A reader question regarding USHCN sites

A reader asked us this question, which he admits is getting into conspiracy theory territory. We’ve got some damn smart commenters here so we’ll put it out to readers:

Years ago I looked at the Ripogenus Dam, Maine, temperature record, and it showed decreasing temperatures over its lifetime. Several years
later it showed warming, after it was closed and adjacent site data
was used. Other sites around the US were also closed in the last 15

My question is “How many of the closed sites showed cooling in the
original data while NASA’s Hanson was touting warming?” Also, is the
original unadjusted data available for all the USHCN sites from the
beginning of each station’s measurements?

Possibly related posts:

  1. Quote of the Day: NYT’s Andrew Revkin to NASA’s James Hansen
  2. Greenhouse Gas Observatories Downwind from Erupting Volcanoes
  3. UK Parliament Select Committee was asked to go easy on Phil Jones
  4. Phil Jones admits withholding scientific data
  5. Former lead author of IPCC report says, “Oops”

4 Responses to “A reader question regarding USHCN sites”

  1. boballab says:

    It would take to long too go in depth but someone has taken the time and did a very good look at these things. It isn’t centered on just USHCN (United States Historical Climate Network) but on GHCN (Global Historical Climate Network). Both of these are products of the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) of the National Oceangraphic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA). Long story short: According to the person that looked into this a UN committee wanted a new “Climate” monitoring system set up and in response to this NASA/NOAA (they work together on this) stopped using alot of stations that were in areas that tended to show cooling. Examples included higher elevations, rural areas and such. As an aside NASA/NOAA have a nasty habit of calling Airports rural because they base the definition on population not if there is a lot of pavement and other spurios heat sources around. Examples of both points is that for the state of California the number of stations used was down to 4. One near the beach in San Diego, 2 near the beach in LA and 1 at the San Fran airport. Now as anyone can see that is not really representative of the temp at Mt. Shasta.

    Marine Corp Air Station Quantico VA., the biggest Marine Corp air station is listed as a rural site.

    To learn more about the shenanigans with the “Great Dying of the Thermometers” and the “Thermometer March to the Sea” Go to this website: http://chiefio.wordpress.com/gistemp/

  2. Excellent observation. I’ve just written an article on this very issue. Look out for it coming online soon. I hope this will draw in comments from around the world of what actually has been happening at readers’ local ground weather stations. The WUWT site does a fantastic job along these lines – I recommend everyone interested take a look over there, too.

  3. D. Patterson says:

    The USHCN (U.S. Climate Historical Network) datasets are archived with NCDC (National Climatic Data Center), but they have been compromised by “adjustments” lacking a proper audit trails which could be used to determine the original raw values.

    Efforts have been made to obtain the surface observation summaries (Form B-91 if I remember correctly), but they only provide a daily summary with the MIN-MAX-TOBS.

    The original source document is the Form WBAN-10 U.S. WBAN Surface Observations, which include all 12HR, 6HR, 3HR, 1HR, and special surface observations. Unfortunately, NCDC employs a contractor to hande retrievals of these original manuscript documents, and the cost is determined by quotation upon request. I’m told by NCDC that retrieving a single form may begin at about $60.00.

  4. Bobsatwork says:

    Go to NASA GISS site here:
    There is a graph at the top of page showing “Number of stations”. Note the very striking decline, especially in the 1980′s and 1990′s. Then see how well this decline matches the supposed rise in temperatures over the same period. To me this is way more than a “smoking gun”.

This website is for sale for $10,000. Contact us if interested.