copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2020-10-29): - NOAA uses quality control measures to ensure the temperature data are of the highest quality and accuracy for research purposes. NOAA is open and transparent about its quality control measures and anyone can read all about them in the published literature or on the NOAA website. Learn more. [...] Peterson, T.S. and R.S. Vose (1997): "Historical Climatology Network Temperature Database." Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS). v78, no. 12, pp. 2837-49. [...] Menne, M.J., C.N. Williams, Jr., and R.S. Vose (2009): "The U.S. Historical Climatology Network Monthly Temperature Data, Version 2." Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS). 90, 993–1007. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2008BAMS2613.1
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2020-11-23): There are good reasons for all the corrections that NOAA applies to the data. The gridding process undoubtably improves the usefulness of the data internally. Artificial mapping discontinuities are smoothed over and trends will be clearer. But the corrections and the gridding process are statistical in nature, they do nothing to improve the accuracy of the National Temperature Index. If a specific problem with a specific thermometer is encountered and fixed, accuracy is improved. If the cause is not known and the readings are "adjusted" or "infilled" using neighboring thermometers or a statistical algorithm, the resulting maps will look better, but they are no more accurate. [...] Figure 4 shows the actual measurements from the stations, these are not anomalies and the data are not gridded. The raw data shows CONUS is cooling by 0.3°C per century, while the corrected data shows CONUS is warming by 0.3°C degrees per century. These lines, like all the fitted lines in this post, are Excel least squares trend lines. The lines are merely to identify the most likely linear trend in the data, thus the R2 is irrelevant, we are not trying to demonstrate linearity. [...] Figure 5. This plots the difference (Final-Raw) between the two actual station temperature curves in Figure 4. As you can visually see, the difference between the final and raw curve trends, since 1890, is about 0.8°C, roughly the claimed warming of the world over that period.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2020-06-17): In January 2005, NOAA began recording temperatures at its newly built U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN). USCRN includes 114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states. NOAA selected locations that were far away from urban and land-development impacts that might artificially taint temperature readings. Prior to the USCRN going online, alarmists and skeptics sparred over the accuracy of reported temperature data. With most preexisting temperature stations located in or near urban settings that are subject to false temperature signals and create their own microclimates that change over time, government officials performed many often-controversial adjustments to the raw temperature data. Skeptics of an asserted climate crisis pointed out that most of the reported warming in the United States was non-existent in the raw temperature data, but was added to the record by government officials. [...] Strikingly, as shown in the graph below, USCRN temperature stations show no warming since 2005 when the network went online. If anything, U.S. temperatures are now slightly cooler than they were 14 years ago.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2015-09-24): In the remainder of this post, "raw data" refers to data that passed the quality-control tests (unflagged). Flagged data is discarded by the models and replaced with an invalid value (-9999). [...] The estimates produced by NOAA for the GHNC data introduce a warming trend of approximately a quarter degree C per century. Those estimates are produced at a slightly higher rate for non-rural stations than rural stations over most of the record. During the first 60 years of the record measurements were estimated at a rate of about 75%, with the rate gradually dropping to 40% in the early 1990s, followed by a brief spike in the rate before resuming the drop to its present level. Approximately 7% of the raw data is discarded. If this data were included as-is in the final record it would likely introduce a warming component from 1880 to 1950, followed by a cooling component from 1951 to the present.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2015-03-04): Rep. Gary Palmer falsely claimed on a radio show that temperature data used to measure global climate change have been "falsified" and manipulated. Palmer, a Republican from Alabama, cited the so-called Climategate episode of five years ago, in which emails written by climate scientists purportedly showed evidence of data manipulation, and a more recent accusation of climate scientists tampering with data from temperature monitoring stations. The Climategate scandal has been subject to several separate investigations, all of which exonerated all scientists involved from any wrongdoing, and the latest data manipulation charges are a mischaracterization of standard and well-validated methods for adjusting temperature records to eliminate factors that could produce inaccurate readings. [...] Climate skeptics claimed that leaked emails between many climate scientists around the world showed there was a coordinated effort to inflate the global warming signal in temperature data. But several separate investigations, including by the U.S. Department of Commerce Inspector General and the Environmental Protection Agency, found no such wrongdoing or manipulation.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2018-03-20): NOAA’s US temperature record shows that US was warmest in the 1930’s and has generally cooled as CO2 has increased. This wrecks greenhouse gas theory, so they "adjust" the data to make it look like the US is warming. [...] The fabricated temperatures have warmed four degrees since 1970, relative to the adjusted temperatures which were based on actual station data. This shows that the warming trend in the US claimed by NOAA is based on computer models, not actual thermometer data or even adjusted thermometer data. [...] Science doesn’t get any worse than how NOAA handles US temperature data. NASA uses the NOAA data as the basis for their temperature graphs, which have also been massively altered to turn cooling into warming.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2022-04-11): This style of selective wording and lack of context, an approach called "cherry picking", applies to every one of Dr. Koonin’s scientific comments." [...] Commentary in The Australian by Ian Plimer relies on false claims to make its case "If you think that potentially causing hundreds of millions of refugees and trillions of dollars in damages is fine because some plants did well in the same conditions millions of years ago when humans weren’t around, then you could support this article." [...] Western Journal op-ed deceives readers with completely unsupported claims "What would make their case stronger would be if they actually analysed all the data, engaged with the existing scientific literature and made their own contribution to our scientific understanding by publishing a scientific paper. The cherry picking exercise in this Western Journal article does not contribute to our scientific understanding of the world."
