NASA and NOAA “adjust” Temperature Data: raw measurements show the U.S. has been COOLING since the 1930s

Thanks to the excellent work being done by Tony Heller more and more government agency data fudging antics are being exposed.

The pair of charts in the below tweet offer a clear before and after snapshot of all U.S. historical climatology network stations–before and after NASA and NOAA carry out their inexcusable “adjustments.”

First, you have the official “reported” figures, which show a warming trend.

And second, is the actual “measured” data which reveals an unmistakable cooling trend.

Below is a blown-up view of U.S. thermometer data before NASA/NOAA got their grubby little paws on it.

What the chart reveals is that temperatures were actually warmer from 1920 to 1960 than they are today.

They were comfortably warmer, in fact, often by 2 or 3 degrees Fahrenheit.

The same trend is realized in the chart below, which shows the percent of days above 90F (32.2C) in the years between 1901-2019 again at all U.S. historical climatology network stations (also note that the chart runs through 2019, and so excludes the record cold influxes of the past year and a half):

The National Climate Assessment data further supports the trend, showing that summers were much hotter across the United States from around 1910-1960:

Additionally, recent sea surface temperature observations –even those controlled by the warm-mongers– clearly show that those catastrophic climate projections are proving some way off the reality:

For more on that, click HERE.

If you haven’t yet cottoned on to the fact that governments routinely lie to their people then the above charts should offer you a window in. Global warming is hardly “global” if the united states –the fourth largest country on the planet– has been cooling since the end of the dust bowl. And I think it is also reasonable to assume that the U.S. is not alone in having a cooling trend since the mid-1930s, there is nothing geographically unique about the North American continent–and that notion would match well with observed solar output which has been after the increased activity between 1930 to 1960 has been gradually waning:

Data is easily manipulated, and massaged statistics have been used to prove points and enact policy for centuries. And today, it appears government agencies –played by the unseen puppet masters above them– have found a shiny and powerful new tool to ad to their fear and control arsenal: “the climate emergency.”

One final note on this topic:

‘Fire burn acreage’ was much higher from 1910-1960 than it is today, which isn’t surprising because heatwaves are normally associated with drought, points out Heller. There is a close correlation between heatwaves and burn acreage, as visualized in the below chart which overlaps the official heatwave data (red line) with that of the burn acreage (blue and green lines):

The powers-that-be want you to believe that forest fires are a direct result of rising temperatures, but as Heller has demonstrated: temperatures are not rising, and neither is the Fire burn acreage.

The actual data destroys “the climate emergency” narrative, and so the Biden administration has recently erased the pre-1983 fire data giving the lackluster reasoning that “it wasn’t official” (linked here). And after delving a little deeper, the real reason they deleted the pre-1983 data is because the year 1983 contained the lowest burn acreage on record, so by starting in 1983 they have been able to make it look like burn acreage is increasing.

In reality, there is zero-correlation between rising CO2 and burn acreage. Burn acreage in the U.S. is actually down 90 percent since CO2 was at pre-industrial levels — but the administration has recently deleted this document, too:

Don’t fall for the agenda-driving lies spouted by power-hungry politicians and cock-and-bull pop-scientists.

The truth is that the COLD TIMES are returning, that the mid-latitudes are REFREEZING in line with the great conjunction, historically low solar activitycloud-nucleating Cosmic Rays, and a meridional jet stream flow (among other forcings).

Both NOAA and NASA actually appear to agree, if you read between the lines, with NOAA saying we’re entering a ‘full-blown’ Grand Solar Minimum in the late-2020s, and NASA seeing this upcoming solar cycle (25) as “the weakest of the past 200 years”, with the agency correlating previous solar shutdowns to prolonged periods of global cooling here.

Furthermore, we can’t ignore the slew of new scientific papers stating the immense impact The Beaufort Gyre could have on the Gulf Stream, and therefore the climate overall.

Prepare accordingly— learn the facts, relocate if need be, and grow your own.

