Gauge Study Denial

NOAA: . . . Global Land Temperature Sets Record
…The average global land temperature last month was the warmest on record and ocean surface temperatures were the 13th warmest. Combining the land and the ocean temperatures, the overall global temperature ranked the second warmest for the month of March. Global temperature averages have been recorded since 1880…

After the weather balloon data is manipulated and cherry-picked, after the surface stations are located at air conditioner exhausts and on roofs of buildings, and within a few feet of warm structures. After the data is manipulated further to consistently reduce previous years observations. After the data is liberally massaged by the predictors of climate, and peddlers of carbon credits, perhaps we could imagine that NOAA actually believes temperatures are higher again. But it would be a stretch!

The data does not stand up under the inspection of Steve McIntyre, Anthony Watts, even 16-year old Kristen Byrnes, (whose website has gone viral) and a host of others. We can have no confidence at all in NOAA’s computer theories of weather, which predicted significant warming in the last ten years, and precisely none followed. We were threatened with catastrophic global warming, and got no warming at all. We can have no confidence in NOAA’s ability or even its desire to measure temperature correctly. NOAA expects us to swallow, hook, line, and sinker, its latest assertion, however bad are the gauges and analysis methods. We cannot do it.

Check out the fancy performance of NOAA and others in maintaining its gauges (surface stations), courtesy of Anthony Watts, just below. The estimated error for most of the devices is greater by far than the change we want to observe. Of course, one could correct the data IF WE COULD RESTRAIN OURSELVES FROM DISTORTING IT FURTHER in the process. The “corrections” seem to only add to the error. 77% of these devices are expected to produce error of more than 1 degree centigrade. With such a motley population of gauges, how do we manage to correct them, anyway.

Detailed report (from NOAA, dated April 16) here.


Climate Reference Network Rating Guide – adopted from NCDC Climate Reference Network Handbook, 2002, specifications for siting (section 2.2.1) of NOAA’s new Climate Reference Network:
Class 1 – Flat and horizontal ground surrounded by a clear surface with a slope below 1/3 (<19deg). Grass/low vegetation ground cover 3 degrees.
Class 2 – Same as Class 1 with the following differences. Surrounding Vegetation 5deg.
Class 3 (error 1C) – Same as Class 2, except no artificial heating sources within 10 meters.
Class 4 (error >= 2C) – Artificial heating sources = 5C) – Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface.”
Class 5 (error >~= 5C) – Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface.”


4 Responses

  1. I guess the NOAA had to come up with something to counteract the article a few weeks ago that said the oceans weren’t warming. When the NOAA can accurately predict hurricane cycles, or even the weather for a week, maybe I’ll listen.

  2. I agree Skeptic; and they made it a doozy, or maybe a whopper.

  3. NOAA has been in bed with Al Gore so often that I wouldn’t be surprised to see little robotic weather predicting babies soon. NOAA doesn’t even try to hide it, in fact they will fire any of their employees if they voice an opinion that contradicts the “scientific consensus”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: