Administrative Climate Drift

What this report from an expert brings out is that a huge disconnect exists between the consumers of data and the producers. After a century or so of managing a data network, you would surely think that they could get data origination right. Perhaps the system is now so inbred that grand gramma’s witless niece is now in charge. A little like the history of the village water boards.

This is completely the work of utterly clueless people who have no sense of responsibility from the supervisor down.

None of these measuring stations should be anywhere near an urban area to begin with. We surely have not run out of farmers who can look after what today can be automatic equipment. They even respect the importance of good data.

This does support the notion that the drift in temperature data could have an administration component. What a great new variable to add to my climate modeling equation. Administrative climate drift?

Quite honestly, this makes me choke. The rot could have developed for decades and the data is likely badly distorted in many areas. Time for an engineering audit.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/01/documenting_the_global_warming_1.html

January 05, 2009

Documenting the Global Warming Fraud (continued)
Thomas Lifson

The scientific fraud underlying global warming theory is starting to be exposed (see our first post on the subject), as data manipulations have been discovered, and now, news of the placement of temperature measuring devices in locations designed to yield artificially high readings, such as next door to a crematorium. The excellent site Watts Up With That exposes the data-gathering scandal:

In my 30 years in meteorology, I never questioned how NOAA climate monitoring stations were setup. It wasn't until I stumbled on the Marysville California fire station and its thermometer that that I began to notice just how badly sited these stations are. When I started looking further, I never expected to find USHCN climate monitoring stations placed at sewage treatment plants, next to burn barrels, or in parking lots of University Atmospheric Science Departments, or next to air conditioning heat exchangers. These were all huge surprises. ...

Then I saw this station, submitted from Fort Scott, Kansas:

The reporting station was moved to this location in 2002 from about a block away. In addition to the awkward problem of the furnace, there is this:

From a wider perspective, you can see all the things around it. Not only do we have a fountain (extra humidity), a nearby brick wall for heat retention at night, a large concrete driveway that curves around the station, a tree for shade in the late afternoon, a big brick building with a south facing brick wall, but we also have cobblestone streets and convenient nearby parking. The station is near the center of the city.

As Watts Up notes, all that's missing is a BBQ.

So why on earth would NOAA choose this location? It seems to me that Congressional hearings are called for. But of course that would require a Congress interesting in finding out the truth about alleged global warming.