Comments on: Fabricating Temperatures on the DEW Line

By: The Ice in Greenland is Growing | Global Warming Skeptics

The Ice in Greenland is Growing | Global Warming Skeptics — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:35:59 +0000

[...] let’s not forget what we’ve learned about the temperature reporting from the DEW line Radar Stations – [...]

By: The Ice in Greenland is Growing

The Ice in Greenland is Growing — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 12:28:54 +0000

[...] let’s not forget what we’ve learned about the temperature reporting from the DEW line Radar Stations – [...]

By: The Ice in Greenland is Growing « Watts Up With That?

The Ice in Greenland is Growing « Watts Up With That? — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:37:54 +0000

[...] let’s not forget what we’ve learned about the temperature reporting from the DEW line Radar Stations – [...]

By: Jeff Alberts

Jeff Alberts — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:58:41 +0000

below freezing the wet bulb temp was too hard & long to do so a lot of the guys guessed i worked on several sites from one end of alaska to the other end of canada

Why did they guess you worked on several sites?

By: edrusiecki

edrusiecki — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:16:19 +0000

i was on dewline from 61 to 65 two different contracts head radicians job was to make a path to the stevenson screen before inspections a lot of the guys used the temperature from the console/at a I site we taught the cook to give the report to the planes coming in.below freezing the wet bulb temp was too hard & long to do so a lot of the guys guessed i worked on several sites from one end of alaska to the other end of canada

By: Andy Schlei

Andy Schlei — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:29:14 +0000

Bill Newberry:

You’ve got it exactly right. Chemtrails=loonies 100%. Same class of people who believe that we didn’t land on the Moon.

By: Brian D

Brian D — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:16:02 +0000

An Alaskan volcano erupted back on 12 July in the Aleutians. Eruption column hit 15 km(49,200) or better, as reported here.
http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/usgs/

This site for Alaskan volcanoes shows sulfur dioxide cloud movement and other info and pics.
http://www.avo.alaska.edu/activity/Okmok.php

But I’m most curious. I wonder how the fine ash will affect the Artic as it gets swirled around by the weather systems. Eruptions have been smaller since the main eruption, but it’s still going. The sulfur cloud moved south over the Pacific and North America from the initial eruptions.

By: Tesla

Tesla — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:36:21 +0000

Maybe Benford’s law could be used to get a rough estimate of the number of data points that were fudged?

By: Bill Newberry

Bill Newberry — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:05:57 +0000

rrrobbie (15:47:53) :

crosspatch in the reference to chemtrails click on the word “article” to access the reference which you might find compelling enough to turn you into a “loonie” yourself.

rrrobbie,
I made the mistake of clicking on the “article” and now have to agree with Crosspatch.
Chemtrails=Loonies. What a crock of malarkey. Either these people are complete dingbats or, at best, mediocre story tellers.

By: rrrobbie

rrrobbie — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 22:47:53 +0000

crosspatch in the reference to chemtrails click on the word “article” to access the reference which you might find compelling enough to turn you into a “loonie” yourself.

By: Ric Werme

Ric Werme — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 22:07:41 +0000

http://www.intellicast.com/Community/Content.aspx?a=137 is a column by Joe D’Aleo about issues at New York City’s Central Park temperature record and questionable adjustments that make warming appear.

More relevant to the thread is a claim I heard, I no longer have it, that reported New York’s snow measurements of the Blizzard of 1978 are poor. Well into the storm the responsible parties stopped taking measurements in part because it was so nasty out and in part because they figured any new snow would just compact the old by the same amount. Measuring snowfall is an art, as is measuring snow on the ground. The official rules for both tasks aren’t quite okay and could be improved on. In general things are better than in the 1970s, but not perfect.

http://richaucoin.com/_wsn/page4.html has some notes about a 2006 storm in New York with questionable snow amounts. It’s unfortunate that Concord NH’s snow record got fouled this year. I live about eight miles from the airport which is near the measurement site and could’ve helped out. My snowfall beat Concord’s record, but there were a couple storms where I got much more than they did.

I generally don’t pay much attention to arguments about changes in snowfall implying something about climate change. Over long enough time it does, but individual year’s variances are so great all I can do is shake my head in amazement. One might think that I get more snow than southern New England, and I did by a huge amount last season. OTOH, in 2004/2005 southern New England had more thanks to a couple major coastal storms that didn’t reach this far in. See my http://wermenh.com/sdd/index.html for more. Heck, see my http://wermenh.com/blizz78.html about the Blizzard of 1978. Somewhat to my amazement, several people find it via search engines every day.

By: crosspatch

crosspatch — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 19:12:01 +0000

“It is this familiarity with clouds that alerted me to the strange cloud formations resulting from weather modification programs such as the laying down of chemtrails. ”

Uh, oh … “chemtrails” is a buzzword used by the loonies. At this point I am not sure I am going to believe a word this person is saying without further confirmation … which considering the number of people that served up there over the years, shouldn’t be too hard to get.

By: Bill Newberry

Bill Newberry — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:59:29 +0000

Bruce,
The method of measuring snowfall as described in the article is a surefire way to guaranteed inaccuracy. We have a similar setup in central Maine and I can recall several instances where the snowfall totals were changed/revised/amended after-the-fact. The most accurate way of measuring snow is to obtain a water equivalent to
compare against what is measured on the snow boards. However, measuring snowfall is more talent than science. The 12″ of dry fluffy stuff that comes off the Great Lakes on frigid January days is a lot different than the 6″ of traffic choking slush from a Nor’easter. The texture of the snow combined with the wind factor goes a long way in determining how “accurate” the measurement will be. This is the way its always been. We are just adding to the aggravation by relying solely on snowboard measurements by part-time help. I guess we’ll just have to ignore future “records.”

By: Bob Meyer

Bob Meyer — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:09:15 +0000

“Who Goes There?” – John W Campbell Jr.

Maybe we should insist on blood tests for Al Gore. It could explain a lot about him.

By: will86aber

will86aber — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 13:59:12 +0000

I’ve always felt that the global warming theory was highly unreliable, if not completely fabricated to bring in more dough for sketchy scientists.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
http://will86aber.wordpress.com/2008/07/19/penndel-borough-and-robbins-ave/