The “Record Temperatures” Con Trick

By Paul Homewood

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/extremes/records/

We often hear the claim that bucket loads of new temperature records are being set in the USA. For instance, so far this year NOAA claim that there have been 7061 daily record highs, i.e. record temperatures for that particular day. Impressed? Well, not really. There are over 5000 stations across the nation that they monitor. In a given year, then, there will be about 2 million daily temperature recordings, so over a 100-year period, you would expect 20,000 daily records each year.

But how meaningful are these records anyway? Let’s take a closer look at “monthly temperature records”, i.e. the highest temperature for that particular month set at any station. So far this year, there have been 238 high maximums set. We can go further and list these, as I have done for July below.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/extremes/records/monthly/maxt/2013/07/00?sts[]=US#records_look_up

But how far back do these stations date to? We can check through the NOAA database. The results, as illustrated below, show that no station dates to before 1939, and most have only been operational since the mid 20thC. In other words, none go back to the much hotter years in the 1930’s.

Station State Year Operational Beaver Dam AZ 1951 Nampa ID 1976 Pierce ID 1962 Zortman MT 1965 Overton NV 1939 Valley Park NV 1972 Denio NV 1951 Monument OR 1961 Lexington TX 1948 Altamont UT 1953

It is clear then that such claims of record temperatures are meaningless, but, nevertheless, the intent and effect are abundantly clear. As the Guardian gleefully reported during last summer’s heatwave :-

“US heatwave sets more temperature records…………….in a long-term trend that demonstrates the effects of a warming climate, daily record-high temperatures have recently been outpacing daily record-lows by an average of 2-to-1”

While PBS have been running a widget for the last year, which tracks new record high temperatures set each day (for some reason not updated since May 2013!), and introduced with the statement:-

“Across the USA, extreme heat has claimed the lives of at least 60 people, the National Weather Service reported on Tuesday. With excessive heat warnings, unrelenting humidity and countless cases of heat-related illness nationwide, the weather no doubt feels worse than ever in large swaths of the country. But is it historically hot.

Using data collected by the NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, the PBS NewsHour has set out to track the number of high temperature records set each day of the year across the United States. We’ve built this widget so our viewers can understand the significance of the heat, not only in terms of raw degrees, but in a format that compares today’s temperatures to previous record highs.”

As one of my commenters said about the 1930’s – “how could it have hotter then, when so many records are being set now?”

The point is often made, as in the Guardian above, that record highs outweigh lows, but this is a red herring. Most of these stations go back to the cold years of the 1960’s and 70’s; therefore it is unlikely that new cold records will be set. To get a true perspective, stations should only be included that date back at least to 1930. Better still, the exercise should be limited to only USHCN stations, that are regarded as high quality.

NOAA have all the information at hand to do this very easily. Which all raises the question, why don’t they?

Former NOAA Administrator, Jane Lubchenco, declared:-

Scientific integrity is at the core of producing and using good science. By being open and honest about our science, we build understanding and trust.

Perhaps her successor, Kathryn Sullivan, might start by abandoning misleading statistics and dishonest propaganda.

Footnote

The NOAA table includes a column “POR”, or period of record, which might have saved me some work!! A quick check shows that most stations tie up, with a few showing a shorter record on NOAA than I get. This appears to be where data is missing from the middle of the record, as their definition of POR is:-

The Period of Record (POR) represents the number of years with a minimum of 50% data completeness.

Their shorter record, of course, merely emphasises my argument.