“A reanalysis of U.S. surface station temperatures has been performed using the recently WMO-approved Siting Classification System devised by METEO-France’s Michel Leroy. The new siting classification more accurately characterizes the quality of the location in terms of monitoring long-term spatially representative surface temperature trends. The new analysis demonstrates that reported 1979-2008 U.S. temperature trends are spuriously doubled, with 92% of that over-estimation resulting from erroneous NOAA adjustments of well-sited stations upward. The paper is the first to use the updated siting system which addresses USHCN siting issues and data adjustments.”
It’s a US issue, not terribly important to the rest of us.
I might comment later.
[update 31st] What I wrote above has produced an unintended reaction in comments. This was perplexing but I think I now realise my mistake, which was giving a quick one liner without a reason or context, perhaps treading on international feelings as well. This was not intended.
I omitted to say what I took as a given: the work presented by Watts et al is very welcome and very likely excellent. I support any actions to move towards reality and truth. If you see this as not gushing please take as a combination of an unknown new work and a personal tendency to deadpan.
I also omitted to say why I think it is a US issue and will change nothing over here, meaning UK and Europe. Explaining poses a problem of length and completeness, so this is very incomplete.
A primary difference between the USA and Europe is the concept of free. With information this is nicely illustrated by UK data only available from overseas, often from the USA.
The US has wide public access to their meteorological data. In Europe the public have little if any access other than what is pushed by government. In the UK a lot more data is available commercially from government, they want money for goods we paid to collect. There is also availability to government itself and formal academia, often notionally charged using notional accounting. The US authorities do change for some data, primarily it seems when there is a significant delivery cost (example, very high resolution tidal data)
As a consequence of the above the US public have a far more accessible met. system where it is practical to see and address problems.
Also keep in mind that Europe and the USA are roughly the same size and population. This is where the federal Europe idea appears, where at the moment there are many countries but without a common federal overgoverment, where the EU gets accused of trying to take overall control. The EU apparatchik is extremely inaccessible and secretive. Those in the US need to note the small size of the UK: “Area – comparative: slightly smaller than Oregon” (CIA worldbook)
Finally, I see the whole “climate” problem as political and nothing to do with climate but about power and control by a secretive core which is cloaked inside the visible politicians. There a huge difference between the US States and much of the rest of the world, perhaps the US viewed as more genuinely of the people. Contrast with where the central state considers it owns, it controls with the people an annoying resource to be milked.
If I have upset anyone, sorry.
Posted by co-mod