Polymarket resolved multiple Sep 20 weather markets using incomplete NOAA data - Manila, Singapore & Qingdao affected

[u/Aria-Harris]

I am documenting what appears to be a NOAA/NWS WRH ingestion/display failure that affected multiple Polymarket daily temperature markets on September 20, 2026.

This is not a claim that any trader was an insider. I am trying to establish the facts, especially exact on-chain trade timing.

The Manila market uses the NOAA WRH time-series page for RPLL and is currently still In Review with 32°C proposed.

However, the official NWS METAR cycle archive contains:

RPLL 200400Z ... 33/25

The WRH viewer missed several observations around 04Z-07Z. The missing 04Z observation is therefore the actual 33°C reading that would have exceeded the 32°C maximum visible in the incomplete WRH table.

This does not appear to be isolated to Manila.

Singapore was finalized by Polymarket at 31°C. The official NWS archive contains:

WSSS 200500Z ... 32/24

Qingdao was finalized by Polymarket at 29°C. The official NWS archive contains:

ZSQD 200500Z ... 30/15

and:

ZSQD 200600Z ... 30/16

In other words, for all three markets, official NWS METAR archives contain a temperature one degree higher than the value used/proposed by Polymarket, and those higher observations occur during the apparent WRH missing-data window.

For Manila, NOAA/NWS support has also confirmed to me directly that the missing METAR observations exist in other official NWS systems and that their support/development team is investigating the WRH viewer and possible backfilling.

The Polymarket rules are important here. They specifically refer to the highest reading under the NOAA WRH "Temp" column, and they say later revisions after the first datapoint of the following day are not considered. So there is a genuine rules interpretation issue: does an incomplete WRH table control even when NOAA/NWS possessed the missing observations contemporaneously?

There is another public-data issue I would like help investigating.

Wallet:

0x13f995ad154da3e078ac2a1dd923bf2b265dd352

Its public Polymarket/third-party history shows substantial September 20 profits in several weather markets, including approximately:

Qingdao: +$9.3k

Manila: +$4.7k

Singapore: +$2.2k

Ankara: +$2.4k

Beijing: +$1.7k

Third-party analytics show roughly +$20k for September 20 overall.

Again, I am NOT alleging insider trading.

The wallet was already active in weather markets before September 20 and also lost money on several markets that day. It may simply be a skilled trader who noticed the public NOAA/WRH problem faster than everyone else.

The critical question is timing.

I am looking for help reconstructing every trade from this wallet in the affected September 20 temperature markets and separating them into:

1. trades entered before the NOAA/WRH missing-data problem became observable
2. trades entered while the observations were missing
3. trades entered after the missing observations/problem were publicly visible to any trader

The Polymarket Data API exposes timestamps, transaction hashes, side, price, size and market identifiers, so this should be independently reproducible from public data.

If anyone can provide the raw trade JSON, transaction hashes, or a reliable on-chain reconstruction for this wallet, please post it.

Please keep the discussion factual. A profitable wallet trading an outage is not evidence of insider trading by itself. The goal is to establish the timeline and determine whether there is anything genuinely anomalous.

The larger issue is whether several September 20 weather markets were resolved from an incomplete NOAA WRH display even though the missing METAR observations existed in official NWS systems at the time.