Search This Blog

Saturday, August 31, 2013

THE CLIMATE IS COOLING and the warming alarmists are liars and cons. A bit of history

Back in 2007, Anthony Watts had an idea.  He was interested in the weather reporting stations and decided it would be interesting to audit them.  Here is some background information to begin to bring you up to speed on the climate question.  There is a great deal more to say on the issue but this is a good start.  Yes, people were...well...read it for yourself!

1)  My summer project – a national weather station audit


You may remember a couple of weeks ago I got sideswiped by Ms, Sherri Quammen, who in a letter to the editor called me a “weapon of mass destruction” because I’m actively involved in climate change issues locally. While funny, it did give me the impetus (aka kick in the pants) I needed to get very busy and serious about a project I had been contemplating for some time:

A national repository of weather station site surveys.

ZZZZ Snore, ho hum you say? I’d normally agree, as the subject matter is the stuff of sleep inducers. But there’s a hitch. It seems that the folks at the top of the food chain in climate research didn’t do their homework at the base level, and didn’t bother to do a quality control check on the many weather stations used in the climate records and the computer models used to predict our climate future.

I remember a talk in the spring where Jim Price of CSU had to interrupt (at the behest of a couple of folks that felt a comment about the sun’s role in climate change studies was being ignored was “biased”) the Chico observatory series, Cosmic Hike to give us all a tongue lashing on why Global Warming is “good science”. I asked him a question in front of everybody about how well biases in measurements at weather stations had been accounted for (Jim’s on the IPCC committee) and he said that they had been “carefully accounted for and considered”. I didn’t believe him then, even less now.

Ok back to my summer project. Thanks to Quammen’s inspiration, I got busy putting together a website called www.surfacestations.org for the purpose of doing a nationwide, and hopefully a worldwide audit on the viability of the weather stations used in climate research.

To seed the effort, I’ve been driving around Northern California photographing and logging weather stations, and blogger Russ Steele from Grass Valley has been helping do surveys too. You’ve seen some of them in my blog posts titled: How not to measure temperature.

Some, like Marysville, are just unbelievably badly biased, and to be blunt, the data they produce is simply useless. Yet, they are part of our “official” climate temperature record, and the data is in fact used in the computer models.

So Monday, I go live with the www.surfacestations.org website showcasing some of the US Historical Climate Record sites which is the major framework that global warming science is built upon.

The reaction was immediate and visceral in the science blogosphere. I’d hit a nerve. Some posters called for my “removal”, not knowing that I’m not funded by grants, nor employed by a government agency. I’m funding all this myself, out of my own pocket. I had to chuckle. Some called me an amateur, others said I would taint the outcome, some just ranted (I think maybe Tasker joined in). Many questioned why such an effort was needed at all. The reaction to taking photographs of weather stations to document their conditions raised a stink I never could have predicted. Why? How can something so simple raise so many hackles? Aren’t many climate scientists saying “case closed” and “no more debate”? How could a few pictures threaten this established science?

Well here’s why: Lets use the weather station in Willows at the Tehama Colusa Canal Authority as an example. Its a lights=0 station. A what? Lights=0 means it has no lights around it. Ok so what does that have to do with climate change and temperature measurement? Well, it turns out that Dr. James Hansen of NASA, in creating his USHCN database didn’t actually visit the weather stations to see if they were working well and bias free, but rather conducted an armchair survey where he used nighttime Department of Defense satellite photos to evaluate the potential heat bias from growth around the stations. He figured counting streetlights in a radius would be a good indicator. For stations like Willows, out at the end of Hwy162, yes it works. It also works for out of the way stations like Lake Spaulding, except that the armchair light counting survey didn’t catch the fact the temperature sensor is parked over an aluminum boat next to a building, on a steel tower over a rocky surface. How hot could that be? I presume the boat is there for a fast getaway in case of catastrophic sea level rise.

