It looks like the “(say 9 of 10)” is clearly a guess on your part since you have nothing to back it up.

Without providing any information to back up your claim, such as which (say 9 of 10) stations you examined, your appearance of being only interested in criticism and being disingenuous is bolstered.

Again of the thousands of people who visit this website, you are the only one claiming that there’s a problem and that the wrong station in Miami has been identified. That despite many of those people providing clear information to the contrary, and in support of the correct station being identified. There would have been many who would have pointed out the mistake if what you assert is true.

IMHO that you continue to insist a problem but keep stalling on the questions to be submitted to the COOP manager(while posting more criticisms) seems agenda oriented rather than truth oriented.

Thus, like in the other thread, until you meet your agreed upon obligation, I’ll accept no more comments from you.

So closing comments this thread should give you less time to post comments and more time to focus on that list.

I may reopen it if new information that is relevant is presented.

In the meantime, it seems that a third party has agreed with microsite bias problems that are being pointed out by the surfacestations project. See that here

#98 George M, yes, that is a good question: I did not speak to anyone in the radio station. I probably should have, but when I arrived there on that Sunday afternoon, there was only one car outside, and I assumed that the person inside was pretty busy operating the station. I was kind of excited that the MMTS was right there on the street and so easy to get to, and I just started snapping pictures. My car is one of the two cars in the photos.

I was on my way home from a meeting in Fort Worth. After I left Lampasas, and about halfway to Blanco, I started thinking maybe I should have looked around more to see where the other instruments were. Then I decided that it wasn’t important enough to go back and look, since I had the location of the MMTS.

I included the contact information for the radio station on my survey form, so it would be easy for anyone who wants more info to call them and ask.

As Anthony says, the instruments aren’t always together. You can look at this survey I did in Dubois, WY:

http://gallery.surfacestations.org/main.php?g2_itemId=17594

At Dubois, the coordinates given in the MMS marked the location of the precipitation gauges, but the MMTS was quite a distance away right next to the observer’s house. This is why I think that in some cases the technician’s intent isn’t to mark the exact location of the temp sensor. It seems to me that they often mark the nearest street access, or the front door of the curator’s building, or the nearest rain gauge–whatever is convenient, just to mark the general location of the weather station. Just my opinion.

No more comments from you Eric unit you do what you promised in delivering the set of questions to the COOP manager in Phoenix. As I said there, you seem to have plenty of time to rattle on in comments here, but can’t seem to finish the list.

That disingenuous, and you’ve demonstrated that here again. You really aren’t interested in the answer, only criticism.

So until you provide that list of questions to the NOAA Phoenix COOP manager via email, no more comments from you.

Anthony Watts says:

February 18th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
RE77, Eric,

What you are seeing is the fact that NOAA does not record the lat/lon in their NCDC MMS database with great accuracy. Many entries are often simply wrong, and our volunteer surveyors have to become CSI’s to figure out where the station actually is located.

In some cases, we’ll find stations hundreds of yards or miles away from the locations described by the database.

…

I think that the NWS places more interest in the rain data than temperature becuase the official lat/lon of the station is where the rain gauge is, not the temp sensor.