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2024-07-24): The blue curve shows the actual raw (measured) values. [...] This graph shows the U.S. Lower 48 average mean temperature from 1895 to 2023. The blue curve shows the actual raw (measured) values. The red curve shows the reported or adjusted values. The actual thermometer data indicate that there has been little warming in the CONUS since 1895. Top 10 warmest years by raw data: 1. 2012 2. 1921 3. 1931 4. 1934 5. 1998 6. 2016 7. 1953 8. 1938 9. 1939 10. 2015 Pretty much all of the climate warming results from significant adjustments, to the data, most of which are due to the supposed "Time of Observation Bias" (TOBS). Essentially, government scientists think that hot days were double counted in the past because COOP station observers were too stupid to reset their min / max thermometers before they went to bed. If that were actually the case, it’d be a problem, but it would’ve been obvious right away to any station observer how these thermometers worked in a few days’ of using them. TOBS adjustments are based on assumptions that don’t have any basis in reality. That’s why the adjusted temperature data shouldn’t be used. I’m all for quality control, but the way in which thermometer data has been handled by bureaucrats is abhorrent.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2015-01-28): It is important to note, first off, that no data have been "altered" or destroyed in this process – all the raw data remain available for investigation by anyone who has the inclination (as I’ll show below). But this process can lead to large adjustments to the raw data, and in at least some instances the adjusted data can suggest long-term warming even when the raw data indicate cooling. This appears to have happened at the Paraguay stations mentioned in the article – the raw temperature recordings suggest cooling over decades, whereas warming appears after the raw data have been adjusted by NASA and NOAA.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2024-04-25): Most of the information published on this blog is not derived from peer-reviewed research; in fact, Mr. Heller explains why peer-reviewed studies in climate change are "worthless" Why Climate Science Peer Review Is Worthless. In general, Real Climate Science is opposed to Real Climate Science. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it’s all because they’ve altered the data." – Inaccurate - "NASA scientists fudged the numbers to make 1998 the hottest year to overstate the extent of global warming." – Pants on Fire - "[NASA] has been adjusting temperatures from the past[…] downward, while adjusting current-day temperatures upward, and those changes are responsible for most of the claimed global warming during that time." – Inaccurate [...] Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2019-02-11): This was very disturbing to both NASA and NOAA. Their CO2 warming theory was failing badly, so they simply changed the data, turning cooling into warming. This happened at the same time Michael Mann was erasing the Medieval Warm Period. The blue line below shows the five year mean of the average annual temperature at all NOAA United States Historical Climatology Network Stations. The red line shows the graph they release to the public, and has been highly altered to create the appearance of warming – which does not exist in the thermometer data. If they believe there is error in the data, the correct way to handle it is to leave the data intact, and put error bars on it. Not alter the data and pass it to the public as if it represents the actual thermometer data.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2022-03-09): Fact check: Misleading data used in claim alleging a global cooling trend [...] But on social media, some claim NOAA data actually show global cooling since 2015. [...] The caption says the chart shows 0.9 C of cooling per decade, but it actually shows 0.09 C – 10 times less. And this is cherry-picked data that contradicts the overall trend: Temperatures show a clear global warming trend since 1880.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2016-08-21): "In June, NOAA employees altered temperature data to get politically correct results." At least, that's what Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) alleged in a Washington Post letter to the editor last November. The op-ed was part of Smith's months-long campaign against NOAA climate scientists. Specifically, Smith was unhappy after an update to NOAA’s global surface temperature dataset slightly increased the short-term warming trend since 1998. And being a man of action, Smith proceeded to give an anti-climate change stump speech at the Heartland Institute conference, request access to NOAA's data (which was already publicly available), and subpoena NOAA scientists for their e-mails. [...] There are entire blogs dedicated to uncovering the conspiracy to alter the globe's temperature. The premise is as follows—through supposed "adjustments," nefarious scientists manipulate raw temperature measurements to create (or at least inflate) the warming trend. People who subscribe to such theories argue that the raw data is the true measurement; they treat the term "adjusted" like a synonym for "fudged."
