How can the GW temperature data be reliable when new big study shows that 1/2 of US warming data is artificial?

best gaming monitor june 2011 image

Richie - A

A reanalysis of U.S. surface station temperatures has been performed using the recently WMO-approved Siting Classification System devised by METEO-Franceâs Michel Leroy. The new siting classification more accurately characterizes the quality of the location in terms of monitoring long-term spatially representative surface temperature trends. The new analysis demonstrates that reported 1979-2008 U.S. temperature trends are spuriously doubled, with 92% of that over-estimation resulting from erroneous NOAA adjustments of well-sited stations upward. The paper is the first to use the updated siting system which addresses USHCN siting issues and data adjustments.

The new improved assessment, for the years 1979 to 2008, yields a trend of +0.155C per decade from the high quality sites, a +0.248 C per decade trend for poorly sited locations, and a trend of +0.309 C per decade after NOAA adjusts the data. This issue of station siting quality is expected to be an issue with respect to the monitoring of land surface temperature throughout the Global Historical Climate Network and in the BEST network.

Today, a new paper has been released that is the culmination of knowledge gleaned from five years of work by Anthony Watts and the many volunteers and contributors to the SurfaceStations project started in 2007.

This pre-publication draft paper, titled An area and distance weighted analysis of the impacts of station exposure on the U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperatures and temperature trends, is co-authored by Anthony Watts of California, Evan Jones of New York, Stephen McIntyre of Toronto, Canada, and Dr. John R. Christy from the Department of Atmospheric Science, University of Alabama, Huntsville, is to be submitted for publication.

The pre-release of this paper follows the practice embraced by Dr. Richard Muller, of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project in a June 2011 interview with Scientific Americanâs Michael Lemonick in âScience Talkâ, said:

I know that is prior to acceptance, but in the tradition that I grew up in (under Nobel Laureate Luis Alvarez) we always widely distributed âpreprintsâ of papers prior to their publication or even submission. That guaranteed a much wider peer review than we obtained from mere referees.

The USHCN is one of the main metrics used to gauge the temperature changes in the United States. The first wide scale effort to address siting issues, Watts, (2009), a collated photographic survey, showed that approximately 90% of USHCN stations were compromised by encroachment of urbanity in the form of heat sinks and sources, such as concrete, asphalt, air conditioning system heat exchangers, roadways, airport tarmac, and other issues. This finding was backed up by an August 2011 U.S. General Accounting Office investigation and report titled: Climate Monitoring: NOAA Can Improve Management of the U.S. Historical Climatology Network

All three papers examining the station siting issue, using early data gathered by the SurfaceStations project, Menne et al (2010), authored by Dr. Matt Menne of NCDC, Fall et al, 2011, authored by Dr. Souleymane Fall of Tuskeegee University and co-authored by Anthony Watts, and Muller et al 2012, authored by Dr. Richard Muller of the University of California, Berkeley and founder of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project (BEST) were inconclusive in finding effects on temperature trends used to gauge the temperature change in the United States over the last century.

Lead author of the paper, Anthony Watts, commented:

âI fully accept the previous findings of these papers, including that of the Muller et al 2012 paper. These investigators found exactly what would be expected given the siting metadata they had. However, the Leroy 1999 site rating method employed to create the early metadata, and employed in the Fall et al 2011 paper I co-authored was incomplete, and didnât properly quantify the effects.

The new rating method employed finds that station siting does indeed have a significant effect on temperature trends.â

More here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/29/press-release-2/#more-68286
If this warming reanalysis stands up to scrutiny then NOAA has a lot of questions to answer to avoid a huge backlash with potentially worse fallout than the famous climategate emails. In the meantime all local press offices and media should be notified so they don't miss out on a potential massive scoop!!
@Mike: Thanks for the links this is really exciting news for all the real scientists around the world. It's unfortunate but not unexpected that you have had so many thumbs down from the antiscience global warming alarmists who no doubt are very alarmed about this new scientific study!

