American Thinker:
Anthony Watts of Watts Up With That reports on an important scientific paper sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (the official keepers of temperature records) that confirms what Watts and other critics have maintained for years. To its credit, NOAA decided in 2012 to test Watts’s critique that a substantial portion of the surface air temperature monitoring stations that are used to generate data for claims of global warming are located in places that have become surrounded by urbanization in the form of asphalt and concrete surfaces and other facilities that absorb heat during the day and discharge it at night — thereby artificially raising the average air temperatures.
Here is one example Watts provides of a ridiculously-sited air temperature monitoring station-
I guess you shouldn’t set up a weather heat monitoring station inside a volcano, either.
Not just asphalt but cardinal points. What’s the actual temp, the shady side, or the side of the domiciliary pasteboard that soaks up heat?
Why is your AC compressor/condenser placed where it is?
What is the optimal temperature of the entire globe supposed to be?
I’ve watched the urban heat islands grow over the decades in the State of Washington. Even as a kid, my family used to drive out of Seattle and find the air temperatures anywhere from 2-10°F lower at our destination, both in summer and winter.
As an engineer, I’ve never understood why climatologists wouldn’t question biased input data in their climate models.
@DrRiff: What is the optimal temperature of the entire globe supposed to be?”
exactly what it is right now.
It was originally designed that way.
That’s been known about, and ignored for years.
Brilliant. Just like the thermostat that controlled the heat in my office and was located over another office’s heat vents. My heat never came on. How I hated those Lake Erie breezes.
The warmmongers have the same answer as when presented with the fact that there are far fewer stations today than in 1980, with virtually all of the closed stations located in Siberia and Arctic Canada. That answer: “We calculate what the values would (should) be.” Complete laughable BS.
grayjohn: “That’s been known about, and ignored for years.”
Exactly. Remote, rural monitoring sites were shut down by the hundreds as being “inconvenient” to service and maintain. Stations became more commonly sited in urban heat islands.
And I have serious concerns about the accuracy of the calibration of the devices themselves. I’ve seen a two degree difference between FAA and NOAA
sites less than a hundred feet apart. These two are sited well at the county airport, grass for hundreds of feet all around, no pavement or reflecting structures for much more than that.
NOAA is full of corrupt unelected unaccountable Gummint bureaucrats who are all Leftists cuz hey know thats how they can Empire Build and get more funding and get bigger paychecks.
The worst thing Ted Roosevelt ever did was establish the civil service commission.