NOAA's odd way of presenting February temperatures

Harold Ambler writes:

NOAA's map of February temperatures across the United States got New England all wrong. It wasn't "near normal," at all, as the people of the region can well attest. Oh, and the data, too: Hartford, CT, as an example was actually 5.1 degrees below normal.

NOAA’s map of February temperatures across the United States got New England all wrong. It wasn’t “near normal,” at all, as the people of the region can well attest. Oh, and the data, too: Hartford, CT, as an example was actually 5.1 degrees below normal.

As the map above shows, NOAA seems to have struggled in creating a temperature map that accurately conveys what New Englanders recently experienced: a frigid February. Hartford was 5.1 degrees below normal for the month; Boston was 3.1 degrees below normal. Providence was 4 degrees below normal for the month. And yet all three locations fall within the “near normal” portion of NOAA’s map. What’s up with that?

How well did NOAA do representing February temperatures where you live?

Read more here:

NOAA map of February temperatures less than accurate

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
162 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 18, 2014 1:54 pm

Well, with CAGW “abnormal” is the new normal. Didn’t somebody say that?

kenw
March 18, 2014 1:54 pm

what is the tolerance band for each category? If it was +/-5, then only Hartford falls outside ‘normal’.

KNR
March 18, 2014 1:55 pm

Its the message that matters not the facts , so they done the job they wanted to.

Latitude
March 18, 2014 1:58 pm

Don’t be ridiculous…..the orange and yellow have to be bigger than the blue
…it’s in the rules

March 18, 2014 2:02 pm

If Virginia Beach was near normal in February, I’m Pope John Paul III.5.

Greg
March 18, 2014 2:03 pm

Extreme distorted weather. It’s the new normal.

March 18, 2014 2:03 pm

Perhaps your area has something like this.
http://www.erh.noaa.gov/iln/lcdpage.htm

Chrisga
March 18, 2014 2:04 pm

Wonder what the difference between that one and this one (also Feb 2014)
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/regional_monitoring/us_monthly_tanom.shtml

MarkB
March 18, 2014 2:11 pm

A spot check of New England state’s February data does show Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts withing 1 C of the 1901-2000 average, consistent with the map graphic: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/ Wisconsin was several degrees C below normal and California was several degrees above. That’s as far as I looked.

PowerEngineer
March 18, 2014 2:19 pm

No way was Atlanta average. Had to be in coldest quartile by most any measure.

JJ
March 18, 2014 2:20 pm

The hue and saturation of the color they chose to display the “below average” area is much less visually impacting than what they chose for the “above average” areas. The very light blue for the “below average” is almost indiscernible from the “near average” white.
The opacity of the two “above average” classes is greater as well, with the roads and state boundaries blotted out by the “warm” colors but visible thru the transparent “cool” colors.
Lying sacks of $#!^. People should lose their jobs over things like that.

March 18, 2014 2:22 pm

Selective data and misleading graphics. That’s the new “normal”.

March 18, 2014 2:22 pm

It’s real tough to get the temperature right when you got your head buried deep in the global warming sand.
I coulda’ pointed out that their heads were up…
Well, you know, where the warmists collectively put their heads; so their brains keep warm while they expound and emit high IR CO2 and CH4 gases.

March 18, 2014 2:24 pm

Are we sure Hansen retired?

Gary
March 18, 2014 2:27 pm

Northern Arkansas. We’re all still complaining that this was far and away a colder February than normal. The whole damn winter was colder than normal. Everybody I know (who’s old enough) is comparing this winter to the winters we had back in the 70s. I’ve never heard such belly-aching, and I was leading the chorus.

EW3
March 18, 2014 2:28 pm

Am about 25 miles west of Boston and been here about 20 years.
We may get one night where it gets below zero. This year about 10. This is easily the coldest winter evah. The graphic does not capture this at all.

Taphonomic
March 18, 2014 2:30 pm

Close enough for government work.

cirby
March 18, 2014 2:32 pm

They show central Florida as “above average” – when the temps here were pretty close to average for the month, and might have beat the “average” by a tenth of a degree or so…

brians356
March 18, 2014 2:32 pm

“The great thing about science is that it doesn’t matter how many [scientists] you are up against. Ultimately the right ideas win out. Science is not a popularity contest. Galileo was right, but his ideas weren’t popular at the time. The bet is still open.”
Niel Turock, physicist (on possibly losing his bet over an expanding vs cyclic universe with Stephen Hawking.)
He could have been referring to AGW skepticism.

March 18, 2014 2:46 pm

20 miles south of boston..kids are still pondskating
Stick that on your gragh

Ralph Kramdon
March 18, 2014 2:46 pm

I had jokingly said, “as the global temperature plummets bitterly cold winters will become the norm”. Maybe NOAA agrees.

John
March 18, 2014 2:47 pm

Ohio wasn’t below average…. it was much below average.

Nick Stokes
March 18, 2014 2:51 pm

It could have something to do with this. They changed to a new system on March 13.

Martin 457
March 18, 2014 2:51 pm

AVG. MAXIMUM 33.8 40.1 -6.3
AVG. MINIMUM 11.2 18.0 -6.8
MEAN 22.5 29.0 -6.5
This gets this area shaded in light blue. SE Nebraska.

greg smith
March 18, 2014 2:56 pm

For the fourteen county area in South Texas the map shows average. The 6 preliminary CF6 reports for the area average -1.6 below normal.

1 2 3 7