Skip to content

96% of U.S. Climate Data Is Corrupted–New Study

July 27, 2022

By Paul Homewood

Heartland’s latest study shows the US temperature record is more corrupted than thought:






Official NOAA temperature stations produce corrupted data due to purposeful placement in man-made hot spots


Nationwide study follows up widespread corruption and heat biases found at NOAA stations in 2009, and the heat-bias distortion problem is even worse now


ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL (July 27, 2022) – A new study, Corrupted Climate Stations: The Official U.S. Surface Temperature Record Remains Fatally Flawed, finds approximately 96 percent of U.S. temperature stations used to measure climate change fail to meet what the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) considers to be “acceptable” and  uncorrupted placement by its own published standards.



The report, published by The Heartland Institute, was compiled via satellite and in-person survey visits to NOAA weather stations that contribute to the “official” land temperature data in the United States. The research shows that 96% of these stations are corrupted by localized effects of urbanization – producing heat-bias because of their close proximity to asphalt, machinery, and other heat-producing, heat-trapping, or heat-accentuating objects. Placing temperature stations in such locations violates NOAA’s own published standards (see section 3.1 at this link), and strongly undermines the legitimacy and the magnitude of the official consensus on long-term climate warming trends in the United States.

“With a 96 percent warm-bias in U.S. temperature measurements, it is impossible to use any statistical methods to derive an accurate climate trend for the U.S.” said Heartland Institute Senior Fellow Anthony Watts, the director of the study. “Data from the stations that have not been corrupted by faulty placement show a rate of warming in the United States reduced by almost half compared to all stations.”

NOAA’s “Requirements and Standards for [National Weather Service] Climate Observations” instructs that temperature data instruments must be “over level terrain (earth or sod) typical of the area around the station and at least 100 feet from any extensive concrete or paved surface.” And that “all attempts will be made to avoid areas where rough terrain or air drainage are proven to result in non-representative temperature data.” This new report shows that instruction is regularly violated.


  1. Martin Brumby permalink
    July 27, 2022 2:00 pm

    I’m shocked!

    Shocked, I say!

  2. HotScot permalink
    July 27, 2022 2:01 pm

    Been saying it for years.

    The editor of the Lancet declared that up to 50% of medical studies are junk a few years ago.

    Climate science can’t come close to the rigour of medical science but up until now there was no reference for an assessment.

  3. Andrew Harding permalink
    July 27, 2022 2:11 pm

    We have a similar situation in the UK. Thermometers next to airport runways with the Heat Island Effect exaggerating the ambient temperature.

    If memory serves, the Stevenson Screened thermometers were superseded by Platinum Resistance Thermometers in Earth orbit. They are highly accurate, but much to the disappointment of the alarmists, they showed no increase in atmospheric temperature for 18 years.

    So data was used once again from airports.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      July 28, 2022 11:19 am

      The problem is that aviators need weather information and so virtually every airfield has a weatherstation to provide it. And there are a lot of them around so I can pick from Gatwick, Redhill, Kenley, Biggin Hill etc.

      I came across a link to John Dee who looked at 2 comparable airfields that lie on the same latitude and distance from the sea. One is the RNAS Yeovilton and the other is Heathrow Airport. His analysis showed a summer warming of Heathrow over Yeovilton which I think any honest person would not be surprised at given the acres of tarmac to absorb the sun.

  4. Robert Christopher permalink
    July 27, 2022 2:15 pm

    It’s the tenth anniversary, in a few days:

  5. Harry Passfield permalink
    July 27, 2022 2:24 pm

    I thought it was 97% – no?

    • incywincysales permalink
      July 27, 2022 2:51 pm

      My first thought too!

  6. July 27, 2022 2:32 pm

    “With a 96 percent warm-bias in U.S. temperature measurements, it is impossible to use any statistical methods to derive an accurate climate trend for the U.S.”

    I fear that Heartland is over-playing its hand with this statement.

    It is CHANGE in bias that causes problems for trend estimation, not the bias itself. The increase in bias in some stations has no doubt contributed to increases in record high temperatures, and to reduced likelihood of record low temperatures. But, changes in bias can be detected and removed in trend estimation, though Berkeley Earth is the only one I would trust for USA, here it is slaying its rivals for Boulia (Queensland) Tmax:

    • Gordon Hughes permalink
      July 27, 2022 3:11 pm

      Sadly, this is wrong. You are assuming that bias is manifested in a once-off or at least infrequent jump or fall in mean temperature. However, the whole point of the heat sink issue is that a small external increase in average temperature may shift the diurnal distribution upwards, thus magnifying the reported trend.

      The idea that statistical adjustments can remove biases in original data is largely self-deception which few if any pure statisticians would accept because the distinction between “adjusting” and “massaging” the data is in the eye of the beholder. Bad data is just bad data. One may be able to get something useful out of it but that should always be confirmed by other, more reliable sources. In this case, the more reliable sources are satellite measurements calibrated by ground-based monitoring at relatively remote sites – i.e. well away from urban and other forms of development.

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      July 28, 2022 8:56 am

      Just writing “error” isnt proving much. That’s just logically flawed. Every data point could be an error but those ones. Or many could have small errors. They are just picking large differences but that tells us very little.

