Something Very Rotten In California

I have hesitated to discuss California temperatures until I had tools in place to analyze it properly, and I do now.  NOAA shows maximum temperatures in California rising rapidly, and particularly a big jump after 2012.

Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

The actual average maximum thermometer data shows no net change over the past century prior to 2012, but a big jump over the past six years. (I excluded Death Valley from this analysis, because they started reporting in the 1960’s and cause a fake long term warming bias on the right side of the graph.)

However, something is seriously wrong.  There are 53 USHCN stations in California, and only nine show warming since 2012, but thirty-one stations show cooling since 2012. Whatever is causing the post-2012 spike is not real.  It must be something along the lines of cooler stations not reporting as many days as the warmer stations.  I haven’t figured it out yet, but am quite certain that whatever is causing the recent spike in temperature is a data artifact.

Additionally, there are quite a few California stations which show long term cooling in their afternoon temperatures.



I no longer see any reason to believe California is warming.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Something Very Rotten In California

  1. Josh says:

    Probably those few stations have changed locations from being in the grass far from asphalt to being next to cars?

    • tonyheller says:

      I don’t see any indication of a shift in individual station data. Whatever is causing it is something much more subtle.

      • Michael E DeVore says:

        Graph the average Value of the Last Digit in the temperature readings. The last digit should be randomly set plus an instrument bias. If there were no bias with a large enough sample the average should be 4.5. However US instruments use F and the conversion to C drops x.5 which should induce a slight bias due to rounding. There is an abnormal spike in 2013 in CA data, but the nature of this analysis requires a few years to see the end result of a bias change.

  2. Gator says:

    Where are these nine warming locations?

  3. crosspatch says:

    Looks to me like the rise began at right around the time that the old stations were being replaced with electronic stations. These stations had to be placed within a 50 foot cable run of the computer that collected the data from them. That means the stations needed to be placed in areas near parking lots, buildings, air conditioner exhaust, etc.

  4. There are some reported problems with the introduction of electronic temperature sensors. The German meteorologist Klaus Hager was interviewed in the German newspaper “Augsburger Allgemeine”, January 9. 2015. He had conducted measurements using both old and new instruments – the conclusion was that the electronics gave 0.9 C higher temperature than the old instruments. Link to the German paper:

    The Australian meteorologist/scientist Jennifer Marohasy also has reported problems concerning the new electronic equipment. You can read about it in her blog:

    • arn says:

      It seems that those new electronic sensors
      have the same “problems” built in as the Voting Machines owned by George Soros.
      Manufactured ex works with a specific margin of error to deliver the wanted results.

    • Johansen says:

      Norwegians have climate blogs critical of the ‘consensus’? Nice!…

  5. Spiritus Mundi says:

    9>32, the warming trend in those nine stations must be of a great magnitude to overwhelm the other 32 stations.

    • tonyheller says:

      Nothing like that. It looks more likely to be a frequency of reporting issue.

      • João Martins says:

        The problem seems to be on 2014, not on 2012. And it seems to be regional: in NOAA averages, similar anomalies (aprox. +3 to +4 F in max, min or average) can be found in Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and Washington.

      • Chris Zinner says:

        Are you going to re-bin the data into descreet time buckets to sort this one out or do you have some other analysis planned?

      • R Shearer says:

        It’s a shame that you are not getting paid for doing this kind of quality assurance that NOAA and other agencies should be doing.

        Someday, many will realize the importance of your findings.

        • Squidly says:

          “quality assurance?” .. yeah, I had a long drawn out discussion argument with Gavin Schmidt about that regarding his Model-E code. Hahaha .. what a joke.

          Regarding climate models and climate data, there is no such thing as “quality assurance” at NASA/NOAA .. it is a complete joke. They haven’t even the first freaking clue what “quality” is, nor do they have any care whatsoever. They absolutely, and verifiably, make up whatever shit they want. And I can attest to this fact directly from the mouth of Gavin Schmidt. It is a sad joke. People like Schmidt and the rest of the gang should be rotting in jail cells.

    • spike55 says:

      Not after homogenisation.

      Use the UHI warming to “adjust” rural temperatures, then smear that “adjustment” over the whole state.

      Homogenisation was designed as a tool, by one of the rabid CRU AGWers.

      With it, they can create what they want.

  6. Johansen says:

    Wait… cooler stations can decide not to report as often as warmer ones, yet that’s not accounted for in the reporting?! The SEC sends people to prison for this sort of thing! If TESLA is indeed cooking their production figures, like some are alleging, people *will go to prison*

    • E.M.Smith says:

      I think it has to do with strategic drop outs so segments start at a down point and end at an up point. That gives a fake trend which biases flat data with which it is blended. The creative “chopping” of data into useful segments via outages and / or “adjusting”.

  7. garyh845 says:

    Thanks Tony for going after this. I know that I’ve mentioned it a few times. Anyway, in spite of the fires, Yosemite is the place to be.

  8. angech says:

    If quite different from the rest of USA suggests some fiddling of the books going on.
    New stations all over or only in the warmer areas?
    New stations in all the neighboring states?
    What is happening in the contiguous states around California?
    There must be some overlap??
    BOM in Australia put programs in to cut off low temps and yet record high temps over very short time intervals.
    Perhaps someone is still using matches to see the screens.

  9. Quail says:

    Re the Livermore station.
    I have noticed that it clips off the lowest temps in the winter on the coldest days. Maybe compare it to LLNL to see clipping? They are about 100′ higher so are typically a bit cooler, but should show similar curves.

Leave a Reply to Johansen Cancel 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.