NCDC tells us that improvements in temperature reading technology since 1998 require an additional 0.5F adjustments
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
Recent Comments
- Greg in NZ on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- arn on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Trevor on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- czechlist on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- arn on COP29 Preview
- arn on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- stewartpid on COP29 Preview
- GeologyJim on A Giant Eyesore
Basically 1 degree then with rounding.
Improvements should require no adjustments.
What justification can NCDC have for including all these adjustments? Our thermometers are suppose to be getting more accurate and reliable with time, not the other way around.
I’m still waiting for that big negative adjustment for UHI. When will that show up?
“Today’s forecast…
Lower Gehenna, Highs around 100 C, with jets of fire and burning brimstone.
Hades, Highs around 100 C, humid and unseasonably hot.
Tartarus, Highs around 200 C, with a chance of scattered magma storms.”
With a forecast like that, I wouldn’t count on any time soon…
I remember that day. Spring of 2004.
Yes, I remember that glorious day, that one single day in late spring of 2004… After decades, and decades of being unable to properly read a thermometer, the scientists had finally collaborated on development of a technique whereby they could actually, definitively, look at a thermometer and get the real reading from it. It was wonderful! The numbers came rolling in, and all was right with the world — for one day. Alas! Every silver lining has a cloud, and the day was barely over when the same scientists who had so consistently read thermometers too high for all their lives, the same scientists who had at last managed to get it right for that one wonderful day, suddenly lapsed once more into the ways of error — only now they were reading their instruments too low. It was pandemic of climatological and observational hypothermia. The situation has only gotten worse. Every year that passes, the scientists become more myopic, less rational, increasingly unable to make sense of their own equipment. Every year they read temperatures lower and lower and lower.
Thank goodness, at least the fine savants at NCDC are helping fix all the mistakes!
Does this organization advocate recalibrating the official thermometer the US uses at NIST.
I stopped believing any of the USHCN “records” after dutifully downloading the daily data for several months. “Historical temperatures” can vary by as much as 4 degrees C, just from whatever the algorithms are doing to the “data”. For instance one of my favorites, that Paul Homewood has written about: Circleville Ohio. In July of 2014, the January 1934 temperatures ranged from 9.9C to 13C. You’d get a different temperature, depending upon what daily data set you downloaded. I believe this is an effect of the Pair-Wise Homogenization Algorithm, and not the UHI adjustments as some seem to think. To be honest, I’m no longer interested enough to find out exactly why…
Sure, from all I can gather we are actually on a slide down in temperatures globally but they can’t let anyone else know that, can they? The slide down started in ca. 2005. So they need even more and faster adjustments, double at least, higher slope of adjustments, just to keep public temperature graphs at least level and flat. Expect the adjustments to continue until about 2035if the 60 year cycle continues, right around 2 × +0.000625 K/mo unless they start allowing some of the decline to show through in the graphs.
However, that graph above shows adjustments to be a bit more than quadruple that rate which comes from the average over the span from 1940 onward. Why? One guess may be to force a little NCDC-made ‘warming’ to give the goons pleasure.
Tony, I believe it was you that started me looking harder into these ‘adjustments’ quite a while ago and for that… a big thank you.
Thermometers doesn’t need any adjustment in the way they read the temperature, because I believe that they just need an improvement. All of us wants to have an accurate thermometer and can give a quick reading.