Fabricating Temperatures on the DEW Line

dewline-map

dewline0021

Stevenson Screen placement in relation to heated buildings- click for larger image

dewline0063

Today I received an email that contained some startling revelations about the Weather Stations that were put in place on the DEW Line, a network of cold war era radar monitoring stations in Canada and Alaska, that have now been abandoned. It makes for interesting reading. The sender Robert J. Chouinard was stationed at one of these and responsible for the weather observations. I don’t doubt the accuracy of his report.

You see, in the early to mid 60’s, during the height of the cold war, I was stationed in the Canadian Arctic as a radar and communications technician on the Distant Early Warning Radar Line (DEW Line).  Besides our main objective of spotting Russian bombers coming over the pole to drop atomic bombs on North American cities, we were tasked with making weather observations and synoptically reporting to a data collection center somewhere down south.  This was well before satellites and maybe even before mainframe computers were employed for this task.  The synoptic reports were compiled by elves and analyzed by someone who was supposed to know what they were doing.  Their objective was to forecast the immediate weather which they didn’t do very well.  The whole process was considered a joke by everyone who was involved in the process but we had to play along with the charade.

For numerous reasons many reports were fabricated. No one imagined their fabrications would comprise a data set that would, in future years, be used to detect minor global warming trends and trigger a panic in the world.

Some of the reasons why the reports were fabricated:

1.  Their purpose was only to help with, what was considered, the futile efforts at weather forecasting, not studies on global warming.  (The significance of the difference between -55F and -45F was not appreciated.  Both temperatures would freeze your balls off.  So why split hairs?)

2.  Often, this activity interfered with our primary objective.  This was because of manning problems which would take a lot of explaining and which I will not go into.

3.  Some of the other reasons for fabricating reports:

(a.)  physical discomfort of leaving a warm environment and venturing out into the extreme weather conditions to read mercury thermometers located about 200 ft. from the living modules.

(b.) fear of frost bite, getting disoriented by limited visibility, or being mauled by marauding polar bears.  (Did you know that more Eskimos get killed from polar bears in Greenland than die of heart attack?  I have always been stoic about dying, but being mauled by a polar bear was my greatest nightmare.)

(c.)  plain old laziness.

When you feed this tainted old data into computers for analysis, well GIGO.  I realize that the referenced study covered a later period but I doubt that the human element changed much.  What more can I say?

 

dewline0058
Tough choice: get the temperature, get mauled, or stay safely indoors and make something up. Photo Courtesy Brian Jeffrey

Indeed, the human element has always been the weakest point of any of our temperature measurement systems, otherwise NCDC would not need FILNET to “fill in” missing data from stations by interpolating other data from nearby stations.

Missing data happens even when polar bears aren’t prowling between you and the thermometer. For example, look at this B91 form provided by the Marysville California observer (PDF format). Note all the missing days. Thanks to NCDC’s FILNET program, those missing days get made up into a complete data set much like the data on the DEW line did. With a “best guess” programmed into a data sorting and analysis program.

Fabricating or guessing data is usually met with serious repercussions in other fields, yet the current state of climate science seems to accept FILNET created data or data from remote outposts like these without question. My question is, if the human network is this unreliable, how do you know that the data from nearby stations your are interpolating from isn’t a product of “just plain laziness”?

I wonder how well the Russians did with their temperature data gathering in similar remote outposts?

UPDATE: Name of DEW line observer added with permission, and new photo added at 7:30AM 7/18/08

UPDATE2: Some clarifications from the original source have been added below.

Dear Mr. Watts:

Here is some follow-up information which you can do with as you wish.  Maybe you could post it as a comment.

Robert J. Chouinard

All DEW line radar and communication technicians (radicians) used to receive a two week crash course in weather reporting, which included identifying and naming various types of clouds.  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.  For some time I have been reading of other peoples observations which confirmed my suspicions until finally I read an article on the net based on an anonymous individual blowing the whistle on the extent, purpose, and science of this illegal and secretive experiment.

I reported this article to Fred Singer who forwarded it on to Tim Bell who graciously replied to me what he knew about this program.  He finished by remarking about how difficult it is to figure out what is happening naturally with the weather when it is being manipulated.  I remarked about resulting erroneous data and offered my experience on the DEW line as another example of erroneous data.  Fred Singer passed my comments on to Anthony Watts who took an interest in reposting it.  I didn’t expect this old post which originally evoked a ho hum response to be as well received as it has been on this blog.

