Skip to content

Inconvenient Tornado Data Disappears

October 13, 2021

By Paul Homewood


For years NOAA have included this page on the tornado section of their website:



One of the main difficulties with tornado records is that a tornado, or evidence of a tornado must have been observed. Unlike rainfall or temperature, which may be measured by a fixed instrument, tornadoes are short-lived and very unpredictable. If a tornado occurs in a place with few or no people, it is not likely to be documented. Many significant tornadoes may not make it into the historical record since Tornado Alley was very sparsely populated during the 20th century.

Much early work on tornado climatology in the United States was done by John Park Finley in his book Tornadoes, published in 1887. While some of Finley’s safety guidelines have since been refuted as dangerous practices, the book remains a seminal work in tornado research. The University of Oklahoma created a PDF copy of the book and made it accessible at John Finley’s Tornadoes.

Today, nearly all of the United States is reasonably well populated, or at least covered by NOAA’s Doppler weather radars. Even if a tornado is not actually observed, modern damage assessments by National Weather Service personnel can discern if a tornado caused the damage, and if so, how strong the tornado may have been. This disparity between tornado records of the past and current records contributes a great deal of uncertainty regarding questions about the long-term behavior or patterns of tornado occurrence. Improved tornado observation practices have led to an increase in the number of reported weaker tornadoes, and in recent years EF-0 tornadoes have become more prevelant in the total number of reported tornadoes. In addition, even today many smaller tornadoes still may go undocumented in places with low populations or inconsistent communication facilities.

With increased National Doppler radar coverage, increasing population, and greater attention to tornado reporting, there has been an increase in the number of tornado reports over the past several decades. This can create a misleading appearance of an increasing trend in tornado frequency. To better understand the variability and trend in tornado frequency in the United States, the total number of EF-1 and stronger, as well as strong to violent tornadoes (EF-3 to EF-5 category on the Enhanced Fujita scale) can be analyzed. These tornadoes would have likely been reported even during the decades before Doppler radar use became widespread and practices resulted in increasing tornado reports. The bar charts below indicate there has been little trend in the frequency of the stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years.

EF1-EF5 Tornado Counts

EF3-EF5 Tornado Counts


It is absolutely clear that the number of strong tornadoes has declined since the 1970s.

Alarmingly, however, this page has been “disappeared”, and the link now comes up with this:



There is no discussion whatsoever of changes in reporting methodology, or any of the detailed work done by earlier scientists.

All we have is the chart, along with a table, which dishonestly claims that tornadoes have become progressively more common.

Fortunately Wayback still has a copy of the original web page, and I also have it on file.

It is blindingly apparent that NOAA found their original assessment far too inconvenient, something that should be kept out of the public domain at all cost.

To be fair, it is problematic comparing historical data with today’s, when reporting methodology and techniques have changed so much.

But this does not stop NOAA from pretending they know what global temperatures were 150 years ago, or comparing current hurricane trends with pre-satellite counts, or claiming to know the size of the Greenland ice cap in the 1930s!

But if the historical data for tornadoes is so unreliable, how can they possibly justify publishing graphs like this every month?



This is not “scientific”. It is fraud, pure and simple.

Maybe Zeke Hausfather and his crony factcheckers might care to investigate! There again, pigs might fly.

  1. David Tallboys permalink
    October 13, 2021 11:55 am

    The NASA website used to say the Sun was the primary force in climate – but that has been removed too:

    The Sun is the primary forcing of Earth’s climate system. Sunlight warms our world. Sunlight drives atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns. Sunlight powers the process of photosynthesis that plants need to grow. Sunlight causes convection which carries warmth and water vapor up into the sky where clouds form and bring rain. In short, the Sun drives almost every aspect of our world’s climate system and makes possible life as we know it.

    Earth’s orbit around and orientation toward the Sun change over spans of many thousands of years. In turn, these changing “orbital mechanics” force climate to change because they change where and how much sunlight reaches Earth. Thus, changing Earth’s exposure to sunlight forces climate to change. According to scientists’ models of Earth’s orbit and orientation toward the Sun indicate that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling — perhaps the next ice age.

    Source: NASA website:

    See if this link works:

  2. Stuart Hamish permalink
    October 13, 2021 11:57 am

    When is NOAA going to register as a political party or subsidiary ?

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      October 13, 2021 7:31 pm

      Probably be called NOAARepublican.

      • Stuart Hamish permalink
        October 14, 2021 10:18 am

        Actually this sinister erasure tampering and memory holing of inconvenient climate data is occurring under Democrat administrations ..
        Consider the US Forest Service fire data peaks of the 20’s and 30’s before this .. You know this of course you sad little troll .. Not much of a debater are you Mr Passfield ?

  3. Andrew Harding permalink
    October 13, 2021 12:49 pm

    It is fraud, pure and simple. It would be interesting in the light of this if the NOAA are applying for extra funding to research more fully their ‘data’?

  4. richard permalink
    October 13, 2021 1:10 pm

    Not surprising, all inconvenient facts will be disappeared. So far this is still on display which illustrates clearly when the worst droughts , fires, storms etc effected the population of the planet.

  5. Tammly permalink
    October 13, 2021 1:13 pm

    What have they done to the data to change its depiction in the chart so much between 1954 and 1990?

    • October 13, 2021 2:51 pm

      Before Doppler was introduced during the 1990s, many small tornadoes were never officially identified, esp if they did not hit urban areas

  6. In The Real World permalink
    October 13, 2021 1:13 pm

    I think we all know that there a ongoing fulltime industry changing records and facts to try to keep the Global Warming / Climate change scam alive .

