More On The Fake NOAA Late Winter Trend

I did some more research on my theory that the NOAA later winters hockey stick since 1990 is due to missing data. In the first graph below I plotted the number of valid days per month for the 100 stations with the fastest trend towards a later winter. As I expected, these stations have dropped from thirty days of valid temperatures per month in 1990, to six days per month now.

This confirms my suspicion that the apparent trend towards later winter since 1990 is largely due to data loss. If a station is missing temperature readings in October and November, that will cause the average date of the first freeze to come later.

Stations used in this analysis :

FREMONT 5 NW OR US USC00353095
WEST YELLOWSTONE MT US USC00248857
FORKS 4 NNE MT US USC00243089
FORTINE 1 N MT US USC00243139
WELLSBURG WTR TRMT PL WV US USC00469368
FRANKLIN NE US USC00253035
KALAMAZOO STATE HOSPITAL MI US USC00204244
CHELSEA VT US USC00431360
COLLBRAN CO US USC00051741
GREENVILLE 2 NE PA US USC00363526
WAHPETON 3 N ND US USC00329100
CORTLAND NY US USC00301799
HETTINGER ND US USC00324178
JOHNSTOWN PA US USC00364385
CORINNE UT US USC00421731
LAKE SPAULDING CA US USC00044713
BROCKPORT NY US USC00300937
PALMERTON PA US USC00366689
ASHLAND EXP FARM WI US USC00470349
WOODSTOCK MD US USC00189750
LOCKPORT 4E NY US USC00304844
FAYETTE 4 SW MI US USC00202737
KLAMATH FALLS 2 SSW OR US USC00354506
CAMBRIDGE WATER TRMT P MD US USC00181385
DELAWARE OH US USC00332119
CAMBRIDGE CITY 3 N IN US USC00121229
ROSEAU MN US USC00217087
GRAFTON ND US USC00323594
FREDERICKSBURG NP VA US USC00443192
MILLINGTON 1 SE MD US USC00185985
OWINGS FERRY LANDING MD US USC00186770
WHEATFIELD IN US USC00129511
LUSK 2 SW WY US USC00485830
MUNISING MI US USC00205690
HERMISTON 1 SE OR US USC00353847
MILFORD 2 SE DE US USC00075915
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS CO US USC00057936
MEDICINE LODGE KS US USC00145173
COLVILLE WA US USC00451630
HEBER UT US USC00423809
LEWISTON ME US USC00174566
THOMPSON UT US USC00428705
QUINCY CA US USC00047195
HOBART 2 WNW IN US USC00124008
SHELBYVILLE 1 E KY US USC00157324
TAUNTON MA US USC00198367
GLOVERSVILLE NY US USC00303319
FOSSTON 1 E MN US USC00212916
MOTT ND US USC00326155
VACAVILLE CA US USC00049200
PLAIN DEALING LA US USC00167344
GOLDENDALE WA US USC00453222
DARLINGTON WI US USC00472001
TELLURIDE 4WNW CO US USC00058204
FRANKFORT DOWNTOWN KY US USC00153028
KENTON OK US USC00344766
COEUR D’ALENE ID US USC00101956
MERRIMAN NE US USC00255470
TUCSON WFO AZ US USC00028815
MILLINOCKET ME US USC00175304
LAKEVIEW 2 NNW OR US USC00354670
MORRISVILLE 6 SW NY US USC00305512
MCLEANSBORO IL US USC00115515
CONCONULLY WA US USC00451666
PORT TOWNSEND WA US USC00456678
MILBANK 4 NW SD US USC00395536
DAHLONEGA 4WSW GA US USC00092475
LAWTON OK US USC00345063
GOLDSBORO 4 SE NC US USW00013713
SAINT PAUL NE US USC00257515
GOLCONDA NV US USC00263245
BAUDETTE MN US USC00210515
SANTA ROSA CA US USC00047965
MORGAN POWER & LIGHT UT US USC00425826
PARKER AZ US USC00026250
LISBON ND US USC00325220
RED RIVER NM US USC00297323
BOONTON 1 SE NJ US USC00280907
PAROWAN UT US USC00426686
SNAKE CREEK POWERHOUSE UT US USC00427909
PANGUITCH UT US USC00426601
UNIONVILLE MO US USC00238523
SNOQUALMIE FALLS WA US USC00457773
DILLON 1 E CO US USC00052281
WANAKENA RNGR SCHOOL NY US USC00308944
HILLSBORO 3 N ND US USC00324203
MILLEN 4 N GA US USC00095882
HEALDSBURG CA US USC00043875
WILLIAMSTOWN KY US USC00158714
MORAN 5WNW WY US USC00486440
SACATON AZ US USC00027370
UKIAH CA US USC00049122
TUSTIN IRVINE RCH CA US USC00049087
LAKETOWN UT US USC00424856
DICKINSON EXP STN ND US USC00322188
BEND OR US USC00350694
NORTH LOUP NE US USC00256040
CLARK SD US USC00391739
GAGE NM US USC00293368
ELECTRA P H CA US USC00042728

