I just noticed a huge USHCN screw up. This is from the USHCN2 docs.
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2/monthly/menne-etal2009.pdf
They say that the USHCN2 TOBS is about the same as the USHCN1 TOBS.
Now check out the USHCN1 docs.
USHCN1 shows a 0.3 Fahrenheit increase in the TOBS adjustment from 1920 to 2000, but USHCN2 shows 0.3 Celsius increase in TOBS from 1920 to 2000.
Looks like they nearly doubled their adjustments, by not understanding the difference between Fahrenheit and Celsius. Either that or they were hoping to slip a huge cheat in under the radar. (I’ve looked at the data more closely now, and it is not a C v F discrepancy. The problem is that there are two upwards shifts in the USHCN2 data – one in 1950 and another in 1990. I will document this soon.)
All released NCDC US temperature data is severely tainted by this, including their claims of “hottest year ever”
You decide – incompetence, cheating, or both?
Incompetance, since NASA can’t change Metric to Imperial, thus crashing a rather expensive space probe on Mars!
I’ll go with incompetence with a side order of confirmation bias and perhaps some self interest as a condiment.
Well said Will, that really sums it up. I might add that as government employees, even if their malfeasance and incompetence were officially recognized, there would be no corrections or repercussions since as you mentioned, this serves the government’s interest which is to impose a carbon tax and/or some kind of direct shakedown of producers and tax-payers.
I agree with Will.
Incompetent cheaters.
They are hoping to slip a huge cheat in under the radar.
They were trying to cheat but got caught, so I guess they were incompetent as well – so, both!
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.
can they really be this stupid……
…and if so, why is anyone paying any attention to them at all
They can’t say they lied…so their only defence is stupid
Wasn’t there a NASA satellite to Mars that failed on its approach to the Red Planet because of an English to Metric unit conversion? You might say then there is precendent.
No it was British.
They are experts.
This Limey would prefer Imperial measurements any day. Why? Because they are all derived from the real world. And I love the langauge? Rods, Poles, Perchs, Chains, Furlongs. Instead we have the rigid metric system, which is entirely conceptual – as it would be, in that the French came up with it.
when they put back the .5C/F decline in temps from the 50-70’s…I might start to believe the temperature record again…..might….
It is only incompetence since they just got caught cheating. They were incompetent because they got caught.
Does TOBS stand for Total Obvious B.S.?
Since Climategate in 2009 I have gone back and examined closely historical events at the end of Second World War (1945-1946) when George Orwell was dying of tuberculosis and frantically writing “1984” [1], while Fred Hoyle was writing two papers [2] that became the foundation of the SSM (standard solar model of H-filled stars).
http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2204
Fred Hoyle himself later admitted that:
_ a.) Fred Hoyle, Sir Arthur Eddington, and all other astronomers and astrophysicists in their circle of acquaintances at Cambridge University believed the the interior of the Sun was mostly iron (Fe) during WWII
_ b.) Fred Hoyle’s two 1946 papers were adopted without debate or discussion and later became the foundation of the SSM (standard solar model of hydrogen-filled stars).
Today I seek help finding a different interpretation for those historical events other than the emergence of a tyrannical world government in 1945 that purposely hid the source of energy in Atomic bombs, nuclear reactors, stars and AGN (active galactic nuclei) by promoting the SSM illusion of hydrogen-filled stars.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10640850/Request_Assistance.pdf
I would appreciate your assistance.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://www.omatumr.com
[1] George Owrell (Eric Arthur Blair), “Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984)” Secker and Warburg, 1949: http://www.amazon.com/Nineteen-Eighty-Four-Centennial-Edition-George/dp/0452284236
[2] Fred Hoyle, “The chemical composition of the stars,” Monthly Notices Royal Astronomical Society 106, 255-259 (1946); “The synthesis of elements from hydrogen,” ibid., 343-383 (1946)
adjusted data agree well with the projections
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/02/2012-updates-to-model-observation-comparions/
Incompetent with willful neglect of the truth.