But this armchair survey didn’t catch things like air conditioners blowing hot exhaust air on sensors, or the Marysville Fire Department parking their vehicles within 6 feet of the sensor, or the fact that Tahoe City had a new tennis court put up 25 feet away and a trash burn barrel located next to the station. And when the really embarrassingly bad weather stations Russ and I documented started showing up, the pro warming folks had to do something because it challenged the very data itself.

The www.surfacestations.org site has been up two days now, and I’m getting hundreds of registrations across the country from people wanting to get involved in the grass roots effort to photograph, measure, catalog and contribute to the database of weather stations. I’m getting inquires from Congress, Policy think tanks, and bloggers worldwide. I even had a mom who’s driving cross country with her daughter contact me to ask how she could participate.

BTW you can sign up to help, its free, easy, and fun too. Find the stations can be a bit of a puzzle, like GPS caching.

I’ve been invited to submit a research paper, and I’m having a lot of fun too. Now I know why I lost the school board election, it was to give me time to do this. Everything happens for a reason...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2)  NEWS Updated 11/04/2011 from Surface Stations

NEWS Updated 11/04/2011  After months of work, our paper has been accepted, read summaries on the paper at these locations:
Dr. Roger Pielke Senior's website here
Dr. John Neilsen-Gammon's website here
Anthony Watts website here
Media Resource - download PDF here
Link to the paper (final print quality), Fall et al 2011 here (updated)
Fall et all 2011 supplementary information here

Surfacestations project reaches 82.5% of the network surveyed. 1007 of 1221 stations have been examined in the USHCN network. The Google Earth map below shows current coverage. 
USHCN surveyed 7-14-09

crn_ratings
Reference for site ratings: NOAA's Climate Reference Network Site Handbook Section 2.2.1
Sincere thanks to Gary Boden and Barry Wise for this contribution!
SurfaceStationsReportCoverMid term census report of the Surface Stations Project: Is the U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable? - click cover image at left to download a PDF document. Now at 80%, and with a majority sample that is spatially well distributed, a full analysis will be coming in the next few months. We will however continue to survey stations in the hope of locating more CRN1 and CRN2 stations due to their rarity.
The upcoming papers will feature statistical analysis of the nationwide USHCN network in the context of siting.

Direct link to PDF of the report is here

HELP NEEDED FOR SURVEYS IN THE FOLLOWING STATES:
Kansas, Nebraska, Arkansas, Illinois, Missouri, North Dakota, Idaho, South Dakota, Texas.
Excerpt graphics from the report are below:
 

Station quality ratings obtained from NOAA/NCDC via this source:
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 (CRN1)- Flat and horizontal ground surrounded by a clear surface with a slope below 1/3 (<19deg 100="" and="" area="" artificial="" as="" at="" away.="" bodies="" buildings="" centimeters="" concrete="" cover="" elevation="" except="" far="" from="" grass="" ground="" heating="" high.="" if="" is="" it="" large="" least="" located="" lots.="" low="" meters="" no="" of="" or="" parking="" reflecting="" representative="" sensors="" shading="" such="" sun="" surfaces="" the="" then="" vegetation="" water="" when="">3 degrees.

Class 2 (CRN2) - Same as Class 1 with the following differences. Surrounding Vegetation <25 30m.="" a="" artificial="" centimeters.="" elevation="" for="" heating="" no="" shading="" sources="" sun="" within="">5deg.

Class 3 (CRN3) (error >=1C) - Same as Class 2, except no artificial heating sources within 10 meters.

Class 4 (CRN4) (error >= 2C) - Artificial heating sources <10 br="" meters.="">
Class 5 (CRN5) (error >= 5C) - Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface."



 


Get Involved!help us document weather stations in the USA and the world.
Odd and irregular observing Sites looking at some of these observing sites you have to wonder: "what were they thinking"?
Resources links to useful and pertinent documents, images, drawings, specifications, and web sites.
Visit the blog to see highlighted examples of poorly sited stations in the "How Not to measure Temperature" series.