However, judging from the responses to this post, I fear that I have left some distorted impressions.  First, most of us radicians started out being quite fastidious but priorities have a way of getting in the way.  Liquor was never the problem.  We were on shift when we did our weather reports and drinking during working hours was never allowed.  Remember our first objective was a very serious one – to detect enemy aircraft during the cold war era.  I arrived at Fox-1 one year after the photo of the polar bear was taken, in the summer of 1962, at the start of the Cuban missile crisis.  None of us were in a mood to fool around.  Being stuck on the DEW line after a nuclear exchange did not appeal to any of us.

I alluded to manning problems so maybe I should offer some details.  Our employer, Federal Electric of Paramus, N.J., was the sub contractor to the USAF.  They were not a nice company to work for and consequently when I arrived there was an ongoing attempt to organize a union, which went nowhere during my subsequent 4 ½ years of employment.  Because of the tension resulting from the Cuban missile crisis and company related morale problems there was a mass walkout which meant that the rest of us were pressed to work double shifts for which we were promised to be paid overtime.  (We never were paid). Weather reporting was a low priority for which we didn’t have the manpower so reports got fabricated.  Once bad habits are formed it’s hard to break them.

I cannot speak for other people at other sites or in better times but the low priority of the task, I suspect, prevailed and inspired compromised reporting.

About polar bears:

I said “Did you know that more Eskimos get killed from polar bears in Greenland than die of heart attack?” Someone doubted this so I tried to find my source, to no avail.  I have a son who is a doctor in Denmark who is contemplating working in Greenland for a few years.  He grew up hearing stories of his maternal great-grandfather during the Klondike gold rush and my DEW line stories so he got the idea of carrying on the family “tradition”.  I relayed this information about polar bears to him along with an Internet reference which, unfortunately, is no longer active.  So, take this information with a grain of salt, if you like.

Polar bears were always a threat on the DEW line, especially at certain times of the year.   I thought I was about to be devoured by one at Fox-1 on a very cold, dark night in 1962.  I was concentrating on reading the thermometer from the Stevenson Screen when the station chief’s pet husky came up behind me and jumped up on my back.  I had a minor heart attack on the spot.  I’m happy to say that that was my only “polar bear” experience.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

83 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dieuwe de Boer
July 17, 2008 11:19 pm

So it looks like global warming was caused by polar bears, global cooling, and laziness.

neilo
July 17, 2008 11:39 pm

This opens the question: what dataset can we trust, and from what point in time?

papertiger
July 18, 2008 12:27 am

http://www.sacbee.com/288/story/1089062.html
CHICO – Fire officials have determined that the Humboldt fire, which consumed 23,500 acres and destroyed more than 80 homes near Paradise in Butte County, was intentionally set.
Joshpae White, a spokesman for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, said the investigation is ongoing but that officials have eliminated all other causes of the wildfire.

Evan Jones
Editor
July 18, 2008 12:34 am

Indeed, the human element has always been the weakest point of any of our temperature measurement systems, otherwise NCDC would not need FILNET to “fill in” missing data from stations by interpolating other data from nearby stations.
Hmmm.
I know someone from online (not this site) who claims he is an odfficial temperature reader volunteer. He posted a shot of his Stevenson screen (but he decline to reveal which one; he was well aware of the surface-station project).
He made a joke or two about deliberately “upping” the readings by a couple C. I emphasize that I do not know if he actually did or not. (For that matter, I don’t even know for a fact he is an official reader or if his station is part of the NOAA/GISS official net.)
But I always wondered about that “human element”. I never mentioned this until now, but in light of the above story (complete with “F” word), I thought I’d relay is as an anecdote or the mix.

papertiger
July 18, 2008 12:40 am

Cruising under your radar
Watching from satellites
Take a page from the red book
Keep them in your sights
Red alert
Red alert
Left and rights of passage
Black and whites of youth
Who can face the knowledge
That the truth is not the truth?
Obsolete
Absolute
Distant Early Warning by RUSH.
It seems to fit the occasion.

July 18, 2008 1:48 am

Scene: Any guard house at a camp in the Gulag.
Guards: Boris it’s your turn to read the Stevenson screen.
Boris opens door – howling gale at 30 below or so comes in.
Boris quickly shuts door.
Boris: Ivan what was the temperature when Gennady read the screen last week before the bad weather?
Ivan: minus 30.7
Boris: ya reckon it’s colder?
Ivan: Da, comrade.
Boris: how about we put down minus 33.4?
Ivan: Da, Boris, have another vodka!

