Cooking Up Global Warming

Human Events ^ | Septembde 7, 2007 | Christopher C. Horner

[libstripper]

A very embarrassing chapter in the history of our nation's scientific establishment has been unfolding thanks to a creative new website www.SurfaceStations.org set up and run by Dr. Anthony Watts. This site is providing unwelcome scrutiny to the United States’ surface temperature measurement network, supposedly the most reliable in the world. The reputation has been built over the years in part because of our government’s purported insistence on uniformity of technology as well as siting (putting the gauges where they will gather the most accurate data) and maintenance standards.

But if you place your measuring equipment in the wrong place you could help start a global warming panic. Which is, apparently, just what government bureaucrats are doing.

[libstripper]

More and more dirt is coming out on the Watermelons' attempt to foist the "Global Warming" scam on the public. Now it appears that the temperature stations have generally and deliberately been located to produce the highest temperatures, instead of giving accurate measurements. This could do as much damage to the GW hysterics as exposure of Michael Bellesiles' fraudulent Arming America did to the gun grabbers.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH

---

Filet of BS?

[muawiyah]

I've proposed to a young "environmental affairs" student that she build two identical weather stations following the government standards perfectly (albeit with identical, but otherwise commercial grade termometers to hold down costs).

She would then change the type of paint on the top of one of the stations and see if it resulted in any differences in the results from the two units.

This is not a complex project, of course, but she could write up her results in terms of a critique of the "critics" as well as of the "weather service".

[The Great RJ]

I do not believe there is any conspiracy to skew temperature data. The poor location of many of these temperature recording stations is more likely a result of typical bureaucratic bungling. In my community the National Weather Service office and official recording station is located next to the airport and reports different temperatures and especially different rainfall amounts than weather stations installed by a local TV channel at area middle schools.

[JayNorth]

I've proposed to a young "environmental affairs" student that she build two identical weather stations following the government standards perfectly (albeit with identical, but otherwise commercial grade thermometers to hold down costs).
She would then change the type of paint on the top of one of the stations and see if it resulted in any differences in the results from the two units.
This is not a complex project, of course, but she could write up her results in terms of a critique of the "critics" as well as of the "weather service".

If she's smart she WON'T do it. If you question the party line in most colleges they are very vindictive. She'll end up like Blutarsky in Animal House: a GPA of zero point zero.

[DaveArk]

In Tulsa, the official temperature is taken at the airport. As the town has grown, the temps have risen. The airport is located in the northeast part of town.

The local weathermen regularly remind everyone of the heat island effect caused by the city. The prevailing winds come from the southwest.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Innocent error(s), deliberate (bureaucratic) “I’ll et around to moving it later”, and (deliberate bureaucratic inertia) “the regulations don’t say I have to MOVE the sensor once it is built and the environment changes” plus a healthy dose of “it’s not my job to (notice & fix things) cleanup the neighborhood around the sensor” ...

But, regardless of the problems with the local sensors, Hansen’s deliberate errors in (the whole government’s ?) “corrections” to ground-based thermometers need to be “calibrated” with reality for the real change over time changes. The urban heat island is 8-10 degrees between large cities and their suburbs - let alone the farming and woodlands! - and it is 4-8 degrees in medium cities.

But - what are the actual “corrections” that NASA/NOAA are applying over time?

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

It may seem that the placement of the weather stations is deliberate, but keep in mind that to-the-tenth-of-a-degree accuracy was not the original aim of the stations. No one was trying to promote this crazy GW agenda 20 years or more ago. Instead, the areas have urbanized, A/C units have been installed, parking lots have been paved, etc.

The effects of UHI are more pronounced near these stations but misdiagnosed as "global" warming. Equipment that was placed for one purpose has been corraled into serving another completely different purpose. Maybe since the thermometers are almost always near government facilities, they point to two things: the growth and incompetence of government.

[Souled_Out]

"If you question the party line in most colleges they are very vindictive."

---

I found this to be very true. Even when presented with proof from their own 'environmental science' books you will always get graded lower. Don't even think about confronting the instructor to ask for a reasoned explanation, or point out facts. These actions will ensure that your grades will plummet. I had to drop my Environmental Science class for this reason before it killed my GPA.

[N. Theknow]

I do not believe there is any conspiracy to skew temperature data. The poor location of many of these temperature recording stations is more likely a result of typical bureaucratic bungling.

You mean the thermometer in the back of the black car in the Wal-Mart parking lot in Phoenix isn't a prime location?

[ODDITHER]

What is so funny about these Glo-war nuts is that anything goes.

Have a hot summer? It’s global warming
Have a drought? It’s global warming
Have a cool summer? It’s global warming
Have a wet summer? It’s global warming.