Site launched on 06/04/07
Progress as of 11/04/2011
USHCN Sites surveyed so far:
1068
USHCN Sites rated so far:
1007
USHCN Sites remaining:
214 

"This is a very important need for the climate science community, and you are encouraged to obtain this photographic documentation if you can, and also share with the new website under development by Anthony Watts"
Roger Pielke Sr., University of Colorado, June 1st, 2007

Other news:
Florida Completed!
Nevada USHCN surveys completed
California USHCN surveys completed! See all California stations here
Louisiana has only three stations left, Franklin, Lafayette, and Plain Dealing Any takers?
A look at how changes in paint on Stevenson Screens may have affected temperature measurement.
Now Online: Conferencepresentation given at CIRES/UCAR on 8/29/07 describing this project and the methods used to assign station site quality ratings, along with examples of many site issues seen thus far. Click to view slideshow
Special recognition to five volunteers; Bob Thompson, Eric Gamberg, Russ Steele, David Smith, and Don Kostuch, who turned summer travels into survey expeditions. Don Kostuch has surveyed more stations, and covered a broader geographic area than any other surveyor. Thanks to all!

Here is a well maintained and well sited USHCN station:
 
Graph is from NASA GISS - see it full size
Click pictures for complete site surveys of these stations
Here is a not-so-well maintained or well sited USHCN station:

Graph is from NASA GISS - see it full size
This site in Marysville, CA has been around for about the same amount of time, but
has been encroached upon by growth in a most serious way by micro-site effects.

What you'll find here

  • Site surveys of USHCN, GHCN, CWO, and other weather station networks
  • Photographic views and sketches of instrumental sitings
  • Historical notes on each station when available
  • Survey notes about nearby objects, surfaces, and sensor placement
  • Supplemental notes and photographs when applicable
I actually love the odd sites link... 

Then there are the Darwinist geologists who KNOW that Uniformitarianism is a joke.  The sedimentary rock layers (this should have been obvious?) were formed catastrophically.   Can anyone say, "Flood?"  So (and I cannot make this stuff up) these geologists have termed their assumptions "Actualism!"    I had to laugh.   I mean, really, you are that bad off that you have to completely cover your arguments with bull manure?   This development will absolutely deserve it's own blogpost before long.   Let me show you a couple of actual weather stations being used by climate alarmists to try to make you think the Earth is in trouble and we need to help it. 

Forest Grove 

Roseburg 

Now an addendum...From a blogpost in April of this year when winter was coming to an end and the global cooling was apparent.  Just as it has been for several years, as it happens!!!

Whenever there is a hurricane, an earthquake an unexpected snowstorm or unseasonable temperatures then out come the Global Climate Change alarmists.    But I can assure you that you should pay no more attention to them as you would to a salesman trying to sell you a sump pump for your attic!

First, notice they quit crying out "Global Warming?!"   Because the globe was not warming.   Sure, weather stations were reporting higher temperatures, but once we began to look as satellite readings and deep sea diving drones and collating the data, we discovered the dangerous man-made global warming was not happening!


The Roy Spencer Blog = First his 2,000 year temperature graph:  http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-background-articles/2000-years-of-global-temperatures/

…and his home page is http://www.drroyspencer.com/

Anthony Watts has a home page for climate news = http://wattsupwiththat.com/   It is the world’s most viewed and awarded climate blog.  Anthony and other authors post on it regularly.

The audit of North American weather stations home page is here:  Audit page

Global warming alarmists have attacked this website continually so many of the pictures and reports are not available at all times.    An apparently orchestrated attempt to locate temperature sensing gauges in inappropriate locations was discovered as volunteers around the continent photographed and reported on local weather stations.   So they have a separate site with pictures of every audited weather station, good or bad, at the surface station database page:     

A few examples…Eastport, Maine has their weather sensor within two feet of an air conditioner exhaust.  Tahoe City has theirs next to the place the groundskeeper burns trash, near a big tennis court!   Presque Isle, Maine, has a rooftop sensor which means, of course,  it shows  very artificially high temperatures on warm and sunny days.    Urbana, Ohio not only has their weather station at a sewage treatment plant (tends to emit heat) but here is the full description:

