrupted by bad placement, would give a much better sense of how the climate is or is not changing. Our datasets are complete garbage, though. So many sites have been moved and “upgraded” that we don’t have a baseline, much less a sense of how much variation there is due to natural noise. and much much less a sense of how much is due to increasing CO2.
You have made your points repeatedly and accurately while they are creating straw men.
Science relies on the guesses we make (hypotheses) being tested against reality, if real measurements are not made and logically used then it is not science.
… better thread to ask this question in …
When did the first known/recognized use of gridding appear?
Year?
Paper?
Author(s)?
These are bad times for clear thinking people who know their math.
Washington has been infested with parasites, freeloaders, morons and war mongers, the scientific world has been infested with activist who have lost any connection with reality (if they ever had any connection with reality) and the electorate has bend over to be screwed and fleeced.
Just wait until drinking water, food, fuel, electricity, iPhones and Nike shoes get scarce.
That should wake up some people.
For now defend your fortress on the web and keep all guns blasting.
The debate is over, we’re at war.
re: R. de Haan June 25, 2014 at 12:59 am
… Just wait until drinking water, food, fuel, electricity, iPhones and Nike shoes get scarce.
Not going to happen; we have a lot of inertia still left in the system even if it is on an overall ‘decline’.
.
_Jim,
It is already PLANNED.
42% of US electricity is produced by coal plants. The EPAs older regs (2011-12) will permanently shut down 10 % of our coal plants. That does not include temporary 18 month shut downs for upgrading with a three year window. Last I checked 12X3/2 = 18 so that means HALF of the coal plants will be down for THREE YEARS or ~20% of the US capacity. That does not include the possible shut down of 1/3 of the nuclear plants. Nuclear energy currently generates 19 percent of our nation’s electricity. If all 38 units at risk were prematurely retired, about one-third of our nuclear fleet would be shut down
That was from a few years ago.
No.
You assume there are no adults left. There are some left. So, no.
It gets WORSE….
After wiping out over 10 to 15% of the generating capacity (If you also include loss of hydro) NEW plants can not be built except maybe Nuclear— If you can get past the foaming at the mouth protestors and Natural Gas -EEEK FRACKING!!!
So Obummer has set up the next president with a royal FLUSH!
Meanwhile I am glad I am sitting on part of NC’s natural gas formation….
No.
You are bent on some mania that I’m not buying into.
Regards.
_Jim, you are a heck of a lot more optimistic than I am.
I lost my optimism when REPUBLICAN Senator Burr assured me he would not vote for the Food Safety Modernization Act and then turned around and not only co-sponsored the G^% D@#* bill he added in that the WTO would get to write the regulations American farmers would have to obey!!!
In other words the Democrats AND the REPUBLICANS both want this country to crash and burn. I can see absolutely no other reason for the mismanagement of this country since Reagan and before. Especially when Pascal Lamy came right out and said the decision was made to eliminate National Sovereignty back in the 1930s.
You don’t believe the Republicans want to eliminate our country? Then explain why Bush in June of 2007, president Bush signed a Framework for Advancing Transatlantic Economic Integration at a summit in Washington with the European Union? President Bush, speaking at the post-summit press conference, claimed that it was “a commitment to eliminating barriers to trade” and “a recognition that the closer that the United States and the EU become, the better off our people become.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/04/20070430-2.html
Remember The EU began as a Coal and Steel Free Trade Agreement in 1951.
You can ask Tallbloke how well that is working out for the UK. Original from from: http://www.vernoncoleman.com/euillegally.html
We all should take note of this comment:
Unfortunately it is about to get worse. Right now any one country has veto power. New rules will be switching that to a majority rule and there goes the last of the UKs sovereignty.
There is also a listing of all the activities that will be regulated by the EU and not the UK, like immigration, trade, agriculture, food, transport, and employment law. They are called ” ‘competencies’, areas of legislation where the EU has total power over member states”….. Not sure where I saw the actual listing but it was a very long list that means the UK as an independent country will cease to exist. It will have no more status than a state like North Carolina. Worse one of the ‘competencies’ combined with majority rule means the UK can not withdraw from the EU without agreement by the other countries in the EU.
Think about this _Jim, the USA belongs to the WTO and a law was just passed that gave the power to regulate farming and food to the WTO. Farmers in the USA just lost their voice, vote, freedom and sovereignty and now are little more than serfs of an unknown unelected bureaucracy that isn’t even American! Isn’t that the same road that the UK traveled before us?