Why NIWA has a problem

Wattsupwiththat shows exactly why NIWA has a problem with their explanations.

NIWA’s explanation for the wild data manipulation was because the Wellington station was moved in 1927. There is a slight problem with that. The Weather Station at Kelburn is on top of their building that was built in the 1970′s meaning it was moved at least twice. Berend has pointed out that the weather station in the photo is in Auckland. Nevertheless their station in Khyber Pass, Auckland isn’t compliant with NOAA rules for valid weather stations;

Class 1 (CRN1)- Flat and horizontal ground surrounded by a clear surface with a slope below 1/3 (<19deg). Grass/low vegetation ground cover <10 centimeters high. Sensors located at least 100 meters from artificial heating or reflecting surfaces, such as buildings, concrete surfaces, and parking lots. Far from large bodies of water, except if it is representative of the area, and then located at least 100 meters away. No shading when the sun elevation >3 degrees.

and is sitting on a roof of a building on top of a hill right next to air conditioning units. You couldn’t get more “Urban Heat Sink” than that.

These guys have really been caught hanging out of the back of a goat sans trousers.

NIWA Kelburn Weather Station

NIWA Khyber Pass Weather Station

  • Nick Stokes

    Not only is this photo not in Wellington, but it is of an air quality station. It measures some met data, but there is no indication in the WUWT that it is used as a weather station.

    • itsatrap

      There is an ARC funded air quality station at the Khyber Pass site that monitors the peak pollution levels in the area. However it doesn't appear to be on the roof. I did a quick google search and you can read more about the station on pages 22-23 of the following document:

      http://www.arc.govt.nz/albany/fms/main/Documents/

      From the look of it, there is a met station on the roof that takes local readings – but it isn't part of NIWA's national network.

      • Nick Stokes

        As far as I can tell from the documentation, the air quality station has various intakes, mainly low – the met instrumentation on the roof is presumably for correlation with air quality. Yes, NIWA doesn't seem to publish the met results. I think the big "Weather Station" in the photo is wrong.

      • mediatart

        The temperature collection is done by Met Service, who are mortal enemies of NIWA- who just play with stuff on their computer regarding temperatures

  • Berend de Boer

    Whaleoil, this picture is from the NIWA building in Auckland (Kyberpass). This is not Wellington. The picture was taken by my son during his science project 2 years ago, where we personally visited most weather stations in Auckland.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Why NIWA has a problem | Whale Oil Beef Hooked | Gotcha! -- Topsy.com

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Whaleoil Whaleoil

    Thanks, Berend, i have updated the post. Do you have any other non-compliant or silly locations for Weather Stations that I can post?

  • Cadwallader

    The unveiling of the deception is a pivotal act in the demolition of the climate fraud industry. But where to from here? Is the discrediting of lying scientist sufficient to rid us all of this nonsense?

    Ten years ago this month I was advised by a computer scientist "expert" that on New Year's Day my computer, car, bank accounts, would be utterly stuffed! It's the same old fear-filled bullshit!

    After the climate garbage is buried what's the bet the next Fear Venture will be over-population? Meteor collision? Another variant of swine-flu?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/peterwn peterwn

      Not a computer scientist, but a politician – to wit Peter Dunne. he cost the country a fortune with his scare mongering. It got so bad that organisations were too scared stiff to give an honest appraisal on the possible impact of a Y2K problem for fear of legal repercussions – this attitude overall cost big money.

      I am not saying that possible Y2K problems could have been ignored, but the mass hysteria that Peter Dunne and the media kicked up went far too far.

      I think the funniest one (not in NZ) was when someone born in '98 but 102 years old in 2000) received an invitation to enrol at the local kindergarten.

      • Cadwallader

        No. In my case it was a computer scientist wanting me to spend about $4000 on new software. In the end I was sold a disc to run through our computers for $25 plus gst. It worked. I survived as have my computer records!

