Mosher Raging Against USHCN

The United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) is by far the best temperature data set in the world, and it wrecks the global warming scam. Climate scientists massively tamper with it, and Mosher is raging against it on twitter today. The Ministry of Truth is  getting very desperate, and is trying to make USHCN disappear.

NOAA US Data Tampering Update | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Mosher Raging Against USHCN

  1. MikeP says:

    Do you typically download updated datasets via subscription or is there some other method you can get the temp data for no cost?

  2. Steve S says:

    Don’t see why you should give Mosher any attention. He has been irrelevant for quite some time, reduced to rambling drive by quips for the most part.

    Mathematical mathurbation is his specialty…everything he touches needs to be “adjusted, homogenized, interpolated, tob’d etc. What a mess…..He and his buddies are so far down the rabbit hole there’s no hope.

  3. kyle_fouro says:

    I know you’ve analyzed stations that have been online in both recent years and the distant past/early twentieth century. Does this mean that those stations have continuous daily temps through that entire time period? Are there stations in the network that have been more or less continuously online, collecting daily data more a hundred years or more?

    I can’t see any kind of “inhomogeneity” or data integrity argument surviving the trends derived from century old, maintained stations with consistent daily min/max readings.

  4. Brian D says:


  5. Brian D says:

    More truth.

  6. Brian D says:

    Open your eyes!!

  7. Tom says:

    I post infrequently but read avidly,

    I just got the clinical data from my major study that proves that the stated null hypothesis is correct – ten years of effort proves that there is no difference. Millions spent, hundreds of thousands of work hours expended, hundreds of very sick patients inconvenienced. But the study had never been done before in a randomized, double blind fashion and the results are clear – Nada. I want to kick the dog and yell at the sky and pick a fight with a very small man. I am the lead author or contributing author on papers that have been cited hundreds of times. I could do some data “adjustments”, make some “arrangements”, get some “consulting” and “grants” to espouse a new and clever “method” to parse the data. It is very tempting when a sack of $cash$, and professional status, and future funding, is offered to “re-evaluate” the data. This tempts me a lot more than to admit “I was wrong”. Painfully, research associates with young families must find another job (I want to throw up). So I am sorely tempted to take the easy route, but I know that altered data and bought opinions are a cardinal sin. I do not want to end up in Dante’s lowest level of hell.

    I want to thank Tony for pointing out that the adjusted climate data does not conform to the existent historical climate record. I learned something. I laughed at the climate-scientist data machinations – now, I have pity.

    • Anto says:

      Good on you Tom. The temptation is great, but the personal price of selling out your values is very high.

    • Kent Clizbe says:


      They are far past being deserving of pity.

      The climate cabal and their associated hangers-on are dangerous and evil.

      They are not practicing science. They are involved in an international seizure of power. And they’ll do it at the point of the sword, with violence.

      They are very explicit about this.

      “Man-made climate change happens. Man-made climate change kills a lot of people. It’s going to kill a lot more. We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.”

      No need to pity them. Despise and counter-act.

    • Jason Calley says:

      HeyTom! Good job!

      Riddle: “What do you call a person who follows the data honestly and faithfully?”

      Answer: “A scientist.”

      Congratulations on your confirmation as a real scjentist, Tom. That is not an easy exam you just passed. Lots of people flunk it!

  8. pinroot says:

    OT: A look at the latest IPCC report, the hype, critique of the data and other things:

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.