Conference Day 3 – suggestions

This mornig s session is all about drafting a set of suggestions to forward to other key members of the climate research community using the group knowledge gained from this conference. I have submitted my suggestion, and it has been accepted for inclusion in the publication. It reads:

It has become clear that many surface weather stations, possibly a

significant number, may have undocumented biases that may or may not

be correctable using data analysis and data adjustment techniques.

After completion of weather station surveys for USHCN and other

networks, Why not identify the known good stations that have long term

records, few station moves, and no obvious microsite biases and

separate their data into a subset. Study the data and trends the known

good station subsets produce separately to see what can be learned.

11 thoughts on “Conference Day 3 – suggestions

  1. Why not measure the ground temperature? The Climate folks don’t measure the near surface air temperature over the oceans, but the water temperature itself.

  2. Good job, Anthony. Here are some suggestions about the dataset.
    It should contain only the original unadjusted data. Obvious corrections such as transcription errors should be noted, but no adjusted data should be included in the same file. There also ought to be files for precip, wind, insolation, and other data provided with the temp data. A metadata file, carefully audited and containing every shred of station provenance including instrumentation, should accompany the dataset. Since there is a gradation between pristine and unacceptably contaminated stations, there ought to be some evaluation scale rating. It should be available to the public on the internet.

  3. On a slightly different topic, I’d suggest auditing sea ice arreal extent “data.” Lots of opportunities there.

  4. Would it be possible to setup some sort of testing facility to attempt to quantify the biases of different types of non standard stations. Setting up about 6 stations within a square mile to keep climate the same but having one near pavement, AC units, etc, and one control in a properly maintained location. It might not be perfect but it could give a much better idea of the real UHI values.
    I would suggest a moderate climate and a year, or more, research project.

  5. Anthony,
    Excellent suggestion. Now lets how it plays out in the climate change world run by Jim H. and Gavin S.

  6. Jim – climate can vary significantly within a square mile, even under “proper conditions”…
    However, the suggestion is good. (Anthony’s already doing one form of that test.)

  7. Albuquerque NM uses the Albuquerque International Airport for weather recording information, including ‘temperature varaiations’, over the growth years from a few dozen prop planes to the present endless stream of jet Airliners. Need I say more?

  8. Hopefully they understand the census and photographs should not be limited to the US, but should include the entire world. Just saying “other networks” is perhaps not a strong enough statement.

  9. Yikes!
    Suggesting fixing the broke ones is bad enough, but a subset of the best available data?
    You will _really_ be branded a heretic for this!
    Keep up the good work! Science in whatever field, is never served better than by detached attention to the validity of input data.
    The scary thing about the AGW crowd who discredits your efforts is that they completly miss the point.
    Accurate data is not partisan. It’s just better data. This can never be a bad thing, unless one is really, really insecure in an irrational, emotional position on what should be a scientifically tractable issue.

  10. Just want to thank Anthony Watts for the Cohasset School weather station. Being able to access t on-line is much appreciated.

Comments are closed.