Kev
July 18, 2008 1:54 am

Whup, Whup
Troll Alert Condition Red:
Where are this anonymous person’s credentials to comment on McHale’s Navy-like shirking of thermometer reading in the face of snow, sleet and hungry polar bears ?
What peer-reviewed studies exist to show that humble grunts deployed to the Arctic Circle in the middle of the Cold War might have been less than diligent about reading the thermometer in spite of frivilous distractions like potential thermonuclear obliteration ??
This almost exists in the category of excuse as to why merchant seamen and naval ratings might have been a tad distracted in taking seawater temperature readings during the period 1939-45 ? As if U-boats and kamikaze dive bombers could possibly offer a reasonable explanation !!
Perish forbid !!

July 18, 2008 2:35 am

Here’s an alternate theory for anomalous Siberian warming. It’s from comment 15 at this thread at ClimateAudit:
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3114#comment-254021
“This thing with the SSTs reminds me of the revelation after the Cold War that in many Russian cities, mayors or other local leadership would have their ‘offical’ daily temperatures exaggerated in order to make it look as if it were really colder than it was, in order to get more money for fuel from Moscow. After 1990 we see a sudden jump in Siberian temperatures-coincidence?”
Interesting. I wonder if Johne S. Morton has anything hard to back it up.
Regards

Leon Brozyna
July 18, 2008 3:14 am

When ‘modern’ and ‘progressive’ businessmen, motivated by the lure of government grants and susidies, make adjustments to financial statements to present a rosy picture of the health of a business, everyone takes a ride on the gravy train until the fraud is exposed. Then, with self-righteous outraged indignation on the part of the deceived, these frauds are prosecuted and these businessmen serve time in jail.
When real scientists adjust their data to make a study ‘work’, their duplicity may escape detection for a time. They may even become repected members within their specialized community. But all it takes is a single dedicated grad student raising concerns and careers are ruined, reputations sullied, a pall of shame descends, and studies redone to undo the damage.
But in the area of climatology, standards don’t seem to apply. They can cook the books with impunity. Missing data? Fill in the blanks with guesses. If such practices are questioned, defend the phony data and blame the weaknesses on human nature. A real scientist’s career would be ended but a climatologist seems to be granted special dispensation to play fast and loose with the facts, even the made up ones. A real scientist must present all his data for review so that other scientists can try to replicate the work. A climatologist does not feel constrained by such standards and will even invoke claims of intellectual property rights to prevent his work from being too closely scrutinized.
Unfortunately, when such sloppy junk science is sanctioned by government and is trumpeted loudly by mass media, we all pay. When the whole mess is unmasked and finally crumbles from its own contradictions, it’ll make Enron seem like some truly minor petty ante scam.

Mondeoman
July 18, 2008 3:21 am

Wow, if you can’t even trust the data ………
PS Great site – its been interesting reading this for the past few days. For what its worth, I put most credence into the sunspot theory than anything else, it cant be a coincidence that if our main heater fluctuates in its output, then our temperature changes.

J.Hansford.
July 18, 2008 4:04 am

Ahhh record keeping and those that find themselves press ganged into it…
As a Trawlerman free to harvest the sea once, it was with a huge measure of contempt and derision that we were obliged to voluntarily fill in log books of our catches, of where and when and how much we caught….. As if we would bloody tell them this!!!….
Then the voluntary turned into mandatory… But our sentiments still hadn’t changed, but rather inflamed…..
Now some thirty years latter all this data was then used to model our, you beaut, state of the art ,fishing legislation models….. A model that promptly modeled us fishermen out of existence.
‘mazing what you can do with data…. ‘eh?…. Hell it don’t even has to match reality…. Bet you guys even think there’s no fish left out there?
Temp records – Prawn catches….. still just guestimates, less or more a tad, jotted down in between a mouthful of coffee and the next wave across the bow…….
We are about to stuff a whole economy, or freedom, enterprise and dreams…. For a unfounded hypothesis.
It’s a cryin’ shame.

Pierre Gosselin
July 18, 2008 4:36 am

This story just further confirms the general unreliability of surface station measurement. I think all conclusions drawn on HadCrut or GISS data have to be accompanied by significantly wide error bars. Think again before basing national and global policy based on such data.
PS
I see 2 tiny tims on the latest sun photo.

diane wilson
July 18, 2008 4:42 am

There’s an old Soviet saying: “As long as they pretend to pay us, we’ll pretend to work.” That would almost certainly include “we’ll pretend to measure the temperature.”

sod
July 18, 2008 5:52 am

(Did you know that more Eskimos get killed from polar bears in Greenland than die of heart attack?
i have serious doubts about this claim, as bear attacks are incredibly rare.
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/bear-facts/bear-attacks/
In all of Canada, only seven people have been killed by polar bears in the past 30 years.
while the heart attack rate among eskimos is growing.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080710170558.htm
—————————
talking about the rest of the entry, i am pretty sure that some officers would care about the temperature reading.
there are statistical methods to find faked number. and you have other stations, to compare the data to.

