What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Looks Like Anthony Watts and his group was correct.

westwall

LET'S GO BRANDON!
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
73,953
Reaction score
29,410
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
At least NOAA has agreed to that and is going to start fixing the siting problems that Anthony and his group exposed.


Summary

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) maintains a network of weather-monitoring stations known as the U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN), which monitors the nation's climate and analyzes long-term surface temperature trends. Recent reports have shown that some stations in the USHCN are not sited in accordance with NOAA's standards, which state that temperature instruments should be located away from extensive paved surfaces or obstructions such as buildings and trees. GAO was asked to examine (1) how NOAA chose stations for the USHCN, (2) the extent to which these stations meet siting standards and other requirements, and (3) the extent to which NOAA tracks USHCN stations' adherence to siting standards and other requirements and has established a policy for addressing nonadherence to siting standards. GAO reviewed data and documents, interviewed key NOAA officials, surveyed the 116 NOAA weather forecast offices responsible for managing stations in the USHCN, and visited 8 forecast offices.

In choosing USHCN stations from a larger set of existing weather-monitoring stations, NOAA placed a high priority on achieving a relatively uniform geographic distribution of stations across the contiguous 48 states. NOAA balanced geographic distribution with other factors, including a desire for a long history of temperature records, limited periods of missing data, and stability of a station's location and other measurement conditions, since changes in such conditions can cause temperature shifts unrelated to climate trends. NOAA had to make certain exceptions, such as including many stations that had incomplete temperature records. In general, the extent to which the stations met NOAA's siting standards played a limited role in the designation process, in part because NOAA officials considered other factors, such as geographic distribution and a long history of records, to be more important. USHCN stations meet NOAA's siting standards and management requirements to varying degrees. According to GAO's survey of weather forecast offices, about 42 percent of the active stations in 2010 did not meet one or more of the siting standards. With regard to management requirements, GAO found that the weather forecast offices had generally but not always met the requirements to conduct annual station inspections and to update station records. NOAA officials told GAO that it is important to annually visit stations and keep records up to date, including siting conditions, so that NOAA and other users of the data know the conditions under which they were recorded. NOAA officials identified a variety of challenges that contribute to some stations not adhering to siting standards and management requirements, including the use of temperature-measuring equipment that is connected by a cable to an indoor readout device--which can require installing equipment closer to buildings than specified in the siting standards. NOAA does not centrally track whether USHCN stations adhere to siting standards and the requirement to update station records, and it does not have an agencywide policy regarding stations that do not meet its siting standards. Performance management guidelines call for using performance information to assess program results. NOAA's information systems, however, are not designed to centrally track whether stations in the USHCN meet its siting standards or the requirement to update station records. Without centrally available information, NOAA cannot easily measure the performance of the USHCN in meeting siting standards and management requirements. Furthermore, federal internal control standards call for agencies to document their policies and procedures to help managers achieve desired results. NOAA has not developed an agencywide policy, however, that clarifies for agency staff whether stations that do not adhere to siting standards should remain open because the continuity of the data is important, or should be moved or closed. As a result, weather forecast offices do not have a basis for making consistent decisions to address stations that do not meet the siting standards. GAO recommends that NOAA enhance its information systems to centrally capture information useful in managing the USHCN and develop a policy on how to address stations that do not meet its siting standards. NOAA agreed with GAO's recommendations.




U.S. GAO - Climate Monitoring: NOAA Can Improve Management of the U.S. Historical Climatology Network
 

wirebender

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
1,723
Reaction score
122
Points
48
Location
NC
It will be interesting to see what the temperature looks like with the warm bias removed.
 

gslack

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
4,527
Reaction score
351
Points
48
Ask Muller.

Thats it? No big fit or name calling? Whats wrong socks starting to get the feeling you been had?

Well welcome to reality...:clap2:
 
OP
westwall

westwall

LET'S GO BRANDON!
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
73,953
Reaction score
29,410
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Ask Muller.

Thats it? No big fit or name calling? Whats wrong socks starting to get the feeling you been had?

