NC Media Watch

Location, location, location (Updated)

Russ Steele

No we are not discussing real estate, we are discussing the locations of temperature sensors used in the US Historical Climatology Network. A network of 1221 temperature recording stations with long records, some from the early 1900s, which are used by NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Science (GISS) to calculate global warming in the United States.

Anthony Watts started a project to survey all 1221 USHCN stations for micro climate impacts, like co-located AC units, burn barrels, BBQs, acres of asphalt, and other anomalies not covered in the National Weather Service Standards Manual. I am one of Anthony’s early volunteers and now Ellen and I are surveying stations while on a vacation trip to Idaho and Utah.  Our most interesting find so far is the Salmon Idaho Station, located at the local radio station KSRA.  At least that is where it has been since 1967, I am still tracking down the other locations, since the temperature record extends from 1905 to the present. 

This first picture is of the current automated sensor installed in 2000 on a flat grass covered area between the radio station and the Salmon river. But, it was placed only 3 to 5 feet from a huge fir tree which shades the sensor most of the day. In contrast the old manual station, shown in the second picture, is on graveled/blacktop slope of more than three degrees.  The day I visited at 10:30 in the morning,  the temperature difference between the two stations was 3 degrees. The automated sensor reading 66 F and the manual one in the shelter read 69 F.  The curator noted that the temperature difference can range between 6-9 degrees on hot summer days, and 2-3 degrees in the winter.  Yet, these two sensors are only 75 feet from each other.

..................

The big difference is the location, one is in the shade on damp grass, the other on a dry gravel/blacktop slope with less shade.  Thus, it is clear that the sensor location has a major impact on the recorded temperature.

Surface Stations Survey Status Report

Russ Steele

We have surveyed the Winnemucca AP, Elko AP, and Hollister surface stations. Nothing extraordinary at Winnemucca, but Elko and Hollister not up to the 100 foot standard. Missed the Mackey Ranger Station, due to construction delays which put us behind schedule.  I will try to do the Mackey survey on the return trip. I will do the Salmon Station later today.   I will be posting the surveys this weekend on the http://www.surfacestations.org database if the Salmon Library WiFi  cooperates.

This is the Hollister Station operated by the Salmon River Canal Company.   

An ordinary citizen reports from Nevada

Russ Steele

Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist, University of Alabama, and TCS Daily Correspondent writes in a Report from the Global Warming Battlefield:

Then, the issue of spurious heat influences on the thermometers that NOAA uses to monitor global temperatures has reared its ugly head. Personally, I've been waiting for this one for a long time. Ordinary citizens are now traveling throughout their home states, taking pictures of the local conditions around these thermometer sites.

To everyone's astonishment, all kinds of spurious heat sources have cropped up over the years next to the thermometers. Air conditioning exhaust fans, burn barrels,   asphalt parking lots, roofs, jet exhaust. Who could have known? Shocking.

We visited two of the Nevada USHCN sites today, the Winnemucca Airport and the Elko Airport.  Ellen and I did not find any astonishing spurious heat sources. However, the Elko sensors are not 100 feet from the black top runway or 100 feet from a busy black top highway as required by NWS standards.  In Elko I had to take pictures through the fence, dues to the security restrictions at the Elko Regional Airport.  I will be posting the pictures at http://www.surfacestations.org/ later today.  We will be visiting Hollister Idaho’s USHCN station in the morning.

UPDATE #1:  As you can see from this graphic there is not much warming at Winnemucca.  The sensor is on the large airport grounds, a former WWII airbase according to my escort, between the taxiway and the runway. Well away from potential heat sources found at other sites.  In fact, you can see the warmer 1930s in the graphic.

 

Searching for global warming facts

Russ Steele

I was one of the Anthony Watts’ early volunteers to survey the 1221 surface temperature stations used in the US Historical Climatology Network. This is the network used to suggest that what the US was experiencing global warming.  Regular readers know that Anthony’s volunteer are finding that many of the “high quality” stations in NOAA/GISS data base do not meet the minimum standards set by the National Weather Service.  Those promoting global warming say these findings are not important, yet one of the surveys prompted a detailed audit of NOAA/GISS data processing procedures, which resulted in some adjustments to the global warming calculations. Details here and here.  1934 is now the warmest year not 1998, as originally thought by NOAA scientists.   

Starting today on a trip to Idaho and Utah, Ellen and I will be surveying additional stations in Nevada, Idaho and Utah along our route. Surveying these rural stations will add to the value to the http://www.surfacestations.org/ data base, which is at 23%, shooting for 25% in the near term. We have targeted ten of the required 24 stations needed to reach the the 25% goal.  We will be posting progress reports here and at http://www.surfacestations.org/.

Value of heretical thinking

Russ Steele

I have been called a heretic for challenging the global warming modelers by suggesting the sun has more influence on our climate than increasing levels of CO2. Here are some thoughts on the value of some heretical thinking by Freeman Dyson at the Edge, The Third Culture 

HERETICAL THOUGHTS ABOUT SCIENCE AND SOCIETY
By Freeman Dyson

My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak. But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in. The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we do not yet understand. It is much easier for a scientist to sit in an air-conditioned building and run computer models, than to put on winter clothes and measure what is really happening outside in the swamps and the clouds. That is why the climate model experts end up believing their own models.

Be sure and read the third heresy if you are under 30, the second if you are a CO2 warmer.

Anna blinked, but wants some answers.

Russ Steele

Please read Anna’s comments here before reading this post.  This a rather long answer, and I have been asked not to post long replies on NCFocus. So, here is my long answer. 

