CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 98Climate variability and modelsUrban Heat Island MitigationClimate Change and Environmental Impact

Documentation of Uncertainties and Biases Associated with Surface Temperature Measurement Sites for Climate Change Assessment

Open access
Pielke, Roger, Nielsen-Gammon, John, Davey, Christopher, Angel, Jim, Bliss, Odie, Doesken, Nolan, Cai, Ming, Fall, Souleymane +7 more·2007·Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
DOI 10.1175/bams-88-6-913
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The objective of this research is to determine whether poorly sited long-term surface temperature monitoring sites have been adjusted in order to provide spatially representative independent data for use in regional and global surface temperature analyses. We present detailed analyses that demonstrate the lack of independence of the poorly sited data when they are adjusted using the homogenization procedures employed in past studies, as well as discuss the uncertainties associated with undocumented station moves. We use simulation and mathematics to determine the effect of trend on station adjustments and the associated effect of trend in the reference series on the trend of the adjusted station. We also compare data before and after adjustment to the reanalysis data, and we discuss the effect of land use changes on the uncertainty of measurement. A major conclusion of our analysis is that there are large uncertainties associated with the surface temperature trends from the poorly sited stations. Moreover, rather than providing additional independent information, the use of the data from poorly sited stations provides a false sense of confidence in the robustness of the surface temperature trend assessments.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1175/bams-88-6-913

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Use of such tests in the presence of trends can lead to falsely detected step changes as well as inaccurate estimates of the magnitude of a shift when it occurs within a general trend.

    “Use of such tests in the presence of trends can lead to falsely detected step changes as well as to inaccurate estimates of the magnitude of a shift when it occurs within a general trend (DeGaetano 2006;Pielke et al. 2007).”

    From Homogenization of Temperature Series via Pairwise Comparisons (2009) · cites this paper as Pielke et al. 2007

  • The biased estimate brings the adjusted target more in agreement with the background trend captured by the neighbors.

    “Much like a false alarm when the target follows M2, the biased estimate would bring the adjusted target more in agreement with the background trend captured by the neighbors (DeGaetano 2006;Pielke et al. 2007).”

    From Homogenization of Temperature Series via Pairwise Comparisons (2009) · cites this paper as Pielke et al. 2007

  • Misclassification removes some of the unique target series trend as a step adjustment, bringing the target series more in line with the regional background climate trend captured by the neighbors.

    “The impact of this type of misclassification is to inadvertently remove some of the unique target series trend as a step adjustment, thereby bringing the target series more in line with the regional background climate trend captured by the neighbors (DeGaetano 2006;Pielke et al. 2007).”

    From Homogenization of Temperature Series via Pairwise Comparisons (2009) · cites this paper as Pielke et al. 2007

  • Physically implausible trends can result when apparent trend inhomogeneities are preserved.

    “Although there is some interest in preserving such trend inhomogeneities for land use/land change impact studies (e.g., Pielke et al. 2007), the results of this analysis indicate that physically implausible trends can result when apparent trend inhomogeneities are preserved.”

    From Homogenization of Temperature Series via Pairwise Comparisons (2009) · cites this paper as Pielke et al. 2007

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. -, and Coauthors, 1998a: Homogeneity adjustments of in situ atmospheric climate data: A review. Int. J. Climatol., 18, 1493-1517.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Pielke, R., Nielsen-Gammon, J., Davey, C., Angel, J., Bliss, O., Doesken, N., Cai, M., Fall, S., Niyogi, D., Gallo, K., Hale, R., Hubbard, K. G., Lin, X., Li, H., & Raman, S.
Affiliations
  • Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (US)
  • Florida State University (US)
  • University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US)
  • North Carolina State University (US)
Corresponding author
Pielke, Roger
ORCID
Venue
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
Publisher
American Meteorological Society
Published
2007-06-01
Volume
88
Issue
6
Pages
913-928
ISSN
  • 0003-0007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0477
DOI
10.1175/bams-88-6-913
OpenAlex
W2110714115
Cited by
98
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
FWCI
6.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (publishedVersion)
  • Lincoln (University of Nebraska) (submittedVersion)
  • OakTrust (Texas A&M University Libraries) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0233780, 0403211, 0217631)
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DE‐FG02‐)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NNG04GL61G, NNG05GQ47G, NNG04GB87G)
  • Purdue University
  • University of Alabama
  • U.S. Geological Survey
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Heat Island Mitigation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Environmental Impact
Keywords
station siting, station relocation, homogenization, measurement uncertainty, land use change, surface temperature trends, reanalysis data, climate change assessment, spatial representativeness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review