
I’ll have a lot more on this study later, but for now just a short rebuttal.
I believe this study is hopelessly flawed due to the fact that the authors take the data from the weather stations at face value without considering bias due to measurement error or siting error, both of which are rampant in the US surface station network.
Read my report at left.
While not all situations with poorly sited weather stations affect trends, a weather station like this one at the University of Arizona’s parking lot in front of the atmospheric science department is represenative of the kinds of problems that would lead to an increased number of new high temperature records set.

Plus then there’s the error problem. For example we saw this summer that Honolulu set new record highs, but they turned out to be in error. The kicker is that NOAA let the records stand anyway! The problem is that a number of climate stations are at airports. Watch this NWS employee say on record that these airport weather stations are “placed for aviation purposes…not necessarily for climate purposes.”
So take this NCAR study with a grain of salt, since the authors did not address any of these issues.
From NCAR: Record High Temperatures Far Outpace Record Lows Across U.S.
BOULDER—Spurred by a warming climate, daily record high temperatures occurred twice as often as record lows over the last decade across the continental United States, new research shows. The ratio of record highs to lows is likely to increase dramatically in coming decades if emissions of greenhouse gases continue to climb.
“Climate change is making itself felt in terms of day-to-day weather in the United States,” says Gerald Meehl, the lead author and a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). “The ways these records are being broken show how our climate is already shifting.”
This graphic shows the ratio of record daily highs to record daily lows observed at about 1,800 weather stations in the 48 contiguous United States from January 1950 through September 2009.
Each bar shows the proportion of record highs (red) to record lows (blue) for each decade. The 1960s and 1970s saw slightly more record daily lows than highs, but in the last 30 years record highs have increasingly predominated, with the ratio now about two-to-one for the 48 states as a whole. [ENLARGE] (©UCAR, graphic by Mike Shibao.) News media terms of use*
The study, by authors at NCAR, Climate Central, The Weather Channel, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has been accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters. It was funded by the National Science Foundation, NCAR’s sponsor, the Department of Energy, and Climate Central.
If temperatures were not warming, the number of record daily highs and lows being set each year would be approximately even. Instead, for the period from January 1, 2000, to September 30, 2009, the continental United States set 291,237 record highs and 142,420 record lows, as the country experienced unusually mild winter weather and intense summer heat waves.
A record daily high means that temperatures were warmer on a given day than on that same date throughout a weather station’s history. The authors used a quality control process to ensure the reliability of data from thousands of weather stations across the country, while looking at data over the past six decades to capture longer-term trends.
This decade’s warming was more pronounced in the western United States, where the ratio was more than two to one, than in the eastern United States, where the ratio was about one-and-a-half to one.
The study also found that the two-to-one ratio across the country as a whole could be attributed more to a comparatively small number of record lows than to a large number of record highs. This indicates that much of the nation’s warming is occurring at night, when temperatures are dipping less often to record lows. This finding is consistent with years of climate model research showing that higher overnight lows should be expected with climate change.
In addition to surveying actual temperatures in recent decades, Meehl and his co-authors turned to a sophisticated computer model of global climate to determine how record high and low temperatures are likely to change during the course of this century.
The modeling results indicate that if nations continue to increase their emissions of greenhouse gases in a “business as usual” scenario, the U.S. ratio of daily record high to record low temperatures would increase to about 20-to-1 by mid-century and 50-to-1 by 2100. The mid-century ratio could be much higher if emissions rose at an even greater pace, or it could be about 8-to-1 if emissions were reduced significantly, the model showed.
The authors caution that such predictions are, by their nature, inexact. Climate models are not designed to capture record daily highs and lows with precision, and it remains impossible to know future human actions that will determine the level of future greenhouse gas emissions. The model used for the study, the NCAR-based Community Climate System Model, correctly captured the trend toward warmer average temperatures and the greater warming in the West, but overstated the ratio of record highs to record lows in recent years.
However, the model results are important because they show that, in all likely scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions, record daily highs should increasingly outpace record lows over time.
“If the climate weren’t changing, you would expect the number of temperature records to diminish significantly over time,” says Claudia Tebaldi, a statistician with Climate Central who is one of the paper’s co-authors. “As you measure the high and low daily temperatures each year, it normally becomes more difficult to break a record after a number of years. But as the average temperatures continue to rise this century, we will keep setting more record highs.”
