Skip to content

Warmest Year Evah? Maybe, But Not According To NOAA!

January 21, 2016

By Paul Homewood 





Just a quick post to add to WUWT’s.



Anthony shows that the claimed warmest year evah is actually 5F cooler than 1997.

As we all know, and as Anthony readily admits, it is obvious global temperatures have not dropped by 5F, otherwise we would now be starting an ice age!

What it does show though is what shifting sands the whole business of record global temperatures sits.


If we go back to NOAA’s own State of the Climate Report a year ago, we find:




We find that the anomaly against the 20thC average in 2014 was 0.69C. Now fast forward to this years SOC:




And we find that the anomaly for 2014 has jumped from 0.69C to 0.74C. And this has all been achieved by cooling the past/warming the present. Indeed, without a clearly delineated base period, the two are indivisible.

We all know that measuring the Global Average Temperature (GAT) is an impossible and meaningless task. But without one, history can be altered and global temperature anomalies  fabricated to order, and virtually impossible to track.

  1. January 21, 2016 8:32 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections and commented:
    Paul Homewood expounds on the “warmest year ever” post at WUWT.

  2. homercidel permalink
    January 21, 2016 8:49 pm

    It is unbelievable how this is altered and altered and altered….

  3. David Richardson permalink
    January 21, 2016 8:58 pm

    Just more evidence of the unjustified tampering with temp data. Once you start fiddling it is difficult to keep up with where you were.

    I was told that tampering with government information of any kind was a criminal offence in the USA. Those involved will have to have a good scientific reason for the constant changes – good luck with that. A true red team investigation is required.

    • January 21, 2016 10:57 pm

      It is possible we will get an equivalent through Rep. Smith’s Congressional Oversight Committee, which has jurisdiction over NOAA and NASA. He is investigating the Karl paper that erased the pause by fiddling SST. He says NOAA whistleblowers have come forth. It must be bad, because NOAA committed criminal contempt of Congress by refusing to turn over subpeonaed emails. Stay tuned on this one.

  4. January 21, 2016 9:39 pm

    Dick Lindzen pours cold water on warmest year hype…

    “Why lend credibility to this dishonesty?”

  5. Glenn Tamblyn permalink
    January 21, 2016 11:42 pm

    So Paul, your ignorance of how temperature datasets are generated is showing…

    “We all know that measuring the Global Average Temperature (GAT) is an impossible and meaningless task”

    Which is why nobody does that. They measure Global Average Temperature ANOMALY. You do understand the difference in how this is done don’t you?

    • January 22, 2016 10:42 am

      You obviously have not read what I wrote

      • Joe Public permalink
        January 22, 2016 1:43 pm

        That’s a succinct put-down.

    • A C Osborn permalink
      January 22, 2016 3:46 pm

      I have come across many peopel like Glen who stupidly believe the crap about anomalies.
      Many pick up on the note that was added to that 1997 report (which I have quoted many times) that they changed the Baseline since that report was published as proof that the temperature quoted was wromg by today’s standards..
      However, the baseline is immaterial to the actual temperature that they posted as it used the anomlies from the then baseline, the anomolies having been derived by subtracting the then baseline from the Actual Temperatures and then when averaged added back to the then baseline thus completing the circle. So it was as close as you can come to an Actual Average Temperature and when they say it was 62.45 degrees Fahrenheit for 1997 that is what is was. They then when on to say in the 1998 Report that 1998 was warmer than 1997.
      You cannot then use the same 1997 anomolies with a different baseline, you have to start back with the Actual measured temperatures (Unadjusted) and go through it all again and should arrive back at 62.45 degrees Fahrenheit.

      Unless of course they are completely incompetent at simple arithmetic.

      • Glenn Tamblyn permalink
        January 22, 2016 6:30 pm

        “You cannot then use the same 1997 anomolies with a different baseline, you have to start back with the Actual measured temperatures”

        Well doh.

        That IS what is done. All 6 temperature series use the same basic method.

        1. Calculate a base line for a single station.over some time period from the absolute temperatures measured for that station.
        2. Subtract that baseline from each reading for that station to produce an Anomaly series for that station.
        3. Repeat for each station.
        4. Use an Area Weighting scheme (this is the main difference between how the different datasets are calculated) to produce an Area Weighted Average of Anomalies of all stations for differing regions for all time periods to produce a dataset of average anomalies.

        If you want to change the baseline you alter the time period used in step 1 and repeat the entire process.

      • January 22, 2016 11:01 pm

        Which totally confirms my original post, Glenn

        So just to risk repeating myself:

        The anomaly for 2014 has magically changed from 0.69C a year ago , to 0.74C now.
        So, has the baseline changed, or has the measurement for 2014?

        Shifting sands!

  6. January 22, 2016 4:37 pm

    Thanks, Paul.
    That they are “fabricated to order” is the right thing to know about global thermometer temperature.
    If you compare their reports along the years it starts to come out; anomaly inflation.

  7. January 22, 2016 10:58 pm

    Dr Roy Spencer ‘On that 2015 Record Warmest Claim’

    A summary of the built-in biases of government-funded climate research.

    ‘But since the government has framed virtually all of the research programs in terms of human-caused climate change, that’s what the funded scientists will dutifully report it to be, in terms of supposed causation.

    And until the culture in the government funding agencies changes, I don’t see a new way of doing business materializing.’

  8. January 24, 2016 4:24 pm

    However, the 2015 analysis is more dramatic:


  1. “The Hottest Year Evah” | Climatism

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: