This video really doesn’t cover anything new. NOAA (NSDC) temp trends are not raw, but homogenized, adjusted and gridded. The colored dots are not actual temps but departures from a subjective 30 year mean. There are so many holes in the coverage that most of Africa, East and Central Asia, Australia and South America is extrapolated. Adjusted SSTs from the oceans are spliced onto the surface trends. The actual number of surface reporting stations worldwide is barely a thousand, of which 140 come from the US. There is no way, one can get a decent trend analysis from this data. Over 2/3rds of the reporting stations from 1960 have closed, and from what we know of the quality of US stations, the actual accuracy of the numbers is suspect. When compared to either the UAH or RSS satellite data, both NOAA and NASA’s data are statistical outliers. Hadley’s isn’t much better. Also, both NASA and NOAA say that UHI does not exist, or it is so small that it has no effect on their trend analysis. Yet, the majority of the reporting stations used come from airfields (lots of concrete, suburban sprawl, etc…).

It is not the trend that has problems, but the magnitude. This video essentially commits the mistake of post hoc ergo propter hoc. It builds on the assumption that what comes from NOAA and its network of co-opts is accurate. It also in the beginning highlights the trends of 2 months (something it doesn’t dare do when cold anomalies occur) based upon data which skeptics have shown to be spurious.

Much of what these organizations do is to re-create the famed Hockey Stick by other means.