Phillip Bratby
July 18, 2008 6:13 am

A bit off topic, but the BBC is reporting more delays due to bad weather in the completion of a cafe on top of Mount Snowdon in Wales. Unexpected snow and gales etc are to blame (due to “global warming”, we don’t expect snow any more!). 80 days work lost due to bad weather last “summer” and 70 days lost since March this year. Unusually for the BBC, there was no attempt to blame the bad weather on global warming or climate change. Check it out at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_west/7513155.stm.

July 18, 2008 6:17 am

Weird but I expressed my deepest doubts about all the climate data only a few hours prior to this post. A quote – “I was to start a new project – a blog with climatic and geo databases, sort of reference pages – but reading the texts below I decided to put it off. What a sense in presenting wrong data? If NOAA and NASA used to use falsified data or processed them to fit their agenda, what it could be said about others’ databases?”
From Political Climatology or Climatic Politics?
http://p2o2.blogspot.com/2008/07/political-climatology-or-climatic.html
Regards

Tregonsee
July 18, 2008 6:25 am

Sir Josiah Stamp said it well:
The Government are extremely fond of amassing great quantities of statistics. These are raised to the nth degree, the cube roots are extracted, and the results are arranged into elaborate and impressive displays. What must be kept ever in mind, however, is that in every case, the figures are first put down by a village watchman, and he puts down anything he damn well pleases!
Treg

Chris D.
July 18, 2008 6:32 am

Almost makes one wonder about the accuracy of the historical record created by other public servants, such as firemen, forest rangers, dam operators, water treatment operators, etc.
This post is remarkable because it is direct, personal testimony of false reporting. I’m sure the criticism will be that the person remains anonymous. I get the sense that this person is describing one site, as opposed to the entire DEW line temp monitoring array (however many sites there were/are). This would be interesting to investigate to see if more sites were handled this way.
REPLY: the name is there now, I was simply waiting for a confirmation.

Fred from Canuckistan . . .
July 18, 2008 6:34 am

As someone who has done DEW Line time, I can attest to the logic.
At -55, it is so cold the thin flap of skin covering your eyes doesn’t insulate anymore and you get stabbing cold pains in your eyeballs. It really hurts and outside work gets delayed or fudged.

July 18, 2008 6:47 am

Evan Jones wrote: “He made a joke or two about deliberately “upping” the readings by a couple C. I emphasize that I do not know if he actually did or not. (For that matter, I don’t even know for a fact he is an official reader or if his station is part of the NOAA/GISS official net.)”
A thousand years ago (or so it seems) when I was in the US Navy, it was common practice to ditto in or estimate sea water temperatures recorded each hour. It was just too much of a pain in the keester to lean down into the bilges and take the intake water reading (from a gauge). So it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if the practice also permeated USHCN stations… especially if it was raining, snowing, etc.
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com

Will
July 18, 2008 7:04 am

This is further evidence that polar bears hatched the global warming hoax to get some attention. It took a few decades, but their plan is finally working.

Gary
July 18, 2008 7:07 am

Regardless of the accuracy of the reporting of the temperature data, is a Stevenson Screen (a/k/a Cotton Region Shelter) an appropriate way to get temperatures in these extreme conditions? Wouldn’t the high probability of icing affect the readings?

David
July 18, 2008 7:09 am

Having seen my fair share of bureaucracies in my lifetime, every word sounds completely true. I looked through all the pictures at the link. I imagine they had more important things on their mind than measuring temperature on this day:
http://www.ve3uu.com/target28.html
or this one:
http://www.ve3uu.com/target40.html

Dell
July 18, 2008 7:15 am

More evidence that Global Warming is indeed Man Made, by which I mean, a result of Man Made errors and/or omissions.

July 18, 2008 7:23 am

Interesting to see some of my photographs again! Having spent three years on the DEWline, some of it taking weathwer observations, I can confirm, to a certain extent, the veracity of the blog. Most Radicians were fairly religious about bundling up and going out to read the two thermometer. The only reading that I ever had problems with was the depth of snow after each snowfall. We just kept adding the inches up and by the time spring came we had to start reporting the leaving of the snow. If our reports were to be believed, there was massive melting and flooding coming from the Arctic as we tried to account for the total snow amounts we had erroneously report over the winter. A precursor to what we now call global warming.
Interesting stuff.

1 2 3 4