Answer
I am taking this news a little slowly since this paper has not yet passed peer review. Although, it is a step better than Richard Muller issuing a press release on his paper which has been rejected by peer review twice: http://www.rossmckitrick.com/

Assuming the paper is fundamentally correct and gets published basically as is, then I would consider it a game changer. And, this method of analyzing surface stations could be applied to global data sets.

Over in Germany, German geologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning and chemist Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt have some very interesting comments about this paper:

"The result of the new study is shocking: Instead of correcting downwards temperatures that were heated by the urban heat island effect, the official US administration offices apparently corrected data from qualitively reliable stations upwards, which appears to be unjustifiable."

"Bit by bit others who might jump onto the train will now use the same methodology worldwide and will probably find that it really affects the global curve.â http://notrickszone.com/2012/07/30/reaction-from-germany-on-wattss-press-release-shocking-development-could-have-global-relevance/

I did a quick Google check on the media coverage of both Muller and Watt's press releases. Guess what I found?
___________________________________________________
Edit: Roger Pielke Sr comments: http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2012/07/29/comments-on-the-game-changer-new-paper-an-area-and-distance-weighted-analysis-of-the-impacts-of-station-exposure-on-the-u-s-historical-climatology-network-temperatures-and-temperature-trends-by-w/

Computer Situation- What should I buy?

Eddie Durr

I'm in 9th grade and I go to a Math Science Technology magnet schools. Right now I have $1000.00 saved up to buy a computer. I had an Alienware m17x. Sold it for $1000, because next year we are going to have to carry our laptops to school. 11.6 pounds= not portable. Now I have a decision to make. I am currently using a Vista Compaq.

1. Build a Custom Built PC, use Compaq to go to school.
2. Buy a Macbook Pro.
3. Wait and buy the New Macbook Pro with Lion and whatever Hardware upgrades in June 2011.
4. Buy a Netbook, and bank the cash.

I need a little input on what I should do. I casually game and am on my computer pretty much 24/7. I have 3-4 hours of Homework every night which has to be done on the Computer, because my school doesn't accept any papers un-typed. So I need to know what is best for a Student, Casual online gamer, Fast, and will hold its resale value.
Thank You,
Eddie

Answer
Hey Eddie, here is what I recommend you do, because its basically what I did... :)

Buy a Macbook, because they hold their resale value well, they have great customer service, and they run Mac OS X - then put Windows on it if you need to (Boot Camp), personally I had a lot of software that was Windows only, but when I'm around the house or my girlfriend or parents want internet access I reboot into Mac OS X and let them use that. However, unless you really need it, I wouldn't recommend the Pro version. I've built and run a LOT of computers in my day, and I think it is a total waste of money to buy a computer with more features than you need. The medium-level stuff will last just as long, and you'll be able to upgrade more often because you don't buy expensive things.

THEN... Buy yourself a real keyboard and mouse, and leave those at home (well, you can keep the mouse in the laptop bag, but leave the keyboard at home) - and then if you want to be cool buy a decent sized monitor - say 20" or something, they're cheap. Then, when you come home all you do is plug in the laptop to the monitor and keyboard and mouse, and its basically like having a desktop. The extra monitor you can use dual-monitors which I find to be REALLY helpful, because you can type a paper on one while you have a web page open on the other for researching.

Oh, and in every case, hold off buying as long as you can. Computers never get more expensive, they always get cheaper and faster at the same time. So if you CAN hold off until June, then do it!

I find that netbooks are too slow for main stream gaming, like World of Warcraft, for example. So if you like to play games like that, then I'd say to skip it and get a more full featured laptop that supports your needs.

Good luck!

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Title Post: How can the GW temperature data be reliable when new big study shows that 1/2 of US warming data is artificial?
Rating: 100% based on 998 ratings. 5 user reviews.
Author: Unknown

Thanks For Coming To My Blog