    I have been keeping an eye on the global atmosphere CO2 levels .
    Which prove that the massive reduction in flying / travel / driving from the lockdown have had no effect on totals because the proportion produced by people is so tiny as to have no effect at all .
    To keep their going lies about changing to electric everything to save the planet , I think that the real figures will soon be disappearing and some new invented ones will appear .

    • Andrew Harding permalink
      October 13, 2021 6:20 pm

      I have used this graph on several occasions, It proves beyond doubt that all the measures that humanity is taking to reduce atmospheric CO2 are completely futile!

      I agree with you too about hiding the data and replacing it with falsehoods, however I have downloaded as much of the current, truthful information as I can!

      • October 16, 2021 9:24 am

        Andrew. Even worse and fundamental to this whole scam/fraud. Something I keep repeating. There exists no statistically significant empirical data of any kind which supports any claim made that CO2 liberated by man and returned to the Carbon Cycle has in any measurable way had any effect on the current welcome 350 year old warming which heralded the end of the Little Ice Age, the fourth warming in recent human history. NONE!

        A claim does not progress into the realms of science unless it has been demonstrated to be supported by statistically significant empirical data obtained by a falsifiable methodology which has been checked and challenged mercilessly. Models do not produce empirical data and are therefore in the absence of empirical data totally irrelevant.

        The none-existence of that fundamental evidence means the whole clown show associated with climate change is scientifically without basis.

        To have proof of effect there has first to be a proven cause. There is no proof of cause so there can be no proven effect, Q.E.D.

        That this whole industry populated by lickspittles cutpurses and footpads aided and abetted by a cabal of supposed scientists who have sold their integrity goes on regardless avoiding any mention of this behaving as if the missing science exists is the fraud of history.

  7. Harry Davidson permalink
    October 13, 2021 1:24 pm

    If a scientist makes adjustments to data and refuses to give the methodology for those adjusts, they have ceased to be a scientist and become a snake oil salesman.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      October 13, 2021 7:39 pm

      ..or a Covid modeller.

      • dave permalink
        October 14, 2021 9:17 am

        Data can stay in public view so long as ‘they’ know that no ordinary person is going to notice it, or understand it, and the MSM will steer clear of it.

        For example, concerning Covid-19 Variants (and dated the first of this month):

        Click to access Technical_Briefing_24.pdf

        On page 22 of this official UK Government document, it is stated as a definite fact that “the secondary attack rate in household contacts of non-travel or unknown cases” (i.e. the way almost all people catch Covid-19) of the (old) Alpha Variant is 10.2% and of the (newer) Delta Variant is 10.6%
        (Actually, these are lower bounds but this caveat applies to both Variants equally.)

        In other words, the constant narrative that Delta is super-transmissible is nonsense – according to the Government’s OWN experts!

  8. October 13, 2021 2:26 pm

    One of the more “Unfortunate” modifications to the NOAA data stream was the complete removal of the planetary “Ap index” long term records and the cessation of recording of that data. There are short term observations and records available but these lack the long term relevance needed for serious climatic study
    That recording commenced in 1932 and was halted and eliminated from the available data in July 2020.
    It is perhaps the best means of relating solar activity to terrestrial climate activity that we have in our hands. … and … ..

    may be found informative.

  9. Tim Spence permalink
    October 13, 2021 3:50 pm

    They revisited and revised the Cat 3 to 5 hurricanes something like 10 to 15 years ago, downgrading many pre 1950s events, for the sake of … accuracy.

  10. AZ1971 permalink
    October 13, 2021 7:43 pm

    To be fair, it is problematic comparing historical data with today’s, when reporting methodology and techniques have changed so much.

    It’s not problematic at all. It speaks to the necessity of doing correct comparisons. Most, if not all, of today’s global temperature record prior to 1950 is fraught with errors and sampling bias. Proxies are no match for instrumental records. We know with certainty far less than we think we do when it comes to what the world was like prior to 1880, no matter what the blowhards at NOAA and NASA insist to the contrary.

  11. October 14, 2021 12:01 pm

    It appears that “1984” was just about 37 years late……

    • dave permalink
      October 14, 2021 3:29 pm

      THIS is the original “Ministry of Truth” :

      “Stalinist” is the usual description of its architecture.

      It was – and is – the Senate House and Library of the University of London. During World War II, it was commandeered to house the main propaganda department of the UK Government; namely, The Ministry of Information. The actual Minister of Information from 1940 to 1945 was a spin-doctor and fixer called Brendan Bracken:

      To the credit of Bracken, he made sure that all the special powers and privileges of this Ministry were abolished at the end of the War.

      George Orwell’s connection with this building and its purpose was that his wife was employed in the Ministry.
      I do not believe there is any plaque or commemoration in the building concerning its war-time role.

      • October 15, 2021 12:26 pm

        There are a few buildings and monuments around this country which I describe as “Stalinist”.

        I read “1984” as a high school student in the 1960’s. We also read a bit of Marx and others so we would never fall for this stuff.

        You cannot institute Communism w/ a strong middle class. Any wonder they are constantly undermining the middle class educationally, financially and culturally????

  12. October 14, 2021 7:12 pm

    Compare to ths chart which P Gosselin had up a few yrs back:

    His source:

  13. October 17, 2021 9:52 pm

    The correct term is that the data “has been disappeared”.

    That carries with it all of the obscene context of The NKVD and Smerch as well as the appalling behaviour of countless corrupt regimes in S. America.

  14. October 17, 2021 11:02 pm

    Perhaps relevant to note that the previously reliable NOAA Oceanic Nino index has been “disappeared” showing … ” Page or link not found

    We’re sorry, but the page or file you were trying to reach has either been moved or doesn’t exist. We apologize for any inconvenience. ”

    There is some data still available but the updated information is a little difficult to find !


  1. Inconvenient Tornado Data Disappears – Watts Up With That? – Desi Creator

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: