John Shewchuk tells us some "ghost stories"
The U.S. Historical Climate Network (USHCN) comprises 1218 stations. You can find out more about the USHCN network and its stations here.
Many have been in use for a very long time. However, for various reasons many stations have been closed. The reasons may include replacement with a newer station, issues with the station's location or equipment, etc.
When a station is closed the reason for closure is documented and published. Usually the administering authority (ultimately the NOAA/NCEI) may choose to continue to estimate readings at the station using readings from other (usually local) stations. These estimates are provided for reasons of continuity for any users who have been relying on the closed station's readings for their own purposes, whatever they may be.
However, these estimated readings are NOT used by the NOAA/NCEI for its own analysis and reporting.
John Shewchuk's assessment of a closed station
Here is one of John Shewchuk's posts about a closed station.
Now, there is no dispute that the station is closed, and there is plenty of documentary evidence on when and why it was closed.
The NOAA/NCEI are also very clear and open about the fact that they estimate readings for the station now, and state why and how they do the estimation
So, why does John Shewchuk use the term "fabrication", which suggests "the invention of false information in order to deceive someone"?
If the NOAA/NCEI are trying to deceive people, why do they explain exactly what they're doing and why they're doing it?
The readings are estimated, not fabricated
In this post John Shewchuk shows that readings are clearly marked with an "E" in the USHCN data so that anybody who chooses to use the readings knows that they are estimated.
So, given that the "E" has already been explained and there is no secrecy about the estimation, why does John still use the term "fabrication"?
Does John Shewchuk believe that "estimated" is a synonym for "fabricated"?
The Epoch Times joins in
John Shewchuk's false claims that the data are fabricated rather than estimated don't only appear in his posts on social media.
In this article from the Epoch Times the same false claim about fabrication is made.
The Epoch Times also says "The addition of the ghost station data means that NOAA’s 'monthly and yearly reports are not representative of reality,' Anthony Watts, a meteorologist and senior fellow for environment and climate at the Heartland Institute, said.'
That statement is clearly false.
The NOAA/NCEI no longer uses the readings for their own analysis
Read the highlighted paragraph on the Time Series chart page.
It's as simple as that.
If you would like to find out more about the move away from the coarser gridded USHCN dataset and to the nClimDiv dataset which is based on finer gridded GHCN data that NOAA/NCEI use for reporting now, this is a useful link. I wonder if John Shewchuk has ever read it?
John Shewchuk has been told this multiple times but he still repeats his false claims.