- Sensor is attached to the building, just mere inches away from brickwork
- Sensor is near windows, which radiate heat from heated interior rooms in winter
- Sensor is directly above effluent grates for waste-water, Waste-water is often warmer than the air many months of the year
- Sensor is between three buildings, restricting wind flow
- Sensor is between three buildings, acting as a corner reflector for infrared
- Several exhaust fans near sensor, even though one is disable, there are two more on the walls (silver domes)
- Air conditioner within 35 feet of sensor, enclosed area will tend to trap the exhaust air near sensor
- Sensor is directly over concrete slab
- Refrigeration unit nearby, exhausts air into the enclosed area
- Shadows of all buildings create a valley effect related to sunlight at certain times
- There are two nearby digester pools, which release heat and humidity in the sensor vicinity
- Heat and humidity plume over the site from digesters is often tens of degrees warmer than the air in the wintertime

Here is the Santa Rosa weather station – on the asphalt roof of the Santa Rosa, California Press Democrat Davis building!!!   Talk about a heat sink?  The person looking for the weather station said this:  

“In traveling around California and Nevada to look at NOAA USHCN climate monitoring weather stations I've seen some odd things. I've seen temperature sensors near asphalt and concrete, sensors placed within feet of buildings and cars, sensors placed near air conditioner exhausts, and sensors that had barbeque grills in the vicinity.

Last Friday June 6th, I traveled to Santa Rosa, CA to the Press Democrat Newspaper, a wholly owned subsidiary of the New York Times, which according to NOAA, has the climate station of record for Santa Rosa.  But nothing prepared me for what I was about to find at the Santa Rosa Press Democrat.

When I arrived, I couldn't locate the NOAA MMTS sensor anywhere around the building, but I did see a tower on the roof of the building, and in the rear of the building they had a Davis Vantage Pro2 weather station on a pole. I knew that wasn't the official climate temperature sensor provided by NOAA. So, after doing a perimeter search twice, I went inside to inquire within. Everything in the lobby said "go away". I guess it was the bullet proof glass, and the cameras, and the security guard. After getting a name of the person responsible for their weather page from the front desk, I called on my cell phone, no answer.

Undeterred, I decided to try looking outside again. It was then I noticed the 5 level parking garage about a block north.

From the top of the parking garage a quick scan with my binoculars located the NOAA MMTS temperature sensor. It was there, about 8-10 feet above the roof, surrounded by a sea of air conditioners and exhaust vents!

Here is what I saw from my binoculars:”  




So it is no big shock that this station, like many others in North America, began sending much higher temperatures after the Democrats took over politically and had control over the location of the weather station, eh?    

The really interesting thing about all this is that the National Weather Service had a habit of tossing out cooler reporting stations and “estimating them” while depending primarily on stations in cities, where they are so often located next to airport runways and on rooftops and in front of air conditioner exhausts or parking lots and so on and so forth.   When you include Michael Mann’s faked “Hockey Stick Graph” scandal and the leaked emails of IPCC and CRU officials agreeing to hide information so that global warming would appear to be a big problem, then remarkably enough one sees a conspiracy of all things!!!

The plan was for people like Al Gore and organizations like the UN to present faked information that would scare people into agreeing to limits on their energy use, radical changes in auto emissions standards, the eventual destruction of the coal industry and lots of government money going to “green energy” companies that were usually political cronies.    There was a Carbon Exchange set up in Chicago where companies would pay for the right to emit greenhouse gasses (to be able to operate) and supposedly Carbon Offset companies would plant trees to make up for the emissions.    However, in some cases they would clear third world forests and then plant new trees rather than allow the locals to use the cleared land for crops!   It was all a scheme to enrich guys like Al Gore, who has a massive primary home that uses so much energy it puts the lie to his so-called belief in global warming. 

Al Gore had four houses in 2010 and here is the front part of his primary residence:


Al Gore is like the guy who tells you scotch will kill you while sipping on a couple of fingers worth of Dewar's.  The UN and the IPCC and the CRU knew they were lying to you!!!

