Sentences with phrase «only rural station»

In other words, it is one of our only rural station records that we can use for studying long - term temperature trends.

we calculated the global land temperature using only rural stations.

These minimum temperature adjustments do seem to remove much of the urban - correlated warming bias in minimum temperatures, even if only rural stations are used in the homogenization process to avoid any incidental aliasing in of urban warming, as discussed in Hausfather et al. 2013.

Not exact matches

In rural Germany only the gas stations are open.

I gave birth in a large older hospital - with my 1st - and a rural hospital (only 6 rooms and most doubled as birthing rooms) The nurse's station was a across the hall.

Therefore, the only questions are: «Are the rural stations correctly identified?»

As Hansen indeed only used rural stations for his global temperature trend outside the USA, I need to change the challenge: find out the station density of rural stations in the GISS database for the tropics (20N - 20S or 30N - 30S) where in the 1979 - 2005 period the data show some reliability... Good luck with that!

A new climate measurement system that only has stations at pristine sites away from urban / rural areas shall be established.

Only eight of the rural stations have data for at least 95 of the last 100 years!

If you only use linear trends for analysing the temperature record for Valentia Observatory, you might mistakenly conclude, «it shows a «warming trend», and it's rural, so even the rural stations show «unusual global warming»».

The few rural neighbours that are around only have fairly short records (remember the Punta Indio station from Section 2?).

Only EIGHT of the rural stations had data for at least 95 of the last 100 years!

There is accurate CO2 data but only since 1958 at Mauna Loa, as for temperature, well there are thousands of high quality rural weather stations throughout the world and especially in the US and the northern hemisphere that have long histories and NO UHI bias.

Would it not have been more logical and possibly more honest to have discarded the contaminated data from the Urban stations and used only the clean data from the Rural sites.

Yours is not only the best, but the only coherent explanation I have ever come across explaining why most rural stations in Nebraska, Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri to name a few, your dotted area of this effect in the US, all show nearly flat records, some even negative, from 1895 onward.

Memo to Republicans: For discussions and debates about climate change, use only official weather / climate station thermometer datasets located in rural regions and / or from satellites.

Over time fewer rural stations are available, and by 2000 only 25 % are rural.

It can only be assumed these adjustments reflect trends at «nearby» rural stations in some way.

Five rural stations sit within 500 km (which is what GISS would use to calculate the adjustment), of which only 1 (Dumka) does not appear to be in China.

TOBS problem should «target» with such a precision only the good and rural stations, and so many factors should coincide, in order to make the TOBS a significant factor.

Were these top rated stations rural as it appears any time a rural only study is undertaken there is little or no warming, odd that.

Also in constructing that record we can only pick stations that have been in the same rural location since 1930.

And the MMTS rural 1,2 stations with the trend 0.032 are the only ones which are relevant for assessing the real climatic warming.

Out of about 500 Australian stations to be found on the GISS database, only one is a completely rural mainland station with a continuous record from 1930 to 2008 (Cape Leeuwin).

Now I find Mr. Watts team finds a 0.032 per decade warming trend when looking at only well sited rural stations.

Or even tripled, if you look at only rural, non-airport stations.

That only proves that the supposedly rural stations are polluted to a similar level by UHI.

It found that homogenization effectively removed trend differences across four different definitions of urbanity, at least after 1930 or so, and did so even when we only used rural stations to homogenize (to reduce any chance of aliasing in an urban signal).

It turns out that the 42 pairs of stations is the ONLY time in the paper that solely rural stations are compared to solely urban ones.

Other approaches: Compare a urban only network with a rural only network Compare PAIRS of stations.

People have computed trends using raw data, adjusted data, rural - only data, Anthony Watts «best stations only» data, etc etc including several reconstructions by people with at least one foot in the denialist camp and the same trend pops out.

I wonder why only five weather stations out of ~ 6000 were chosen... - gavin] Because in all probability there are only five rural, continental US stations with data from 1905 to 2003 which can be guaranteed to have not to have suffered changes in building cover, vegetation, irrigation,..

GHCN QC summary: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/ghcn-monthly/index.php Also worth noting that GCOS only uses stations that are classified as «rural».

Furthermore, I don't imagine many people will assume comparing an analysis based solely on «very rural» stations to the results gotten when analyzing the entire dataset will amount to only comparing «very rural» to urban sites.

Only one station has occasional pixelated reception, but that is still exceptional performance for my hilly, rural location.