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2021-03-25): Data adjustments may also be required if there are changes to the time of day that observations are made. If, for example, a network of weather stations adopts a uniform observation time, as they did in the United States, stations making such a switch will see their data affected, because temperature is dependent on time of day. [...] While raw data from an individual station are never adjusted, any station showing abnormal data resulting from changes in measurement method, its immediate surroundings, or apparent errors, is compared to reference data from neighboring stations that have similar climate conditions in order to identify and remove abnormal data before they are input into the GISTEMP method. While such data adjustments can substantially impact some individual stations and small regions, they barely change any global average temperature trends. [...] Independent analyses conclude the impact of station temperature data adjustments is not very large. Upward adjustments of global temperature readings before 1950 have, in total, slightly reduced century-scale global temperature trends. Since 1950, however, adjustments to input data have slightly increased the rate of global warming recorded by the temperature record by less than 0.1 degree Celsius (less than 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit).
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2023-01-27): The warming trend in global temperature continued in 2022, which was the sixth-warmest year on record, according to a recent report from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. But a viral tweet — using just a small segment of a NOAA graph — wrongly claimed the agency had announced a "global cooling" trend. [...] But Milloy twisted the agency’s finding by copying and sharing a small portion of one of the graphs included in the release. [...] In the full report, NOAA included another graph showing the same data, but going back even further — 143 years, to 1880, when records began. That graph shows an even starker change.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2019-08-05): Factually Inaccurate: Necessary adjustments to temperature datasets have, in total, reduced the apparent global warming trend since the late 1800s. Many independent datasets support the accuracy of these adjustments. [...] The most significant adjustments to data relate to changing ship-based instruments and methods used to measure sea surface temperatures around the time of World War II. As the use of thermometers in buckets of water hauled up on deck was replaced by thermometers in ship engine water intake pipes, the measured temperatures changed slightly, necessitating a correction to ensure an "apples-to-apples" comparison. [...] Raw data show more global warming since 1880 than is reported by NOAA [or shown in other datasets]. This is because NOAA "adjusts" temperature data to fairly compare different measurement times, places, and technologies. The cooling effect of adjustments on global temperatures has been shown lots of times, such as with the graph below for 1880—2013 temperatures.
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2022-04-11): NOAA shows clear global warming trends over the past 58 years based on radiosonde data [...] NOAA does not fraudulently adjust data to create the illusion of a global warming trend [...] Hosted by former Australian senator, Tony Heller repeats false claim that scientists fake the warming trend
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2018-05-03): Observed climate change is already affecting food security through increasing temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, and greater frequency of some extreme events (high confidence). Studies that separate out climate change from other factors affecting crop yields have shown that yields of some crops (e.g., maize and wheat) in many lower-latitude regions have been affected negatively by observed climate changes, while in many higher-latitude regions, yields of some crops (e.g., maize, wheat, and sugar beets) have been affected positively over recent decades. Warming compounded by drying has caused large negative effects on yields in parts of the Mediterranean. Based on indigenous and local knowledge (ILK), climate change is affecting food security in drylands, particularly those in Africa, and high mountain regions of Asia and South America. {5.2.2} [...] Without intervention, these are likely to increase by about 30–40% by 2050, due to increasing demand based on population and income growth and dietary change (high confidence). {5.4}
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2024-03-01): The image below shows a "hockey stick" temperature graph for the past 1000 years. This particular version is from the Summary for Policymakers of the IPCC’s third assessment report from 2001, and it applies only to the Northern Hemisphere. [...] If the results of this study are broadly correct, then pre-industrial temperature variability has been high, which would mean that hockey stick temperature graphs are not correct. [...] and that the use of [signal-free standardization] instead of traditional [negative exponential] chronologies results in an overestimation of recent temperature trends and a lack of reconstruction skill. [Emphasis added]
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2011-03-03): 1.5°C and 2°C Warmer Worlds [...] Key Economic Sectors and Services [...] Small Islands, and Coastal and Low-lying areas
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2024-07-01): 20 Questions and Answers [...] WMO: World Meteorological Organization [...] With thanks to Lead Author, Ross J. Salawitch and Co-authors Laura A. McBride, Chelsea R. Thompson, Eric L. Fleming, Richard L. McKenzie, Karen H. Rosenlof, Sarah J. Doherty, David W. Fahey
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2023-01-12): "The reason for the warming trend is that human activities continue to pump enormous amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and the long-term planetary impacts will also continue," said Gavin Schmidt, director of GISS, NASA's leading center for climate modeling. [...] Data provided by Robert B. Schmunk (NASA/GSFC GISS) [...] - Mark SubbaRao (NASA/GSFC)
Claim: [T]he raw data, the actual thermometer data[...] shows that the US has been cooling for 80 to 90 years. But the graphs they release to the public show warming trend, and it's all because they've altered the data. (Tony Heller, 2019-05-08)
Evidence (2023-09-05): potential future conflict, where the incentive is to attack first if one fears being attacked.90 [...] Public: Misconceptions and Misreadings," Journal of Politics 70, no. 2 (April 2008): 556–560, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1017/s002238160808050x. [...] 74 Diana C. Mutz, "How the Mass Media Divides Us," in Red and Blue Nation? ed. Nivola and Brady.