|Home Arguments iPhone App Recent Comments Translations Links Support SkS|
Saturday, 28 August, 2010
Why we can trust the surface temperature record
Surveys of weather stations in the USA have indicated that some of them are not sited as well as they could be. This calls into question the quality of their readings.
More importantly, for the purpose of establishing a temperature trend, the relative level of single readings is less important than whether the pattern of all readings from all stations taken together is increasing, decreasing or staying the same from year to year. Furthermore, since this question was first raised, research has established that any error that can be attributed to poor siting of weather stations is not enough to produce a significant variation in the overall warming trend being observed.
It's also vital to realise that warnings of a warming trend -- and hence Climate Change -- are not based simply on ground level temperature records. Other completely independent temperature data compiled from weather balloons, satellite measurements, and from sea and ocean temperature records, also tell a remarkably similar warming story.
Confidence in climate science depends on the correlation of many sets of these data from many different sources in order to produce conclusive evidence of a global trend.
This post is the Basic version (written by John Russell) of the skeptic argument "Surface temperature record is unreliable". We're currently writing plain English versions of all the skeptic rebuttals. If you're interested in helping with this effort, please contact me.
Posted by John Russell at 19:41 PM
|© Copyright 2010 John Cook||Links | Translations | About Us | Contact Us|