An expanding ratio
The study team focused on weather stations that have been operating since 1950. They found that the ratio of record daily high to record daily low temperatures slightly exceeded one to one in the 1950s, dipped below that level in the 1960s and 1970s, and has risen since the 1980s. The results reflect changes in U.S. average temperatures, which rose in the 1950s, stabilized in the 1960s, and then began a warming trend in the late 1970s.
Even in the first nine months of this year, when the United States cooled somewhat after a string of unusually warm years, the ratio of record daily high to record daily low temperatures was more than three to two.
Despite the increasing number of record highs, there will still be occasional periods of record cold, Meehl notes.
“One of the messages of this study is that you still get cold days,” Meehl says. “Winter still comes. Even in a much warmer climate, we’re setting record low minimum temperatures on a few days each year. But the odds are shifting so there’s a much better chance of daily record highs instead of lows.”
Millions of readings from weather stations across the country
The study team analyzed several million daily high and low temperature readings taken over the span of six decades at about 1,800 weather stations across the country, thereby ensuring ample data for statistically significant results. The readings, collected at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climatic Data Center, undergo a quality control process at the data center that looks for such potential problems as missing data as well as inconsistent readings caused by changes in thermometers, station locations, or other factors.
Meehl and his colleagues then used temperature simulations from the Community Climate System Model to compute daily record highs and lows under current and future atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases.
About the article
Title: “The relative increase of record high maximum temperatures compared to record low minimum temperatures in the U.S.”
Authors: Gerald A. Meehl, Claudia Tebaldi, Guy Walton, David Easterling, and Larry McDaniel
Publication: Geophysical Research Letters (in press)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

The question isn’t whether there are record highs vs. lows but whether there are more record positive vs. record negative deviations from the upward trend line.
There isn’t here, in the longest running temperature record:
http://i35.tinypic.com/2db1d89.jpg
Gee, how convenient they didn’t chart it back to the 1930s… wonder why?
Layne, you beat me to it.
I’d also like to see the 30’s and 40’s. Might see a sine wave pattern.
And what happened in the 60’s and 70’s? Was CO2 decreasing?
Another BS cherry picked study.
A small request to nudge the surfacestations project forward a bit: I am holding site pictures for St. John (WA, replacement for Colfax), Salinas (UT, replacement for Loa), and Pearce-Sunsites (AZ, replacement for Douglas). Albums are needed so I can upload….
That very old thermometer record shows the recovery from the Little Ice Age very nicely. (why else would the trend be up?)
I would assume if you have heat sinks surrounding tons of weather stations, then you will have a lot of record highs.
It’s even more normal than the longest running record indicates.
Take out or compensate the urban/airportized readings, take out or compensate the Fire Weather Stations in the Forests, and you have nothing to write home about.
No, Al, the sky isn’t burning. It’s quite grey and getting colder.
Remember to tell your grandkids about the good old days, when they had real summers and life was good.
Having just come from Revkin’s blog, I’m tempted to start by the de rigeur “sigh”, but I’m trying to hold onto my IQ.
Anyway, am I correct in that “record highs” are from the uncorrected, unhomogenized data?
Of course, why bother thinking, when some folks don’t even believe there could possibly be a UHI that might have changed over the last several decades, even in Phoenix!
Well, in addition to screwing up the italics [FIXED], I guess I should have said “unadjusted” rather than “uncorrected”.
Sigh… 🙂
I’m not a scientist, but it seems to me that you would expect more record highs than lows as long as the yearly average temperature is higher than the average of these yearly averages over the years that we are looking at. Even if it has cooled slightly it is still hotter than it was in the mid seventies, thus your upward fluxes will take you into record territory, and your downward fluxes will not.
If some weather stations are at or near airports, those well drained, concrete paved artificial deserts (notning grows there) isn’t this to be expected?
While not all situations with poorly sited weather stations affect trends, a weather station like this one at the University of Arizona’s parking lot in front of the atmospheric science department is represenative of the kinds of problems that would lead to an increased number of new high temperature records set.
Spelling correction……….representative………..(please delete)
SLoppy agenda driven substandard garbage.
And paid for with your taxes.
Roll on Anthony’s publication.
Hopelessly flawed is an inappropriate moniker.