Dear Anna:

If your religion does not allow you to believe in a Medieval Warm Period, that is fine with me.  I find significant data in the ice cores and and sea floor cores to indicate there was a warm period over a range of years centered around 800-1300, dispersed over the globe. The real question is was it warmer then, than today? I agree that question may still be an open issue, the proxy data is not precise enough to know for sure.

Since we now know that 1934 was now the warmest year, not 1998 or 2006, when the CO2 was much less then, than it is today. This raises the question what was the role of CO2 in causing the higher temperature in the 1930s? Or for that matter in the 40-70s when it was cooling.  Four of the top ten years were in the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939 and only three of the top ten in the last ten: 1998, 2006, 1999.  As for that matter what happened to 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, that were cooler than 1900.   So, if every increasing CO2 is the problem, why are we not seeing a steady increase in temperatures, they seem to be all over the map. Why is that? 

You wrote: “What do you think is the probability that global warming really is being caused by increasing CO2 levels and is a grave danger that's very much worth taking major steps to address?”

My reply:  I think that CO2 is making a very small contribution to global warming, but it is being swamped by the activity of the sun.  Or, I should say the lack of sunspot activity.  I would say there is a higher danger of global cooling over the next 30 years than global warming. The southern hemisphere is having a really tough winter with record breaking cold temperatures. We are having a mild summer, even breaking local records. But, this is just the weather. We need 30 years of weather for a climate trend to emerge. Where as, 300 years of sunspot trends indicate we maybe in for an extended cooling trend, with a tiny mitigation by increasing CO2.

And an extended cooling period would more dangerous to large segments of the population than extended warming, crop failures  and  increased energy demands. During the Dalton Minimum 1790 to 1820 California experiences long periods of drought, the longest being 13 years, when there was little moisture and the there were insufficient degree days for the wheat to mature and the corn came late, with smaller ears than normal.  Native americans move in to the Spanish villages and the warmth of adobe buildings.  Life was tough during the Dalton Minimum. Tougher than it would have been if it were a few degrees warmer.  Let’s hope the sun returns to a normal sunspot cycle, sooner rather than latter.      

Best regards,

Russ   

NOAA’s global warming errors should matter to everyone

Russ Steele

I returned from my camping trip with the grandsons and found this in my must read file on Watt’s Up With That?

Does Hansen's Error "Matter"? - guest post by Steve McIntyre

Steve McIntyre's Climate Audit blog is offline, he has asked me to post this here - Anthony
 
There’s been quite a bit of publicity about Hansen’s Y2K error and the change in the U.S. leaderboard (by which 1934 is the new warmest U.S. year) in the right-wing blogosphere. In contrast, realclimate has dismissed it a triviality and the climate blogosphere is doing its best to ignore the matter entirely.

My own view has been that matter is certainly not the triviality that Gavin Schmidt [realclimate blog] would have you believe, but neither is it any magic bullet. I think that the point is significant for reasons that have mostly eluded commentators on both sides.

This is a very thought provoking essay on the issue by Steve, you should take the time to read the whole post here.

UPDATE #1: Weekend Global Warming Questions. Some questions from the right wing no one is answering on the left.

UPDATE #2: Canada's National Post has some thoughts on the numbers.

Comments delayed

Russ Steele

I was be away from my broadband connection for a few day, postings will be slow, and moderated comments will be delayed until Sunday afternoon.

Downgraded from On the Right to Global Warming Denier

Russ Steele

Anna at NC Focus created and innovative web page called Nevada County Voice, which collects posts from local bloggers and put them on the same page. She did a big upgrade on the 9th, expanding the reach to Voices and in the process decided to label NC Media Watch, Sierra Environmental Studies Foundation, and Light on Nevada County as Global Warming Deniers.

How inconvenient that this was the same day that NASA’s GISS admitted they made some computer errors and that 1989 was not the warmest year, it was 1934. More details at Climate Science and ICECAP. It has been NC Media Watch position on global warming that in the Sierra the 1930 were warmer than it is today. We published the data for everyone to see, and we were labeled a global warming denier by Anna and her cohorts  Now it appears that even NASA agrees, the 30s were warmer than the present. We were right!

However, my real issue is that all the blogs listed as Global Warming Deniers write about multiple subjects, not just global warming. I would prefer Skeptics on the Right or something similar. If she does not change this offensive label, I am request she remove NC Media Watch from Nevada County Voices.   I do not deny there is global warming, just that there is insufficient justification to blame humans when their are other more plausible explanations, especially if NASA keeps making adjustments based on surveys of additional stations.

If you agree this denier label is wrong, and should be changed, please post a comment at NCFocus.

UPDATE #1:  Anna "blinked" and has restored the On The Right with a *. Go figure. 

Climate auditors are producing results

Russ Steele

.
NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies made changes yesterday in the annual temperature record after an error was found by Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit. The weather station survey started by Anthony Watts played a role in this discovery, especially the Detroit Lakes, MN, site surveyed by volunteer Don Kostuch.   Anthony Watts has the full sequence of events at Watt’s Up With That. Unfortunately Climate Audit is down this morning for the details. I will publish a link to Steve's  analysis when CA returns to service.

Congratulations are in order for Steve McIntyre and Anthony Watts, as their “amateur” efforts have resulted in a major change in the rankings of the warmest year by GISS. The current warmest year is now 1934. I have posted more details on my Union Blog NC Insight.  More on this story at ICECAP and Climate Science