Comments on, G. Kukla, J.
Gavin, and T.R. Karl, 1986, Urban Warming,
Journal of Applied Meteorology, Volume
25, Issue 9 (September 1986)
On June 1st at ClimateAudit.org,
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1634
post 31 on their thread, "Tom Karl’s Station Adjustments", I commented
how in 1986 Tom Karl was co-author of a paper which defined the UHI
effect in 34 USA urban sites. See full post below.
The point of my post was to remind readers that the seminal Jones et al
compilation of Northern Hemisphere T trends which effectively "gave
birth" to what we now know as IPCC Global Warming" (GW), was published
in the same Journal, also in 1986 and used 10 of Tom Karl's urban
stations.
I mention this here for the sake of completeness in view that I may
comment further on Tom Karl's published work because he is one of the
most influential climate scientists from the USA publishing research in
this Greenhouse era, 1980's on.
My comments at #31
Now you are addressing Tom Karl's influence on temperature trends it is
interesting to go back to 1986 and note that in the same year Jones et
al launched their Northern Hemisphere tranche of "Global Warming"
http://www.warwickhughes.com/cru86/
and in the same Journal, G. Kukla, J. Gavin, and T.R. Karl published
their paper Urban Warming. Follow by link to Read Online and look
in the Journal list for page 1265.
The Abstract for this paper reads, "Meteorological stations located in an
urban environment in North America warmed between 1941 and 1980,
compared to the countryside, at an average rate of about 0.12°C per
decade. Secular trends of surface air temperature computed
predominately from such station data are likely to have a serious warm
bias."
Kukla et al examined USA data from 34 urban / rural pairs.
It so happens that Jones et al 1986 used 10 of these Kukla et al urban
stations uncorrected.
A question that has puzzled me for some time is why Kukla et al did not
comment on Jones et al inclusion of UHI affected data ?
It is not just the 10 stations, Jones et al used nearly 60 US cities
over 50,000 population, see Earthlights image below.
Kukla et al was funded by the DoE, who also funded Jones et al.
Did Kukla et al suddenly decide after looking at Jones et al that their
paper was wrong ? That city data are not affected by UHI
after all.
Obviously Tom Karl has gone on to write much about temperature data and
urban data issues. More on that later.
This Earthlights image of the USA 48 has Jones 1994 stations (521 US)
superimposed and you can see most are over lit areas.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/climate/liteusaj.gif
In 1988 Wood commented on Jones et al 1986 and Wigley & Jones
replied, all scanned and commented on at.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/cru86/wood.htm
Not one US climate scientist stood with Wood as a co-author although
obviously he had help.
Back to Review comments
on climate
papers
by key "IPCC Supportive" scientists main page