famartin

Paul, again the problem is that the numbers going into the average. Your highs, and apparently your lows, aren’t representative of a proper site. I give up.

This one is easier to read. Again, this is raw high temps. 2004 2005 2006 2007 Difference Jan Coatesville 29.9 36.3 47 43.7 39.225 Jan E Nantmeal 29.6 35.7 46.2 42.4 38.475 -0.75 Feb Coatesville 40.4 41.6 41 32.6 38.9 Feb E Nantmeal 39.9 41.1 40.7 32.1 38.45 -0.45 Mar Coatesville 51.8 45.2 51.9 51.8 50.175 Mar E Nantmeal 50.9 44.7 50.8 50.8 49.3 -0.875 Apr Coatesville 62.4 65.4 66 58.5 63.075 Apr E Nantmeal 61.9 64.6 64.7 57.4 62.15 -0.925 May Coatesville 77.4 69.2 73.9 76.9 74.35 May E Nantmeal 75.1 66.9 71.2 74.3 71.875 -2.475 Jun Coatesville 79.2 83 80.2 81.9 81.075 Jun E Nantmeal 76.1 80.3 76.9 78.4 77.925 -3.15 Jul Coatesville 82.3 86.3 87.2 83.8 84.9 Jul E Nantmeal 78.5 82.9 84.1 80.8 81.575 -3.325 Aug Coatesville 81.8 85.8 85 83.4 84 Aug E Nantmeal 78 82.3 81.8 80.5 80.65 -3.35 Sep Coatesville 77.1 81.5 73.1 80.1 77.95 Sep E Nantmeal 73.5 81 69.3 75.8 74.9 -3.05 Oct Coatesville 62.4 63.7 64 71.5 65.4 Oct E Nantmeal 59.4 63.1 61 68.2 62.925 -2.475 Nov Coatesville 54.8 57 56.8 51.5 55.025 Nov E Nantmeal 53.7 56.2 55.9 49.6 53.85 -1.175 Dec Coatesville 43.4 38.2 49.8 40.6 43 Dec E Nantmeal 42.4 37.8 49 39.5 42.175 -0.825 Ann Coatesville 61.90833333 62.76666667 64.65833333 63.025 63.08958333 Ann E Nantmeal 59.91666667 61.38333333 62.63333333 60.81666667 61.1875 -1.902083333

Here's the raw high temp numbers. Take all of Paul's highs this time of year and add 3-4 to get something realistic: Jan Jan Feb Feb Mar Mar Apr Apr May May Jun Jun Jul Jul Aug Aug Sep Sep Oct Oct Nov Nov Dec Dec Ann Ann Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal Coatesville E Nantmeal 2004 29.9 29.6 40.4 39.9 51.8 50.9 62.4 61.9 77.4 75.1 79.2 76.1 82.3 78.5 81.8 78 77.1 73.5 62.4 59.4 54.8 53.7 43.4 42.4 61.90833333 59.9166667 2005 36.3 35.7 41.6 41.1 45.2 44.7 65.4 64.6 69.2 66.9 83 80.3 86.3 82.9 85.8 82.3 81.5 81 63.7 63.1 57 56.2 38.2 37.8 62.76666667 61.3833333 2006 47 46.2 41 40.7 51.9 50.8 66 64.7 73.9 71.2 80.2 76.9 87.2 84.1 85 81.8 73.1 69.3 64 61 56.8 55.9 49.8 49 64.65833333 62.6333333 2007 43.7 42.4 32.6 32.1 51.8 50.8 58.5 57.4 76.9 74.3 81.9 78.4 83.8 80.8 83.4 80.5 80.1 75.8 71.5 68.2 51.5 49.6 40.6 39.5 63.025 60.8166667 39.225 38.475 38.9 38.45 50.175 49.3 63.075 62.15 74.35 71.875 81.075 77.925 84.9 81.575 84 80.65 77.95 74.9 65.4 62.925 55.025 53.85 43 42.175 63.08958333 61.1875 -0.75 -0.45 -0.875 -0.925 -2.475 -3.15 -3.325 -3.35 -3.05 -2.475 -1.175 -0.825 -1.90208333 -2.475 -1.175 -0.825 -1.90208

Paul… you’re fighting this is tiresome, that’s why the “name calling”. Your data is simply garbage, like most of your related “climate change” posts. I’ve proven that pretty well just now. But obviously you have an agenda. Obviously if your a rich snob in east nantmeal then I guess overall, it doesn’t suck to be you, but your numbers are trash. Too bad, so sad.

Paul, the data clearly shows yours highs have a severe cold bias this time of year. If you don’t like it, frankly it sucks to be you.

Paul has screamed about the compatibility of his station with others historically. He's pressed me to prove him wrong. Well, here it is: The closest station to him, Coatesville 2W, overlaps for 4 years from 2004-2007. I think those who've paid attention to him realize he probably runs cold for highs. So here's the average high temperature differences from Coatesville to his station during those 4 years, and they make perfect sense given his shady site. Jan -0.75 Feb -0.45 Mar -0.875 Apr -0.925 May -2.475 Jun -3.15 Jul -3.325 Aug -3.35 Sep -3.05 Oct -2.475 Nov -1.175 Dec -0.825 Ann -1.90208 That pretty much perfectly fits a curve of tree canopy percentage.

That's not what I mean, and you know it. You are staunchly against human-induced change. In any case, I wish you would just be-gone. Seeing your drivel here is infuriating.

Paul your method is clearly wrong. Besides the poor measurement quality of your own data (way too shaded, does that station EVER get in the sun?), being over 300 feet above West Chester means all comparisons between West Chester and your house are garbage, unless you make a SIGNIFICANT downward adjustment with the West Chester data or a significant UPWARD adjustment of your house. Honestly, the fact you refuse to believe that shows just how either uneducated or biased you are. Like I said, the lack of sense in your posts would have me ban you from the subject, if I had my way. You're either grossly uneducated or grossly trying to support a biased view. Either way, it has no place here.

Paul, its just not. Sorry. You are just dead wrong. Honestly if I had my way I'd ban you from discussing this subject here and at Phillywx.

"yawn" I started arguing with Paul over on Phillywx and the thread got locked. I'm a middle-of-the-roader who scoffs at the ridiculousness of both sides these days. The world isn't going to end from human-induced climate change, but adding CO2 does cause warming. Chester County might not be warming, but Paul's methods are, to put it bluntly, grossly inappropriate, so his so called "non-warming" trends are completely untrustworthy. The fact his signature file is novel-length and totally related his anti-climate change stance is proof enough that his opinions are biased.

Here's pure West Chester data, note there are gaps particularly from 1992-1999, and unfortunately no data since 2017. These are the 10 warmest June - Augusts (met Summer). 1988 76.7 1987 76.3 2005 75.8 1968 75.6 1955 75.4 1959 75.2 1949 75.1 2010 75 2002 75 1952 75

...because they were all measured over 300 feet below you.

You lose more sunlight in September than any other month.

Agree, we've had snowless or nearly snowless (outside of one random big one) El Ninos to be sure, but dry El Ninos are hard to come by. Now watch, somehow this will be the dry one We still have better odds of a KU with an El Nino, so here's to hoping.

Getting OT but remember that San Diego rarely sees rain this time of year. Their August average is just 0.01". Their daily record on August 22nd is just a trace, and almost half the days of August have daily records less than 0.10". Don't get me wrong, there have been a few random gully-washers... the monthly single-day record is 1.80 on August 12, 1873. But its quite rare. Their all-time daily record is 3.34" on December 2, 1854, followed by 3.23" on April on April 5, 1926. The last time they had over 2" in a day was February 27, 2017.