  7. 2hmp permalink
    July 27, 2022 4:30 pm

    I read somewhere that 80% of so called climate scientists did not admit having seen the Planck atmosphere curve. Quite appalling, and those that had conveniently ignored it.

    • catweazle666 permalink
      July 27, 2022 6:13 pm

      Most of them seem unaware of the really basic stuff like Henry’s Law, Dalton’s Law and Raoult’s Law, and wouldn’t recognise an entropy-enthalpy diagram if it bit them on the snout.
      Hell, they aren’t even aware that correlation does not imply causation!

      • July 28, 2022 11:48 am

        Especially when the “cause” FOLLOWS the “event”……tricky, that.

  8. Sid selver permalink
    July 27, 2022 6:21 pm

    Gee what a surprise !! Suspicions confirmed !!

    • catweazle666 permalink
      July 27, 2022 6:36 pm

      The only surprise is that they missed 4%!

  9. MrGrimNasty permalink
    July 27, 2022 6:35 pm

    In the UK the London conurbation is now so large and has such a massive heating effect in hot sunny weather that it compromises everything upwind for hundreds of square miles.
    It’s like an enormous fan driven storage heater.
    None of the new records recorded in London, Cambridge etc. in recent years have any significance or indicate anything about climate change, they just show that urbanisation of the land surface has passed a critical point.

    • Ben Vorlich permalink
      July 27, 2022 8:46 pm

      I’ve said for a long time that UHI is not a simple thing. It’s effects and extent depend on the weather. As you wind will extend the Island to the leeward side the area depending on wind strength, but the urban area temperature will be reduced. In low wind speed conditions the Island is reduced in area and the temperature is higher.
      None of this is included in modelling and forecasts, the best the weather forecasts manage is the few/several degrees lower in rural areas and even lower in remote areas

      • Mad Mike permalink
        July 28, 2022 11:28 am

        This correlates with my experience about 10 days ago. It’s desperately unscientific to use my car external temperature gauge but it shows the point.

        On one of those really hot days, I was driving along the M4 to the M25. The temperature had been pretty consistent from Reading, 34C-36C. The turnoff on to the M25 is just north of Heathrow and as soon as I joined the M25 the temperature went to 39C. As I passed Heathrow it touched 40C. A very few miles down the road at the A3 junction it was back down to 38C. There was no wind so presumably the heat stayed around Heathrow which was obviously capturing the heat via lots of concrete and jet engines but what was the proper temperature along for that area and what was the abnormal temperature?

  10. Mark permalink
    July 27, 2022 10:06 pm

    I can prove there is no global warming. All change in climate is from the Sun. I have sent many letters to anti-climate change people. I can’t get any response from any of these, so called experts, that say there’s no man made warming. Maybe some day Morano will respond?

  11. John Hultquist permalink
    July 28, 2022 12:26 am

    Thanks Anthony, for all you do.
    I’ve written often that temperature measurements are useful for local use, such as aircraft operations or knowing when to turn the misters on your wine grapes. Also, these weather items are useful as something to talk about.
    Describing the “climate’ of a place makes sense but the concept of Earth’s climate does not. I know of no place that has had a climate change in recent history, say back to the end of the Little Ice Age.
    I’ve lived east of the Cascade Mountains since 1974. From ’74 to ’89 I was in northern Idaho. From ’89 to 2022 I have lived 100 miles east of Seattle. Those pesky Mountains are still there, and the climate is ever the same.

  12. Ben Vorlich permalink
    July 28, 2022 8:30 am

    O/T Should I be impressed?
    U.K.’s First Pop-Up Solar Charging Station Generated 20,000 Miles Of Electricity In Eight Weeks

    That’s 360 miles per day or one Tesla. Lot of Panels to achieve that. But it seems to have impressed everyone.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      July 28, 2022 11:31 am

      The commenters are not that impressed though.

  13. MrGrimNasty permalink
    July 28, 2022 9:23 am

    BBQs, what I’ve been saying for ages.
    What is the point, it’s like selling electric scooters, if they were only used legally and responsibly there would be no market for them.
    They are both sold in the near certainty that they will be used illegally and dangerously.
    Of course in some quarters they want more fires and damage to support the climate propaganda.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      July 28, 2022 11:36 am

      The Co-op policy is rather odd. Do they really make so much profit on them that they need to continue to sell them other than near National Parks? If all the big names stopped selling them I guess it would help as it would mean that you couldn’t just add one to the trolley but I think non-food chains would need to join in. A lot of campsites ban their use.

  14. MrGrimNasty permalink
    July 28, 2022 9:50 am

    Met Office State of the UK climate. Most interesting thing is probably the claimed rate of sea level rise.

  15. July 28, 2022 9:53 am

    Can the surface data be compared to the satellite data?

  16. catweazle666 permalink
    July 28, 2022 3:33 pm

    Interesting relevant commentary here:

  17. Tim Spence permalink
    July 28, 2022 3:37 pm

    Can the surface data be compared to the satellite data?

    I don’t think so, they’re measuring two different things, and with completely different methods. I would expect some similarities though.

  18. August 2, 2022 9:39 am

    Can we show the 96% trend versus the 4% trend? Is that data in the wild?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: