Tom Karl wrote some papers identifying issues which can affect temperature readings.
Therefore, USHCN can adjust temperatures any way they want.
Quiet. Scientists at work.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
- EPA Climate Change Arrest
- Nothing Nuclear Winter Can’t Fix
Recent Comments
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Jehzsa on “pushing nature past its limits”
- arn on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on “pushing nature past its limits”
Yes, they can idenitfy issues, as the long as the issues show warming. You should send them issues identifying cooling and see how many of those they incorporate.
They do account for UHI with a massive 0.1 degree adjustment
That is simply indefensible. I don’t care how good the hand waving is.
/sarcon
That is of course based on actual, site specific, measurements published in peer-reviewed papers, and rechecked at intervals to ensure accuracy.
Or just finger in the air ‘estimates’? /sarcoff
;-0
This is where imbeciles such as ‘physicist’ get themselves into trouble. Dozens of papers have been published in the peer reviewed literature on techniques for adjusting/correcting temperature measurements, and many of these might be characterised as ‘sceptical’. What USHCN is doing has not been published in the literature. Of course this doesn’t stop ‘physicist’ from complaining that sceptics should publish in the literature before they criticise USHCN. It is possible for him to do this because (a) he is clueless and (b) he is an idiot.