New Surface Station Report Released – It’s ‘Worse Than We Thought’ – Are You Satisfied With That?
MEAN CONSULTATION: 96% OF US CLIMATE DATA IS WRONG
Official NOAA temperature stations generate corrupted data because they are intentionally located in man-made hotspots
Nationwide study tracking widespread thermal corruption and bias found at NOAA stations in 2009, and thermal bias distortion problem even worse now
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL (July 27, 2022) – A new study, Broken climate station: Official US surface temperature record still severely skewedfound that about 96% of US temperature stations used to measure climate change do not meet what the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) considers “acceptable”. ” and uninterrupted location according to their own published standards.
The report, published by the Heartland Institute, compiled through satellite surveys and directly to NOAA weather stations, contributes to “official” soil temperature data in the United States. The study found that 96% of these stations are damaged by the local effects of urbanization – creating a thermal bias because they are located near asphalt roads, machinery and objects that radiate, trap or generate heat. other. Placing temperature stations in such locations violates NOAA’s published standards (see section 3.1). at this link), and strongly undermines the legitimacy and importance of formal consensus on long-term climate warming trends in the United States.
“With 96% warm bias in US temperature measurements, it is not possible to use any statistical method to determine exact climate trends for the US” Senior Fellow of the Heartland Institute Anthony Watts, director of research. “Data from stations that were not damaged by the faulty location showed that warming rates in the United States fell by nearly half compared to all stations.”
NOAA’s “Requirements and standards for [National Weather Service] Observe the climate“Instructions that temperature data instruments should be” elevated terrain (soil or soil) typical of the area around the station and at least 100 feet from any large concrete or paved surface . And that “all efforts will be made to avoid areas with rough terrain or exhaust systems proven to result in non-representative temperature data”. This new report shows that the guideline is frequently violated.
For more information or to speak with the authors of this study, please contact Vice President and Chief Communications Officer Jim Lakely at [email protected] or call/text 312-731-9364.
This new report is a follow-up to a March 2009 study titled “Are US surface temperature records reliable?“ which highlighted a subset of more than 1,000 stations surveyed and found 89 percent of stations had thermal bias issues. In April and May 2022, the Heartland Institute team of researchers visited many stations with similar temperatures to 2009, plus many that had never been visited before. The new survey sampled 128 NOAA stations and found the thermal bias problem was getting worse.
“The initial 2009 surface station project unequivocally demonstrated that the federal government’s surface temperature monitoring system was broken, with the majority of the stations failing to meet NOAA’s own standards for reliability and quality. Investigations by government watchdogs GREAT and RICE confirmed the results of the 2009 report,” H. Sterling Burnett, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center for Climate and Environmental Policy at the Heartland Institute, who personally surveyed NOAA’s surface stations this spring. “This new study is proof of two things. First, the government lacks or stubbornly refuses to learn from its mistakes for political reasons. Second, official government temperature records cannot be trusted. It reflects a clear urban heat bias effect, not national temperature trends.”
An example of a bias problem
The chart below, found on page 17 of report, showing 30 years of data from NOAA temperature stations in the Continental United States (CONUS). The blue lines show recorded temperatures and trends from stations that comply with NOAA’s published standards. The yellow bars are temperatures taken from stations that don’t conform to those standards (i.e. near man-made hotspots). The red lines are the “official” adjusted temperatures released by NOAA.
“If you look at the undisturbed stations that comply with NOAA’s published standard – those that are precisely positioned and have no local urban heat bias – they show about half the rate of warming compared to with such biased shuffle stations,” Watts said. “However, NOAA continues to use data from their centuries-old network of warm-trending surface temperatures to produce monthly and annual reports to the U.S. public on the state of the climate. .”
“The problem of local thermal bias with these stations was demonstrated in a real-world experiment conducted by Oak Ridge National Laboratory and published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Watts added.
“In contrast, NOAA operates a modern surface temperature network known as US Climate Reference Network,” said Watts. “It has no local thermal bias by design, but the data it generates is never mentioned in the monthly or annual climate reports published by NOAA for public consumption.
The Heartland InstituteA free-market consulting organization founded in 1984 that is one of the world’s leading organizations promoting the work of scientists who are skeptical that human activity is causing the crisis. climate crisis.
Heartland organized 14 International Conference on Climate Change with thousands of attendees since 2008, published six volumes Climate change series revisited by the International Non-Governmental Commission on Climate Change, and for 21 years published Environment and Climate News. The Heartland Institute has also published several popular books on climate, including Why scientists disagree on global warming (2015), Seven theories of climate change (2010), and Are US surface temperature records reliable? (2009).
###
Related
