Why "xkcd on the Cold Truth About Warming" is wrong

We will proceed in a scientific manner.

Is the xkcd comic true? (reproduced with permission)

Mouse over text: 'You see the same pattern all over. Take Detroit--' 'Hold on. Why do you know all these statistics offhand?' 'Oh, um, no idea. I definitely spend my evenings hanging out with friends, and not curating a REALLY NEAT database of temperature statistics. Because, pshh, who would want to do that, right? Also, snowfall records.'

It's a complicated comic, with multiple claims, and it is used to deflect commentary and concerns by people, who notice when it's really cold. So, is any of it true?

None of the black hatted characters claims are true.  And the source the comic creator used is a biased web site that publishes deceptive "science", and is also wrong on the internet.

Looking at the winter trend for Missouri shows why people complaining about the cold In Missouri (and elsewhere) are not delusional,  While temperature data doesn't show the snow and ice, that data also shows the increase in cold winters.

The Tmin (minimum daily temperature) shows it clearly, colder winters.

Comparing with the Tmax confirms it is a trend

Since trends are sensitive at times to start times, here's the 30 year trend using 2014 as the end date.  (the comic was about Jan 2014)

A 30 year trend is solid evidence for climate trends, 

You can see the areas using the GISS maps, the twent year trend for Jan-Feb makes it obvious.

The trend shows up using Jan-Mar.  

It doesn't just seem like winters are getting colder in some cities, they actually are.  It's why the xkcd comic is wrong.

That's a shame, since I really like his work.

The tale of a weather station, and how BEST messed it up

While all the surface data is adjusted, BEST is an easy target,  Fish in a barrel actually.

Here is the actual data, from GHCN

Location

Dale Enterprises is a quality controlled station with no changes, aside from adding an electronic sensor in 1995, but they kept the old mercury instruments as well.

This is what Watts showed in 2010, about the USHCN adjustments

Here is the current GHCN adjustment, using the BOM tool

Compared to the actual data

And here is what BEST did to the data

Just awful "science" at work there.  Instead of using a quality station to adjust the bad stations, they adjust the good station to match the bad ones.

Here's a nearby bad station moved next to water treatment plant, showing a drastic increase in the trend.

Google maps of water treatment plant where that station rests.

The Dale Enterprise station is just north of there.

BEST and the rest of the data analysis adjusted the good station, not the bad ones.They are wrong, but they probably don't even know it.