To: Brumar89 who wrote (939023 ) 6/9/2016 5:35:42 PM From: Wharf Rat Respond to Extending the climate conspiracy: Anthony Watts accuses US volunteer weather observers of fudging temperature records some research that shows that when weather observers estimate wind speed, they usually overestimate it. In April this year a team, led by Paul W Miller of the University of Georgia, published a paper in the American Meteorological Society Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology. The researchers reported that "As a general rule of thumb, humans overestimated nonconvective wind GFs [gust factors ] by approximately one-third."recorded wrote :I’ve often wondered if volunteer weather observers might potentially and purposely skew high and low temperature records. For example, let’s say you are within a degree of breaking a 100 year old temperature record at your NOAA COOP station. Only you know the real high or low reading on that thermometer, and after you reset it, all evidence of it is erased, forever. You can write down the number you want in the B91 form, or phone it in using the weathercoder, and nobody can prove you wrong, unless of course your exaggeration is quite large and doesn’t fit into a regional pattern, inviting scrutiny. accusing scientists of fraud and fudging , and is now accusing the 10,000 ordinary Americans , who do the "thankless volunteer job" of reporting weather, of being part of his "climate hoax" conspiracy. He's saying that they intentionally misreport the observations of temperature. These aren't estimates, mind you. The maximum and minimum temperatures are read off the instruments (digitally in the case of automatic weather stations). Anthony is outright accusing volunteers of being part of his imaginary "climate hoax" conspiracy.pristine Climate Reference Network with the rest of the records. It doesn't. They are virtually identical . The chart below is a plot of the Climate Reference Network in the USA with data from the pristine network of automatic weather stations, and the ClimDiv data, which is based on reports from thousands of weather stations across the country. If you hover over the chart, you'll notice how close they are. You'll also notice that the highest highs, and the linear trend, are higher for the pristine USCRN network, the blue line :)Figure 1 | USA monthly temperature anomalies from USCRN and ClimDiv data. Data source: NOAA the "paper" he announced with such gusto way back four years ago in July 2012? Not even after the promise with his poster (minus data and plus unsubstantiated claims) at AGU last year?dimmest dumbest bottom 8% as his audience, then he'll fade into obscurity among even the uber conspiracy nutters.blog.hotwhopper.com