GLOBAL WARMING’S BLUE DRESS MOMENT? THE CRU EMAIL HACK SCANDAL 

NOT ONLY DID THE CRU SCIENTISTS DISCUSS WAYS TO HIDE DATA AND COVER THEMSELVES, THEY AND IPCC SCIENTISTS TRIED TO HIDE AND MANIPULATE OTHER DATA SETS.   OH, AND OF COURSE THE FAMOUS "HOCKEY STICK GRAPH", WHICH WAS AN ATTEMPT TO TRICK THE PUBLIC INTO BELIEVING THAT OUR COASTAL CITIES WOULD SOON BE FLOODED AND DISASTER WOULD HIT THE PLANET.   IN TRUTH, WHEN THE CLIMATE WARMS THEN PLANTS GROW MORE AND BIGGER AND CROPS FLOURISH, GIVING MANKIND MORE FOOD FOR LESS MONEY.   

WE WANT GLOBAL WARMING, IF POSSIBLE!!!

 

 CREDIT

IF YOU NOTICE THE "MEDIEVAL WARMING PERIOD" LASTED FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS?   IT WAS A TIME OF PLENTY AND ALLOWED VIKINGS TO SET UP FARMS AND CATTLE RANCHES IN GREENLAND AND NOVA SCOTIA, AMONG OTHER PLACES AND, IN FACT, GREENLAND ACTUALLY WAS MAINLY GREEN IN THOSE DAYS.   DIGS IN NORTH AMERICA AND GREENLAND HAVE REVEALED THE TRUTH - GLOBAL WARMING WAS GREAT FOR MANKIND!

BUT DESPITE ALL THE EVIDENCE-SPINNERS WHO ARE WORKING OVERTIME TO CONVINCE YOU THAT MANKIND IS DANGEROUSLY EFFECTING THE ENVIRONMENT?   REMEMBER A COUPLE OF THINGS...

 1)  HOW OFTEN DO METEOROLOGISTS GET LONG-RANGE FORECASTS RIGHT?   UNLESS THEY ARE MAKING PREDICTIONS FOR UNUSUAL AREAS (LIKE COASTAL CALIFORNIA (WHICH HAS A DEFINITE WET AND DRY SEASON)YOU CANNOT DEPEND ON PREDICTIONS A MONTH IN ADVANCE...AND YOU KNOW IT!

2) AL GORE STATED THE NORTH POLE ICECAP WOULD BE MELTED BY 2012, IN FACT ACTUALLY SHOULD NOW BE GONE!

SEA ICE NEWS: VOLUME 4 #1 – ARCTIC ICE GAIN SETS A NEW RECORD

From the Nature abhors a vacuum department comes this note from RealScience showing that Arctic sea ice has made a stunning rebound since the record low recorded in the late summer of 2012.
With a few weeks of growth still to occur, the Arctic has blown away the previous record for ice gain this winter. This is only the third winter in history when more than 10 million km² of new ice has formed.

ScreenHunter_175 Feb. 12 10.35
Source data: arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.anom.1979-2008

Of course, this is only a record for the satellite era data back to about 1980, and just like the much ballyhooed record low of 2012, we have no hard data to tell us if this has happened before or not.

Here’s the current Cryosphere Today plot, note the steep rebound right after the summer minimum, something also noted in 
Sea Ice News Volume 3 Number 14 – Arctic refreeze fastest ever:

seaice.recent.arctic[1]Source: Cryosphere Today – Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois
The Arctic ocean is well filled with ice right now:
cryo_latest[1]
Source: Cryosphere Today – Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois
In other news, the Antarctic seems to be continuing on its slow and steady rise, and is now approaching 450 days of uninterrupted above normal ice area according to this data: arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.south.anom.1979-2008…which shows the last time the Antarctic sea ice was below normal was 2011.8932 or 11/22/2011.
seaice.recent.antarctic[1]
This continued growth of ice in the Arctic Antarctic make the arguments for ice mass loss in Antarctica rather hard to believe, something also backed up by ICESAT data.

As always, you can see all the sea ice data at the WUWT Sea Ice Reference Page.

No comments: