BMEWS
 

Measuring Glowball Warming

 
 


Posted by Drew458    United States   on 07/09/2007 at 02:32 PM   
 
  1. Some of the comments there are quite insightful. This guy is building a database of (with luck) all 1221 recording stations in the US, but that’s only the first step.

    So, some very good points from there -

    a)when was this building built under the sensor? (the data station has been there for over 100 years, so its a no-brainer that it was originally put on unused land) 1979 looks like the time its graph started spiking, so this could be important.

    b) is this sensor now registered as a Class 5 device? No, that has nothing to do with automatic weapons, it just means that the NOAA is aware of the heat sources around it, and hopefully is taking that into account via an adjustment factor.

    c) if B, then is the data graph for this sensor adjusted accordingly?

    It may be too early to make conclusions, but if it this one still has its original Class 1 or Class 2 rating (ie somewhere in a field or forest), then the data is worthless. If even 10% of the stations nationwide are mis-rated, then any “global warming” conclusions drawn by NOAA based on the cumulative data is mostly bogus.

    Good post Mr. Christian. Make people think. I’m sure we’ve got some readers here with statistical analysis skills ... just as a hypothetical excercise, if NOAA chews their data and reports a warming trend of ... say +2 degrees in a decade ... and they have 1200 data points ... how many can be off by say ... up to 20% ... before their conclusion is unjustified?

    Um, by the way, does anybody know what NOAA is actually reporting as a 5, 10, 20 year trend?

    Drew

    Posted by Drew458    United States   07/09/2007  at  08:32 PM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: Goose Egg

Previous entry: Katrina is like a Lynching

<< BMEWS Main Page >>