Sentences with phrase «uhi contamination»

But burying their heads in denial over UHI contamination problems — this only makes them look anti-scientific.

Also, are we certain that UHI contamination does not affect the models?

This was an ingenious method of detecting the UHI contamination indirectly, rather than examining the individual records and locations.

If you're now agreeing that it doesn't matter then, terrific, we all agree: UHI contamination is a serious problem.

Of course Hinkel et al show that very clearly, but even a team player has shown that the assumption of rural sites being free of any UHI contamination is very questionable.

But eventually cities will grow and UHI contamination will creep into the record.

Narrowing of Diurnals, narrowing of varience in Tmin, is a first order sign of of UHI contamination.

How much UHI contamination remains in the global mean temperatures has been tested in papers such as Parker (2005, 2006) which found there was no effective difference in global trends if one segregates the data between windy and calm days.

Not exact matches

If we look at the trends since records began, noting that there are longitudinal problems (changes in locations of weather stations, + UHI effects) and contamination by human analysts (data trickery), the trends seem cyclical in periods of around 60 years.

Tagged Chris de Freitas, economic contamination, Gavin Schmidt, Patrick Michaels, Ross McKitrick, surface temperature, UHI

But that doesn't seem consistent with the idea of «improving» the data quality at each station and removing contamination like UHI, TOBS, and sawtooth drift - correction patterns.

As a starting point, I think sat - temps are high enough in the atmosphere to eliminate or minimalize UHI «contamination», but IMO it's not impossible that UHI could produce plumes of localized warm areas above / downwind of large developed regions at sat - temp elevations, but I don't know for sure.