Social Media channels are restricting Electroverse’s reach: Twitter are purging followers while Facebook are labeling posts as “false” and have slapped-on crippling page restrictions. EV has also been blacklisted by ad networks, meaning the site is no longer allowed to run advertising.

So, be sure to subscribe to receive new post notifications by email (the box is located in the sidebar >>> or scroll down if on mobile).

And/or become a Patron, by clicking here:

The site receives ZERO funding, and never has. So any way you can, help us spread the message so others can survive and thrive in the coming times.

Grand Solar Minimum + Pole Shift

Related posts

8 Thoughts to “NASA and NOAA “adjust” Temperature Data: raw measurements show the U.S. has been COOLING since the 1930s”

  1. Périchon lionel

    Merci beaucoup pour le travail que vous faites. ce site est une mine d’or.
    Lionel Périchon

    Thank you very much for the work you provide. This website is a gold mine.

  2. Matt Dalby

    Congratulations to Tony Heller for collecting this data. I recommend people take a screen shot of it as it may well be only a short time before his twitter account is deleted for sharing “false information”, i.e. FACTS that disprove the official narrative.

  3. Helen F

    How do they ‘adjust’ the data to make it look so different? I mean, what is the rationale that they give to justify it? I’m not a science person at all so if anyone can give a layman’s terms explanation that’d be great 🙂

  4. Hels

    Hi – can someone please explain how NOAA adjust the data to make it look so different? Thanks

    1. accordionsrule

      There are many adjustments made in the temperature record. Some are justified. Some are exaggerated.
      Some appear to be arbitrary.
      To enumerate just a couple, as I understand. I am not a scientist and I’m just summarizing.
      1. The database has been trimmed from about 6000 to about 1600 stations. Most of the removed stations were rural, while airport/urban stations remain.
      2. The database has been arbitrarily adjusted by almost 2 degrees, which is huge, to account for the switch of some stations from evening readings to morning readings. Yet I don’t think any adjustments the other direction were made to account for the switch from mercury thermometer (sluggish physical reaction of the liquid, curved meniscus, and weight of the column) to instant, continuous detection by electronics.
      3. Not all weather station records are complete and reliable. An algorithm is employed to infill and adjust the missing/questionable data. That algorithm favors mature, consistent stations. Which understandably are predominantly inside large cities and at airports, which unfortunately are also the stations most affected by UHI.
      4. UHI, or urban heat island. Its large effect is inadequately accounted for. The infilling and adjusting is done first, favoring mature and closely-spaced stations. After the rural, remote stations have been tainted by this algorithm, they are included in the database which is used to correct for UHI. But their distance and small number, plus the prior infilling/adjustments, dilutes their significance in that reiteration, resulting in a minute correction that does not adequately account for the true UHI effect.
      4. Tony Heller has a graph at Realclimatescience showing the large and exponentially growing difference between raw and adjusted. There is something else going on that isn’t explainable by any rationale I’ve seen.

      To NOAA’s merit, they established a collection of pristine stations that is called USCRN. Google USCRN graph, select “image,” and you will see the temperature record. There has been a gradual cooling since 2005. Another place to do a reality check against all the hype and hysteria is the UAH satellite record, with a warming average of .114C/decade since 1979, but that warming trend is beginning to disappear. Climate is cyclical, not linear.

  5. Roy

    Great information but it would be so much more powerful if you put some references on the data sets. for example, Tony Heller’s Tweet. what does it mean if we have no idea where the data came from and cannot check it ourselves??

  6. Anonymous

    Just youtube tony heller, but they take the good ones down so try his rumble:

    Good stuff! He’s brilliant.

  7. Francis Huxley Jr.

    All this needs to be put into book form,…..the info is great, but there are so many disparate presentations on so many different aspects, …why not get all the top scientistrs to contribute, and put together a cohesive narrative which really shows the tomfoolery that has been going on… would sell like hotcakes…..

Leave a Comment