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to More On The Fake NOAA Late Winter Trend

  1. Louis Hooffstetter says:

    Tony, please explain exactly what you mean by “valid days of temperature per month”.

    Are you saying these stations recorded valid temperature data for an entire month but NOAA reported/used data from only the warmest days?

    If that’s the case, can you think of any reason why NOAA wouldn’t use valid temperature data from the other days, (other than to fraudulently deceive us)?

    • Brad says:

      Due to many reasons, such as age and improper maintenance, stations don’t always report data every day. Days which are not reported are ‘estimated’ by an algorithm using the surrounding temperature data and denoted the an “E” in the temperature data. This algorithm is subject to the biases of its creator and other problems. Much like the climate computer models, the algorithm over ‘estimates’ the actual data. Largely because the estimated, faulty stations are more rural than the urban reporting stations which are better maintained due to the convenience of their locations. Since the data is back filled with the urban data, the rural stations become contaminated with urban heat island effect and create a fake warming trend. Tony using the term fraudulent for effect.

      • Louis Hooffstetter says:

        Brad, thanks for the information; your explanation is very informative. But let me probe a little further. When you say “stations don’t always report data every day”, does that mean they don’t record the temperature every day, or that the recorded data doesn’t get transmitted to NOAA every day for some reason?

        If these stations are not functioning properly, Tony’s graph seems to indicate that the government entity responsible for ensuring the quality of our temperature data has been woefully negligent for the last 15+ years. Wouldn’t stations that only function properly for six days out of each month be prioritized for repair?

        And as for Tony’s use of the term fraud, I believe he’s simply following the old adage that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.

        • kyle_fouro says:

          I’m sure Tony will chime in but from what I understand the stations are actually recording temperatures but NOAA isn’t actually using these temps in their analyses.

      • Freddy Boom-Boom says:

        This might well have answered my question too. I was still unable (even after this later entry) to tease out the reasoning for Oct. data loss = a later freezing date bias. Thanks. And obviously, anyone else who can confirm, add to, or elucidate these points, please do chime in.

    • tonyheller says:

      For whatever reason, some days are marked as missing (-9999) in the GHCN daily database.
      In the USHCN monthly final database, missing months are marked with an “E”

  2. Rob says:

    Did that Seth clown report when the last day below freezing is? Even if the start data were true, not showing the last day makes the data fairly useless since it could just be the first day starts late and last day ends late.

    I know where I am here in Ontario, Canada that I have not seen any real change. If the first cold day seems later than usual then it is almost always offset by the last day happening later in the following year.

    Where I am, winters are all over the place now:

    one winter can be fairly mild with minimal snow but the cold days during it are VERY cold

    one winter can be very cold throughout with a few mild days but minimal snow

    one winter can be “normal” winter temp with a lot of snow

    The only pattern I see is that there is none. Very curious to see what this winter will be like. Hoping it’ll be a lot of snow!