Honest to God, there was a beautiful double rainbow near my house the other morning and when I commented on it a work, one of the glowar nuts said that we have been seeing more of them than ever before because of global warming.

I guess we should be happy that half of the liberals are blaming global warming for natural events, because they would be blaming Bush instead.

[Senator_Blutarski]

Our local La Crosse, Wisconsin weather station is at the local airport. The area around the airport has changed significantly over the last 25 years. Development has added lots of concrete and blacktop to the area, replacing open fields and woods. The airport area has become a heat sink.

My home temperature readings (in the country) run on average 3 to 5 degrees lower than the NWS readings at the airport. I have 3 analog thermometers and 1 digital. The 4 units are quite uniform in their readings.

[philman_36]

She'll end up like Blutarsky in Animal House: a GPA of zero point zero.
Blutarsky became a Senator.

[philman_36]

And he posts on FR!

[kidd]

Here’s an interesting comment from the comments on the article’s website:

---

In the late 70’s and early 80’s I lived in Northern Nevada. About 1980 - long before anyone was worried about global warming - I read an article in the Nevada State Journal (Reno), which stated that the government (possibly NOAA) was making a change in the placement of their thermometers. I don’t know if they were talking multiple locations or just one in the Reno area. Anyway, the previous positioning of the thermometer was 15 ft. above ground. The new location would be 6 ft. above ground. They thought 6 ft. was better because typically people do not live and breath 15 ft. in the air. The article went on to predict that we would see high temperature records broken regularly as a result. Voila - that’s just what happened. I am going completely from memory here. Maybe someone can research this further. I sent an e-mail to NOAA a couple of years ago about this and eventually I got a reply which stated that the positioning didn’t matter because the historical data was “corrected”.

---

Can anyone back this up?

[mountainlyons]

So how much of this junk science is responsible for all of the air pollution laws and restrictions. I live 60 miles from Denver in the mountains and still have to use expensive poor gasoline because of denver.

[libstripper]

If this isn't deliberate, then how do you explain the actions described in the following two paragraphs from the article:

Regardless, as a result of all of the controversy a clearly not amused National Climatic Data Center suddenly pulled the actual locations of the temperature measuring stations from publicly available resources! Dr. Watts took them to task. As of this writing, the locations are again publicly available.

This brazen act nonetheless prompted me to file a request under the Freedom of Information Act seeking the internal deliberations behind such apparent trickery. NCDC has yet to respond, but watch this space, for I also sought internal discussion of a related, potential scandal picked up by climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr. That is NCDC’s continuing decision to not make photos of particular Historical Climate Network sites, that are in their possession, publicly available (see Pielke’s blog post, “NOAA Cover Up Of US Historical Climate Network Surface Station Photographs”).

This kind of stonewalling and cover up of data that's legally publicly available clearly shows the Watermelons are cooking the books and don't want the public to find out.

[lepton]

But, regardless of the problems with the local sensors, Hansen’s deliberate errors in (the whole government’s ?) “corrections” to ground-based thermometers

Have you seen the latest McIntyre and co are wading through? Hansen's treatment of data has resulted in a consistant reduction of Global temperatures before the mid-80s by 0.1C, at least for the first several stations they've been looking at (plus some unexplained adjustments). Filling in gaps in the record does other odd stuff, but this is just from his method of combining scribal variants - which often contain the same data where both records have data.

Again, not critical by itself, but just another layer of trash in the records.

To be fair though, Hansen puts out bits and pieces of what he's doing. HadCRUT, overseen by Phil Jones, doesn't give up any clues as to even what stations they used, much less the adjustments.

As for Sea Ice, see this doc, especially pages 11 and 12, which suggest historical sea ice measurements and satellite passive microwave measurements may be apples and tadpoles. http://ioc3.unesco.org/oopc/meetings/oopc-9/presentations/monPM/Rayner_OOPC9_pr.pdf

[lepton]

If this isn't deliberate, then how do you explain the actions described in the following two paragraphs from the article:

They explain it by saying that they found out that areas of the website with personal contact information for volunteers was viewable by the general public, rather than merely the contact information for the site. After Pielke got involved, contact information was restored within a matter of days. Take that as you will.

[Bernard Marx]

I do not believe there is any conspiracy to skew temperature data.

Just like there's no media willingness to drop "objectivity" in order to propagandize for "global warming." Objectivity? [Not a new idea: The media whores have been wearing white to their weddings for years now, and James E. Hansen of NASA is a paragon of the true scientific method, right?]

To a certain extent I agree with you about bureaucratic bungling. But ever since liberal operatives saw the political power generated by the old "nuclear winter" propaganda, they've been hard at work developing a post Cold War scare tactic to panic the sheeple into their holding pen over on the Left side. They know well how to take advantage of -- and "improve" on -- existing flaws in the system.