Read original post

The US temperature record, as provided by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has been subject to scrutiny and claims of data manipulation. Concerns have been raised by Tony Heller about the integrity of the data adjustments made to the historical temperature records, which are said to have altered the temperature trend from cooling to warming over the 20th century.

Historical Temperature Trends

Originally, NASA's temperature record indicated a cooling trend from the 1930s through the end of the 20th century. However, current NOAA graphs suggest a warming trend since 1895. This shift in temperature trend has raised questions about data integrity and potential alteration for political or ideological reasons.

Data Inconsistencies

Discrepancies have been observed in the NOAA's reporting on US summer afternoon temperatures. While one dataset indicates an increase in average summer afternoon temperatures over time, another dataset from the same agency shows that hot summer afternoons were more common in the past. This contradiction implies that average summer maximum temperatures should be decreasing, not increasing, as the frequency of cooler summer afternoons has decreased.

Adjustment Analysis

NOAA has been accused of modifying temperature data, turning a cooling trend into a warming trend. The alterations started around 25 years ago with small adjustments averaging 0.5 degrees Fahrenheit. These adjustments have reportedly become much larger in recent years, with a marked acceleration post-1990.

A graph plotting the percent of summer days above 90 degrees Fahrenheit against the actual recorded average maximum temperature shows a strong correlation. However, when adjusted temperatures are plotted, the correlation deteriorates significantly, suggesting that the adjustments are not scientifically sound.

measured data

adjusted data

Time of Observation Bias

One of the adjustments made to the temperature data is the "time of observation bias" adjustment, based on the premise that past afternoon thermometer resets could lead to double-counting of hot days. An alternative approach would be to exclude stations with afternoon resets and rely on those resetting in the morning. This approach purportedly shows little difference in the temperature trend, maintaining the strong correlation between temperature and hot day frequency.

Global Data Issues

While the US boasts a robust historical climatology network, the global temperature data is not as comprehensive. NOAA has admitted to a lack of knowledge regarding the collection methods of temperature data outside the US. The absence of historical temperature data and detailed station records for large parts of the world raises further concerns about the reliability of global temperature adjustments.

Conclusion

The legitimacy of the temperature record adjustments has been called into question, with evidence suggesting that the data manipulation may not be scientifically justified. The strong correlation between unadjusted data and temperature trends contrasts with the poor correlation of adjusted data, casting doubt on the methods used by NOAA. The lack of transparency and discrepancies in global temperature data handling has added to the skepticism surrounding the integrity of climate records. This situation underscores the need for transparency and methodological rigor in climate data management.

Read original post

In a recent examination of the U.S. jobs report, Peter St. Onge dissects the seemingly robust jobs report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The report, which has been labeled "the most ridiculous jobs report in recent history" by Zero Hedge, showcased a surprise surge in employment, with 353,000 jobs reportedly added. Contrary to expectations, average hourly earnings allegedly climbed by a substantial 4.5 percent. However, upon closer scrutiny, experts are questioning the validity of these numbers.

The report's illusion of job growth is attributed to a reduction in the average workweek to 34.1 hours, a low not witnessed since the 2008 financial crisis, unless one considers the COVID lockdown periods. This statistical maneuver presents an increase in hourly pay, not due to actual wage growth, but rather the assumption of a shorter workweek. Critics argue that this raises two possibilities: either the economy is in a state akin to the 2008 downturn, or there is an intentional skewing of data to secure additional budgetary concessions from the White House.

Further investigation reveals that the nature of the job growth is also under scrutiny. The U.S. Census Household survey, which inquires directly about employment status, indicates that nearly half of the jobs reported by the BLS may not exist. The survey suggests that instead of the celebrated job creation, there was a loss of 31,000 jobs. Additionally, data on part-time work implies that the economy did not generate any new full-time positions last year; the jobs that did materialize were mostly in the gig economy or as a second source of income for those struggling to make ends meet.

via Zero Hedge

The Wall Street Journal's findings further reinforce this narrative, revealing that the few full-time jobs created were predominantly in government and social assistance sectors, funded by taxpayer dollars. This suggests a contraction in the private sector—the actual wealth-creating segment of the economy.

via WSJ

In a striking revelation, new data indicates that since 2018, all job growth in the U.S. has been among foreign-born workers, with no net increase for native-born employees. This divergence is largely attributed to the BLS's "seasonal adjustment" practices. While seasonal adjustments are standard for accounting for employment fluctuations, the staggering 3 million job difference between raw data and adjusted figures raises concerns over the potential for manipulation to favor certain political narratives.

via Zero Hedge

As the Biden administration continues to navigate the delicate economic landscape, key statistics such as jobs and inflation are becoming increasingly contentious. With public opinion polls reflecting a harsher economic reality than official reports suggest, the apparent disconnect between government data and on-the-ground experiences remains a topic of heated debate.

We will continue to monitor and report on these developments as more information becomes available.