It Is The Data Tampering, Stupid

One of the many excuses used by climate alarmists (and some skeptics) to ignore my data tampering graphs, is that I don’t grid the data. What I do is take a straight numerical average of temperatures at all stations, which is the cleanest and easiest way to understand and interpret the data. The graph below compares my numerical USHCN average vs. NCDC gridded US temperatures. The trends are nearly identical.

As you can see, gridding has very little effect on the trend.

What alarmists choose to ignore is the data tampering, which makes a huge difference.

Spreadsheet

So why doesn’t gridding matter? Because USHCN stations are relatively evenly spaced around the country.

Climate alarmists can’t stand clean, unadjusted data – and the fact is that gridding obfuscates and contaminates data and hardly makes any difference to the trend.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to It Is The Data Tampering, Stupid

  1. Jb says:

    And as u often point out, the govt assigns temps to whole regions based on readings from sparse stations (Africa).
    Do they grid for that?
    Seems they make up criticisms that apply to everyone but themselves.
    Keep up the good work — thank god somebody has saved the original data

  2. Anon says:

    Hi Tony,

    I did not know they were using gridded data, that for the heads up. There are advantages and disadvantages to this type of data treatment. For example:

    https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/joc.3588

    So, without making an innuendo here, what rational do they give for the treatment? Also, given the disadvantages of gridding (cited above) does the treatment of the data in this manner allow for obfuscation (bluntly: tampering)? Also, are they using the gridded method on the “temperature anomaly” they choose to report.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/04/an-interesting-plot-twist-call-it-an-anomaly/

    Something seems odd here. I am not convinced gridding is as innocuous as they claim.

    • tonyheller says:

      It is just one more way to contaminate rural data with urban data.

      • kyle_fouro says:

        Tony,

        I would appreciate in the future a post elaborating on this. Or perhaps a link to one of your past posts that you feel is most relevant?

      • Anon says:

        Data gridding produces a lossy “output” but with advantage of being able share it and synchronize it with other data sets. Analogous to the use of tiff vs jpeg in photography.

        And it could also lead to shenanigans like comparing a daily raw temperature reading with the gridded data which has all of the variation smoothed out.

        Thanks again for the heads up about the fact that they are gridding this data… another thing to be aware of.

      • Hivemind says:

        “… to contaminate rural data with urban data.”

        That hadn’t occurred to me. It makes a lot of sense.

  3. oldbrew says:

    Alarmists always look for ways to divert attention away from messages they don’t like. Lacking any rational counter-argument presumably.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.