Re: Report on NWS's Temp monitoring equipment.

On Jul 20, 6:06 pm, I R A Darth Aggie <n0b...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:25:12 -0000,
AWinest...@xxxxxxxxx <AWinest...@xxxxxxxxx>, in

<1184945112.267952.14...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+ On Jul 17, 11:20 pm, Crackles McFarly <Ireland...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+ > The report estimates that the totality of incorrect measurements
+ > understate and sometimes overstate true climate measurements. If was
+ > stated this error being as much as 5% in some areas.
+ > If you don't see this as a problem then I guess we really have the
+ > answer.
+ Would you support a tax increase to fund better climate observations?

How would raising taxes address the instrumentation issues already
noted?

It could fund a better climate monitoring network. No, that won't
fix past problems, but we have to start somewhere or else the
problems will persist. I was once asked to help the local school
site its package for the local media mesonet. I said ,"Well, if
you want good quality data you could put it in the middle of that
nice, big grassy field next to the school and spend money to put a
security fence around it, or you could put it up on the roof where
the access is already restricted to school staff with keys and
spend no extra money and get less representative data." You know
how that choice turned out. :-)

Once upon a time a I worked on QC'ing surface meteorological data
collected on research vessels. The interesting technical issues we
encountered were astounding.

I've encountered plenty of problems QCing land and satellite data
myself.


Weighing rain gauges that leaked. Calibration profiles associated with
an instrument where NOT updated in the data logger when the instrument
was changed out. The difficulty in subtracting a ship's speed and
direction from the measured wind speed and direction.

Keep in mind that these where *research quality* instrument packages,
operated by research staff, and many of the problems encountered were
user error, oversight, or carelessness.

Axiom: Real-world data is messy.

That's the inspiration for my Box paraphrase.


It's just that some are more messy than others.

--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow
isn't looking good, either.
I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Roberts versus Lazio on "Overaveraging"
    ... See Babbage's classic work on bias. ... > independence when making repeated measurements. ... >> to below the resolution required for the experiment. ... Tom insists that physical resolution of the instrument depends ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Roberts versus Lazio on "Overaveraging"
    ... See Babbage's classic work on bias. ... > independence when making repeated measurements. ... >> to below the resolution required for the experiment. ... Tom insists that physical resolution of the instrument depends ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Roberts versus Lazio on "Overaveraging"
    ... See Babbage's classic work on bias. ... > independence when making repeated measurements. ... >> to below the resolution required for the experiment. ... Tom insists that physical resolution of the instrument depends ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Serious Faults in Miller Data
    ... It's fair to say that Miller's measurements are noisy, ... But Miller did not use his short-cut calculations. ... > I use asterisks to indicate where the instrument had drifted by ... the sum of the numbers in column 9 ought to be the same ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Serious Faults in Miller Data
    ... It's fair to say that Miller's measurements are noisy, ... But Miller did not use his short-cut calculations. ... > I use asterisks to indicate where the instrument had drifted by ... the sum of the numbers in column 9 ought to be the same ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)