Get real! and get a life!

The state of California does a very similar thing, placing remote monitors at most major Interstate Highway interchanges, or at least that was what I saw in 1976 when I was involved in the installation of a similar meterological monitor package at the sewage treatment plant in Pleasanton, CA. (Aha! I’m one of the bad guys.) I have wondered who got the data from those highway monitors, and exactly what all they were measuring ever since. We were concerned principally with local temperature, humidity and wind speed and direction at the facility and its effect on dispersion of viruses which might be released from the ponds and aerators.

That pole was originally black and exuding creosote fumes like crazy. Back then it was a definite thermal and contamination problem. In its weathered state, wood is pretty benign thermally, and the bias effects have been reduced. Producing, as Anthony correctly noted, a changing bias during the life of the pole which would be almost impossible to crank into your model. You missed my point, which is that given the location, the weathered pole is likely the least of their bias contributors. Not that multiple wrongs make a right.

I should think that stations that do not meet the stated criteria would have to have all their data disqualified and removed from the body of data for this study since they do not reflect the true temps for that area…

Got another station in the area to compare it to?

The entire problem with the environmental left is making spurious, non-provable, or patently false claims (DDT is bad, more trees is good, atmospheric CO2 content preceeds temperature increases).

Two falsehoods is NOT better than one!!!

Surely like any other product or service, they are clearly “Not fit for purpose”.

BTW, Rev, I’ve been reading on other sites about how all these-here station observations completely confirm all the original data and that it is just amazing how it was all being done right all along. And how trifling the station biases really are. And how THANKS to the NOBLE efforts of Anthoiny Watts and the WORTHY Steve McIntyre, NASA, NOAA, and the IPCC have been COMPLETELY vindicated. On to solutions.

Watts Up With That?

(My position is that when the Rev and St. Mac, whose honesty I trust in these matters, tell me that this is so, I’ll believe it. Not a day before.)

However, I was also reading about a western bias on the CRN 1 & 2 rural stations (and as we well know, the West is the place where the most warming actually occurred) and the data has not been properly gridded. Mosh mentioned it somewhere, IIRC.

Watts Up With That?

And I also read that the Stratosphere doesn’t “count”. Those nasty CFCs are cooling the strat, so dumper that data (why that wouldn’t be a homeostasis effect and highly relevant escapes me). So keep your warming trend, thank you.

Watts Up With That?

That may be true, but at one time that pole was loaded with creosote and darker. So a long term diminishing bias has been applied. The view above is looking east, so there is also a period of time in the day, which varies through the year, when the sensor is shaded.

The idea of taking continuous measurements is to eliminate as much entropy as possible. That doesn’t seem to be a consideration at all here, or in many other NWS COOP sites.