UPDATE: Published. Not in moderation.
Over at WUWT I have a couple of comments in moderation in the argument about US climate data. This one of them (slightly clarified).
Zeke is quoted: “The way that NCDC, GISS, Hadley, myself, Nick Stokes, Chad, Tamino, Jeff Id/Roman M, and even Anthony Watts (in Fall et al) all calculate temperatures is by taking station data, translating it into anomalies by subtracting the long-term average for each month from each station (e.g. the 1961-1990 mean)”
To create a 1961-1990 baseline, you would have 360 monthly values.
The USHCN monthly data has error flags. The E flag means the data for that month is Estimated. There is not enough daily data to created a monthly value.
There are ONLY 51 stations that had 360 values without an E flag from 1961-1990.
That means only 51 out of 1218 stations have relatively complete data to use as a baseline.
WY MORAN 5 WNW USH00486440 is one of the 51
WY NEWCASTLE USH00486660 is one that failed. 61 months of the 360 had an E flag. (Admittedly my comment had a typo over at WUWT).
And I just looked at the E flag. There lots of other flags.
Here is the other comment:
Anthony, you should double check Zeke’s work.
Using USHCN Final Tavg dated v126.96.36.19940622
July 2012 – 880 Stations have data without the E for Estimated flag.
There are 1218 stations.
27% of the July 2012 Stations are missing data.
July of 1895 has 472 station reporting Real (non-Estimated) data
61%. of the July 1895 stations are missing data.
Now remember, I am only look at the monthly records. Monthly records avoid the E flag if there are enough daily data. It doesn’t mean there is data for every day.
2 thoughts on “USHCN Only 51 Stations Have A Full Set Of Monthly Data For 1961-1990”
What do you suggest should be done to create anomalies if you only have enough data to create a baseline for 51 stations ?
Honestly the quality of the data is so bad it is useless to try and save it with “math”.
If it isn’t there, ignore it. Quit manipulating it.