In it for the money $$$
In one of my own studies of global warming, I discovered that a significant number of temperature measurements (used in generating climate measurements) are taken from questionable locations. For example, the Goddard Institute is in New York city. Follow me here... Dr. Hansen (of the Goddard Institute) uses temperatures measured at the institute, in New York CITY, as part of his evidence that global warming is here. We'll keep going: a huge number of NOAA weather stations (measuring temperatures) are in cities and towns. Television and radio temperature reporting is usually from within large cities or towns. All part of the network of temperature reporting.
Now, it is well known and easily demonstrated that the ambient air temperatures in cities and towns are significantly HIGHER than air temperatures taken in some deep forest or desolate mountainside. In my opinion, measured temperatures taken any where NEAR human activity is going to be higher than normal. Think of the concrete, asphalt, air conditioners, cars, machines, motors... all giving off heat warming the local air around cities and towns. And where are our institutions and universities? In cities and towns.
I have always maintained that human activity easily skews global temperature readings. Now along comes a chap that says he has detected that NOAA temperature reading are REALLY skewed - for essentially the same reason. And he has proof. he found the placement of MANY thermometers in bad places - next to air conditioners (think heat exchanger), trash incinerators, rooftop heat vents, motors, etc. Click HERE for the article.
As the NOAA reports ever warming periods, it is quite coincidental that the size of cities are ever growing. Interestingly, the areas of the US with the fastest rising temperatures are around the east coast and west coast. Think big cities and population. And it IS odd that the SAME NOAA measurements show the midwest as cooling - coincidentally areas with less cities and smaller population.
Bottom line - most likely NOAA temperature sensors are providing false readings generally speaking. Enough say, to give some scientists a scare about rising global temperatures?
Not to say that in a global setting, growing cities will not affect global temperatures at some point in the future. However, just because you find the temperatures 2-3 degrees warmer on the streets of Boston than you do in a corn field in Iowa doesn't mean the world is getting warmer, it simply means the streets in Boston are warmer - for the most obvious of reasons.
Hey, sometimes scientists are just plain wrong. Especially the ones in it for the money.
Now, it is well known and easily demonstrated that the ambient air temperatures in cities and towns are significantly HIGHER than air temperatures taken in some deep forest or desolate mountainside. In my opinion, measured temperatures taken any where NEAR human activity is going to be higher than normal. Think of the concrete, asphalt, air conditioners, cars, machines, motors... all giving off heat warming the local air around cities and towns. And where are our institutions and universities? In cities and towns.
I have always maintained that human activity easily skews global temperature readings. Now along comes a chap that says he has detected that NOAA temperature reading are REALLY skewed - for essentially the same reason. And he has proof. he found the placement of MANY thermometers in bad places - next to air conditioners (think heat exchanger), trash incinerators, rooftop heat vents, motors, etc. Click HERE for the article.
As the NOAA reports ever warming periods, it is quite coincidental that the size of cities are ever growing. Interestingly, the areas of the US with the fastest rising temperatures are around the east coast and west coast. Think big cities and population. And it IS odd that the SAME NOAA measurements show the midwest as cooling - coincidentally areas with less cities and smaller population.
Bottom line - most likely NOAA temperature sensors are providing false readings generally speaking. Enough say, to give some scientists a scare about rising global temperatures?
Not to say that in a global setting, growing cities will not affect global temperatures at some point in the future. However, just because you find the temperatures 2-3 degrees warmer on the streets of Boston than you do in a corn field in Iowa doesn't mean the world is getting warmer, it simply means the streets in Boston are warmer - for the most obvious of reasons.
Hey, sometimes scientists are just plain wrong. Especially the ones in it for the money.
| Permalink | E-mail this post 