  3. An Inquirer says:

    In my childhood (in 1950s and 60s) memories, I remember the first killing frost typically coming the 3rd week in September. Of course, my memory could be off, and the years that when it did come early leave a much more vivid memory for implications on the farm. Also, my most clear memories are in late 60s — and 70s — when temperatures were clearly colder. So my personal impression is that the killing frost is coming later these years.

    • Garyh845 says:

      Do you recall that leading up to the 1970’s, as we were in a cooling trend, that the killing frosts were coming earlier?

      I previously noted:

      I’m guessing that the first freeze was coming later from 1900 to the mid-1930’s. Then, was coming earlier from then to 1979, and then later once again from 1980 forward.

      3 trends – 3 cycles.

    • Freddy Boom-Boom says:

      I grew up in the western Great Lakes area (not too far from Chicago) and some years ago, a life-long friend remarked that it simply felt like seasons were simply showing up a month or so later than they once did (in our youthful years). I do recall at least one (maybe two) Thanksgivings in the first 1/2 of the 1970s where there was at least a couple inches of snow on the ground already.

  4. Fred Harwood says:

    I vividly remember back in the 1950s that the snow in my yard was generally knee-deep. Now, it seems seldom to go above my calf.
    ;)

  5. John F. Hultquist says:

    One of the stations in the table is for Goldendale, WA.
    [ 45.8081, -120.8428 ]
    In fact, the coordinates show the site to be at a farm 1.3 miles from the red dot for the small town shown on Google Earth.
    Lat./Long. for these things is not precise, so rather than this one being at the far edge of a hog pen or something, it is likely closer to the house.
    Also, under Data Coverage the percentage given is 77%.

    You can go here to see the info:
    https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datasets/GHCND/stations/GHCND:USC00453222/detail

    I know of another similar situation where the homeowner became ill and stopped reporting. It took 2 years before a new (more formal) place was set up. By “formal”, I mean not a household. New place is at a sewage treatment facility.

    When someone sets up a station and sends reports that feeds into a climate data set, it is the owner’s equipment, time, and energy involved. If it is -15° F., maybe some little old lady doesn’t feel like going out.
    Lots of reasons for that 77% data coverage.
    Sick.
    Went to Arizona for a week.
    Went to the WA or WSU football game.
    A cow got out and knocked the equipment down.

    • Stewart Pid says:

      But why are all of your “lots of reasons” happening much more frequently with each passing year since the millennium? That trend suggests something is up with the data that isn’t a regular occurrence …. something stinks! Perhaps as simple as aging equipment failing at an increasing rate over time but it is suspicious and very convenient for the warmers to then be able to estimate a warmer temp for the missing data and then calculating the desired answer. Less and less real data and warmer and warmer calculated temps … ain’t climate science grand.

      • John F. Hultquist says:

        But why …?

        I’m not inclined to investigate why.
        I will guess:
        One – the advancing age of the folks that are/were doing this.
        Two – people have become better off, and travel away from home more. I do not think these places were/are automated.
        Three – Younger, internet aware, folks easily set up automated stations with video and continuous displays.
        Four – #3 and #1: Many years ago a person could record daily weather and feel they were making a contribution to society. Now thousands of individuals have streaming weather cams, so the “feel good” incentive is gone.

        You could investigate, find a couple of sites near you, and go have a visit. A few years ago I visited four places – 2 are modern automated stations with questionable siting issues, 2 were once reporting but quit. One of those was a local radio station that took its own readings and reported the numbers on-air. Now, there is no need to do that. The other was a city fire station that had instruments in a gravel parking area next to a charcoal grill. The station building was expanded into the parking lot. New equipment was installed at the city’s waste treatment facility, 25 feet from the building and just beside an asphalt road. It is also 2 mi. away and about 1,000 feet lower.
        The people that know about these old sites are “moving on” and in a few years personal recollections will be lost.

        If you have the time, these little excursions can be interesting and fun.

  6. RW says:

    Tony, you and S. Fred Singer should get in touch if you have not already.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/a_global_warming_surprise.html

    Need to unite skeptic intellect and resources.

Leave a Reply

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