Another subject where people keep banging their heads against a brick wall – the idea of climate change. In this instance, in particular, the existence of temperature recording stations in the developed world – some of which go back to the 19th century. At https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/05/09/the-graph-that-lied/ … this subject keeps coming back but it is always batted away by those with a vested interested in government subsidies. They include the likes of Extinction Rebellion as much as windmill subsidy junkies. This update is by Tom Nelson. I don’t know anything about him and the comments section is nore fully harmonious with his case. That is to be expected as Anthony Watts site attracts a variety of opinions.
Tom Nelson, not a fully committed sceptic at the time, decided to do any analysis of temperature data for his own peace of mind. Is the globe warming – or not? The graph in question is favoured by NOAA and NASA GISS. Not the space people – the climate group. As well as the UK Met Office, the BBC, and so on. The graph starts in 1850 – a fairly cool year. It has to start somewhere of course, so no criticism of that date. The graph is based on temperature data – and earlier temperature is based on tree rings, which do show up cool summers – but not necessarily global warming or lack of it. Hence, temperature stations going back to the 19th and early 20th centuries were useful, as they were based on a scientific instrument. It was thought. However, not many places around the world had temperature monitoring stations at that time – so it has an inbuilt bias as temperatures for the rest of the world are extrapolated. What Nelso focuses on is that back in 1850 there were only 20 million people living in the USA. Nowadays it is more like 350 million people – and possibly even more as illegal migration has been going on for decades. Back in the day, temperature stations were based just outside town, or in airports – as they were useful for pilots and the control tower. In those days the airport was little more than a field with a suitable runway for take off and landing. It is still basically that but nowadays there are numerous buidings, car parks, eateries and the like as well as revving engines of jet airliners. There was nothing like that in the 19th century – the first 50 years of the temperature record. Not really anything like that until after WWII when flying became cheap enough for mass participation of jetting around the world. So, for a hundred years, airports were perfectly reasonable places to situate a temperature reading stations. The same goes for the ones situated on the edge of towns. In the second half of the 20th century population numbers shot up and towns grew and overtook the temperature stations. Yet, they were still used to collect the data. What we have is the urban heat island – and most stations site in that ever warming environment. Subject to all the modern infrastructure that generates heat. Urban areas in the modern world are much warmer than rural ones. Nelson’s point is it is a different ball game nowadays to what it was for a long portion of the graph. Global warming is actually generated from population growth and urban expansion. Nelson is not the first to say this as Anthony Watts himself did a comprehensive analysis on the siting of temperature stations in the US – and a similar one was made in Australia, and more recently in the UK.
In China, and to a certain extent, in other parts of the world, we have a more recent expansion of urban livingSince 1960 when urban spread and industrialisation took off, there has been an 80 per cent increasin in warming readings. When urban station data is compared to rural station data the difference is stark. In Japan, for example. However, the big problem still is that around most of our planet there are no temperature stations – and any that exist are widely spaced. Adjustments always seem to amplify the warming signal. Nelson then says, yo would think all this evidence of urban heat would be addressed in the graph. No. There is a neglible hat tip to the subject but the UN IPCC do not think it has a major impact on the readings. Well, to read what else he says and to read the comments that follow it one must go to the link above. Enter the ring with a neutral mind.