https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/nasa-massively-tampering-with-the-us-temperature-record/ Take a look at that link, really amazing to see two of the same charts doing completely different things for the same years, supposedly using the same exact data set. Shall I say some data altering was [is] going on? Several new datasets have come out in the last couple of months, including the UAH 2015 data in April, and ERSSTv4 was just released as well...it got many major upgrades for the SST configurations, bouy adjustments and ship bias stuff. Supposedly we can see the ENSO events better with the latest data. My problem with all these data sets is that they have gone through algorithms, correcting and whatnot. You cannot tell me there is no bias in these "corrections" the data goes through, because otherwise the different data sets would not have different ideas. Another issue is the base period used to create the anomalies. UAH uses 1961-1990 I believe, while latest NASA data uses 1981-2010 I believe...these different base periods will yield different anomalies since the averages during those base periods are different, assuming these anomalies are being derived from taking the averages of each month or year (depending on set) and then taking the Standard Deviation of each Month or Year (again depending on the set) and then finding the Normalized Anomaly from that (=(Unit AVG-Total$AVG)/STD$DEV). Why cant all the data just get the anomaly from the avg's and stdev of that entire set of data. FOR instance, if we have global temps 1978-2015, why cant the anomaly be based off that entire period, why must they use 1981-2010 or 1961-1990. That makes no sense. They want Anomaly from "Normal" well the normal for 1978-2015 would be the average from 1978-2015, and any anomaly would be off that avg. I would love to get my hands on PURE raw data, no comparing, no algorithms, no fixing, I want the temperature that the measuring device measures and then let me find the norm from that. Enough for now, I cannot digress too much. BUT I did include SOME (if I shared all id be sharing 12+GB of data) graphs of the datasets I have been using, I made the graphs myself and spent hours and hours removing the "base periods" from the sets to be able to compare it myself.