I’d go with wilful scientific negligence myself.
Amazing, the power of cognitive dissonance to allow true believers to delude themselves.
If some weather stations are at or near airports, those well drained, concrete paved artificial deserts (notning grows there) isn’t this to be expected?
Airports are an odd case. The “siting” is above average. But recent increase in air traffic and HO83 equipment issues have caused the records to show a much greater increase against their backgrounds than non-airport stations.
you would expect more record highs than lows as long as the yearly average temperature is higher than the average of these yearly averages over the years that we are looking at.
Yes. And a very important point.
The graph shows a nice correlation with the COOL PDO followed by the WARM PDO….
Like some of the posts above, – the time frame is too short.
The graph would look more interesting if overlayed with the PDO and CO2 lines.
Follow the money – this study was partially funded by http://www.climatecentral.org/
Of course if found a ‘warming bias’… what’s interesting is the chart is deceptive, the bars aren’t based on actual number of records just the ‘ratio’. There’s no note of how many new low records were set, and the 2000 decade is 3 months shorter than any other decade and given that October which was teh coldest in US history gets omitted that way the numbers are skewed incorrectly.
Layne Blanchard (15:55:00) – Possibly because it might reveal some inconvenient truths .
I am not surprised at the timing of this report about extreme temperature change. I would think that Gerald would have at least waited until THIS decade was over, before reporting on it.
Its kind of silly really. Suppose it’s better to show a multi decadal warming trend, than report how the last year of this decade is shaping up to produce more cold temperature extremes than highs. Guess he couldn’t wait 2 more months.
No, I don’t believe them
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/18/a-cold-start-to-fall-over-4500-new-snowfall-low-temp-and-lowest-max-temp-records-set-in-the-usa-this-last-week/#more-11803
It’s very disturbing how many of them there are, and in what positions of influence. Are the malicious, or just delusional? And why?
I guess that just goes to show that you take man out of the dark ages, but you can’t take the dark ages out of (some) men.
So no bias or cherry-picking there then /sarc
DaveE.
So the study team writes, “Even in the first nine months of this year, when the United States cooled somewhat after a string of unusually warm years, the ratio of record daily high to record daily low temperatures was more than three to two.”
But of course nothing is said about lowest maximum temperatures.
Fascinating the team whips this report out, just when LM temps ripped HM temps all to shreds.
This is pure propaganda and just the kind of misleading garbage that fails to pass the scrutiny of MSM.
Most of the time I can see the flaws in climate scare stories but this is the umpteenth time I have seen one, not known what the catch is, came to this site and found the answer at the top of the page. I left a link to this site in the comment section of the originating article (they at least allow critical comments) along with the flaw in the story.
Well done. This site is always on top of the latest climate scams. Very valuable.
Well how amazing; with that highly detailed data consisting of six data points.
The 1950s, 1960s to 1970 s show a definite clearly visible downward trend, of both the record highs, and the record lows; yet we had rapidly rising CO2 all through that period, and if I’m not mistaken, the 1957/58 sunspot peak count was an all time record for the last 4.5 billion years or as far back as we have been counting sunspots. You would have thought that the temperature would be going up at that time ratther than down.
Looks more sinusoidal to me than straight line; so how many cycles of this oscillation will occur before 2100; and what phase will we be in then, in order to meet the IPCC’s predicted; excuse me projected 3-10 deg C rise that their accurate computer models project.
You know, it’s becoming a giant game of whack-a-mole. Every time nature shows the “science” is lacking, along comes more waterboarding of the data. In ten years time, we’ll be hearing about the bidecadal data.
By that time, all of the thermometers will be sited at airports, and will be showing the hottest twenty year period ever.
Even though Copenhagen may not live up to the alarmists expectations, they still have until 2012 to ratify a successor to Kyoto, and next year is supposed to be the peak of El Nino. So expect a conference next year held in some hot and sweaty part of the world.
Not having studied the UHI effect but having a basic idea of what it is about … given the 50 year time span and the massive increase in urbanisation over that periord, wouldn’t the UHI effect alone tend to decrease the liklihood of record lows resulting in the changed ratio of RH:RL (Record High: Record Low)?
Interesting to see the station at one of my former unis… there was a lot of construction in the vicinity of that thermometer in the late 80s when I was at the U of A.