Well welcome to reality...:clap2:




Nahh, olfraud is too mentally deranged to ever admit that a "hack" like Watts could actually be correct about something. It hurts his brain to even think that it might be so!:lol::lol:
 

Si modo

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
44,120
Reaction score
7,134
Points
1,830
Location
Fairfax, Virginia
OP
westwall

westwall

LET'S GO BRANDON!
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
73,953
Reaction score
29,410
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Experts Heat Up Over Berkeley Lab Scientist's Quest to 'Calm' Climate Change Debate - NYTimes.com

"The world temperature data has sufficient integrity to be used to determine temperature trends," Muller told the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.
Only Rocks, and other dilettantes, would cite preliminary data on incomplete work as conclusive.

But, he continues to do so.

Too funny.




Well, you know, he is a MENSA boy!:lol::lol::lol:
 

Si modo

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
44,120
Reaction score
7,134
Points
1,830
Location
Fairfax, Virginia
Experts Heat Up Over Berkeley Lab Scientist's Quest to 'Calm' Climate Change Debate - NYTimes.com

"The world temperature data has sufficient integrity to be used to determine temperature trends," Muller told the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.
Only Rocks, and other dilettantes, would cite preliminary data on incomplete work as conclusive.

But, he continues to do so.

Too funny.




Well, you know, he is a MENSA boy!:lol::lol::lol:
Really? He actually joined????

:lmao:
 

gslack

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
4,527
Reaction score
351
Points
48
Socks and clones is a dedicated follower of the church of warming. He will not accept or even entertain the thought of any other faith or belief not of the warmer belief system. All he cares about is smiting the non-believers...
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
61,261
Reaction score
8,488
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
The scientists continue to refine their instrumentation, and continue to gather data. You people continue to flap yap, and lie.
 

IanC

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
11,064
Reaction score
1,315
Points
245
yes, the instrumentation is getting better, a good thing. the land temps for continental US especially are getting a facelift because of Anthony Watts and his team of volunteers going out and inspecting the collection sites.

but the distrust of arbitrary 'corrections and adjustments' also concern a lot of people. historical data is what it is. the fact that historical numbers keep on changing, always in the direction to exaggerate warming, is an area that I hope the BEST program will adequately deal with. we shall see.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
61,261
Reaction score
8,488
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
Adaquetely deal with as in refute? Their preliminary report seemed to vindicate the present data. I would bet the complete report will do that also. Then come the sneers of 'What do you expect from Berkeley?".
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
61,261
Reaction score
8,488
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
Then Si is incorrect in just assuming, on the basis of her political leanings, that the completed study will vindicate her yapping about the lack of science in the study of climate?
 

IanC

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
11,064
Reaction score
1,315
Points
245
I am already counted as one who has said both sides will howl like banshees. the difference is that the methodologies and data will be open to inspection, and even correction if the evidence is strong enough to support it.
 

Si modo

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
44,120
Reaction score
7,134
Points
1,830
Location
Fairfax, Virginia
Then Si is incorrect in just assuming, on the basis of her political leanings, that the completed study will vindicate her yapping about the lack of science in the study of climate?
I'll try to respond to your disjointed sentence phrase by phrase, because I really have no idea what your point is.

"Then Si is incorrect in just assuming": What do you think I have assumed? If you are saying I have assumed something with respect to Muller's preliminary report, I would like to know what I have assumed whenever I state exactly what Muller states, that the report in preliminary and the work is incomplete.

"on the basis of her political leanings": My political leaning have zero to do with my championing scientific integrity. For most scientists, that is the case.

"that the completed study will vindicate her yapping about the lack of science in the study of climate?": Ah, you think I have assumed the outcome of Muller's completed work. I haven't. I never have. But, you claim that I have. So, now you should produce a post of mine where I say anything about what I have "assumed" the completed work will indicate.

I won't wait for you to do so because I know what I have said and haven't said.

So, it looks like you've been caught in another lie. As I keep saying, those who have facts have a solid foundation and have no reason to lie.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$70.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top