        I understand that the film "2012" is regarded in some naive quarters as fore-telling a world ending catastrophe that must happen! At times like this the ability for humans to rationalise must seriously be questioned!

        • Christopher Thomson

          That movie was a complete waste of time and money. So furmulaeic. There were even people shouting out what to do with each cliched scene.

          • PK:)

            my comment after seeing 2012 was I hope the end of the world doesn't take as long as the movie:)

  • coge

    Intergalactic collision will be the fear industry pet. This whole AGW has always been up there with bigfoot, Nessie & the monkey man of Mumbai. It's based on mass media scaremongering, cherry picked,massaged pseudo-science & fraudulent $100 million dollar research grants.

    Witness those steadfast Australian patriots of the ALP, whose timing has been absolutely impeccable, start the essential trend to roll back this certified mumbo jumbo.

  • Adolf Fiinkensein

    Goge, you DO mean the Liberal Party, don't you?

    • coge

      Yes AF, & it is a highly significant development. The Aussies will only take so much bull.

  • Caleb

    Surely they will be adjusting temperatures down to accomodate… seems to be standard practice to adjust!

  • mediatart

    NIWA , Hq is 301 Evans Bay Parade Hataitai. Checking the Google street view gives a building very similar to the above shot.

    However the Kelburn office is home to MetService. The address is 30 Salamanca Rd which has a park surrounding.

    But as some have pointed out with the 'altitude adjustment'
    - by your adjustment of 1.2 degrees for 122 metres height differential for Wellington, you are saying that the temperature decline with altitude is 10 degrees C per 1,000 metres. This is about three times what it should be. Please confirm what adjustment you have used."- Climate Audit

    Unfortunately for NIWA , NASA has some problems with the Wellington temperature record and has different numbers at different times. Kelburn seems to have a personality split in the 1980s becoming a separate station.
    As well NASA does the REVERSE adjustment for Wellington adding to the current temps rather than lowering the older ones. The principle is the same , but so much for NIWAs claim for international standardisation

    http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2107

    Christchurch records are even more of a dogs breakfast, having been adjusted with reference to the Chatham Is !!

  • Nick Stokes

    In fact, so far is this post from the truth, that it isn't a weather station, and it isn't NIWA, despite being on a NIWA building. The document that you link clearly says that it is operated by the Auckland Regional Council, who are the owners of the data.

    On compliance, they say
    AS2922 compliant?
    No: but not deemed necessary as site purpose is to monitor peak pollutant levels.

    • mediatart

      What about NIWA adjustement to the Wellington temperatures ( taken by Met Service at Kelburn) to account for the altitude change.
      "1.2 degrees adjustment for 122 metres height differential for Wellington, you are saying that the temperature decline with altitude is 10 degrees C per 1,000 metres. This is about three times what it should be."
      If they were scientists they would do an experiment at Thorndon location with a meteorological balloon to get a temperature altitude curve.
      But no they are NIWA, so they use another location , with with completely different climate ( Rongatai isthmus) and do some curve fitting

      • Nick Stokes

        This has nothing to do with this post and its errors. But it's also wrong. Niwa says
        "The Kelburn site is on average 0.8°C cooler than Thorndon, because of the extra height above sea level."
        That's 6.6 C/km; about what you'd expect.

        • mediatart

          Kelburn on'average' 0.8C cooler. ??

          Still doesnt say if this was the correcting factor used. Have they used a time varying correction which is suggested by the term average. Also when did the Rongotai temperature
          This is just the sort of detailed info that NIWA is hiding.

          AS well the NIWA claim of 0.8C 'average' adjustments dont talley with the NOAA in the GHCN where there is a 1.2C change shown distinctly when overlapping the graphs of the mean annual temp.

          Strange too that NIWA dont use any lighthouse temperature stations. These have more likely to be in the same location for a longer period than sites which have moved around a bit. ie all the rest and dont require a UHI adjustement as well.

84%