WeatherRusty Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 I don't know what you are looking at but I didn't see a state in the southeast that had a warming trend line. Florida at +.04 was the only one. The places that have warmed seem to be mostly in the northern west to northern midwest. Mo. through Pa. shows very little warming as well. Most of the warming has occurred in the higher northern latitudes, mostly at night and over land. Ironically, the country most responsible for the buildup of atmospheric CO2 to this point has experienced a global warming less than the global average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben4vols Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 But you menton one state you should mention others as well. Hell you should use the entire US with the same data source that was used for Texas. The NCDC disclaimers are below. Some of the data has been adjusted some hasn't. Roy Spencer has done a good amount of work looking into UHI. His ISH PDAT data is interesting and has about half of the warming compared to the USHCN. These data are primarily intended for the study of climate variability and change. Whenever possible, observations have been adjusted to account for the artificial effects introduced into the climate record by factors such as instrument changes, station relocations, observer practice changes and urbanization. As a result, some values available on this site differ from the official observations. Some of the following data are preliminary and have not been quality controlled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclonebuster Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Good blog post on Watt's site today. Shows once again the effects of UHI. Another thorn in the side of the alarmists. WOW, look at those temps in the 30's and 40's. Hmmm.... http://wattsupwithth...you/#more-66378 Where is the hockey stick? So what's Global about the state of Texas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclonebuster Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Contiguous U.S. I love the way denialist cherry-pick a data set and make lofty arguments. Wyoming Do you think Wyoming(pop 550k) is suffering with heat island effect? Still not a global graph........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben4vols Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 iyou have to wonder why Spencer doesn't submit this stuff to journals. oh wait, I remember why: he has been routinely exposed as a cherry-picker. Spencer gave up on peer review due to the corrupt nature of it. Those are his words not mine. I don't need the whole what is and isn't peer review. Spencer is anything but a cherry picker. At least no more than you are when you post silly graphics starting in the 70's. I'd like to hear why you think his data set is wrong. Does skeptical science not have a blog post from Dana on the subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloridaJohn Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 I'm curious as to why Spencer only used 300 stations in that graph. According to the NCDC, there is data available for over 108,000 stations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclonebuster Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 I'm curious as to why Spencer only used 300 stations in that graph. According to the NCDC, there is data available for over 108,000 stations. It's called Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Spencer gave up on peer review due to the corrupt nature of it. Those are his words not mine. I don't need the whole what is and isn't peer review. Spencer is anything but a cherry picker. At least no more than you are when you post silly graphics starting in the 70's. I'd like to hear why you think his data set is wrong. Does skeptical science not have a blog post from Dana on the subject? This is a joke. If Spencer presents legit info, then it would be published, praised, and cited where need be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Global Temperatures spiked up slightly from the flatline they were in yesterday. 0.04 Degrees warmer than yesterday. Still way below 2010, and still running in the middle of the pack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 FWIW, the CFSv2 is predicting a strong El Nino about the same magnitude as 2010. Whether we warm as much as 2010 is an open question, and may give us an indicator with as to what factor is currently having the most impact on climate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailMan06 Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 FWIW, the CFSv2 is predicting a strong El Nino about the same magnitude as 2010. Whether we warm as much as 2010 is an open question, and may give us an indicator with as to what factor is currently having the most impact on climate. A bit OT but I'm not likeing our winter chances for a Nino that strong. Hopefully this sets us up for another 2010-2011 winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Spencer gave up on peer review due to the corrupt nature of it. Those are his words not mine. Peer review is rigorous. That's why peer-reviewed pieces have more credibility than those that aren't peer-reviewed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Peer review is rigorous. That's why peer-reviewed pieces have more credibility than those that aren't peer-reviewed. Agreed, and there are many articles in the peer reviewed literature which take a skeptical approach on AGW being the dominant factor in recent climate changes and a skeptical approach on AGW being bad and catastrophic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 A bit OT but I'm not likeing our winter chances for a Nino that strong. Hopefully this sets us up for another 2010-2011 winter. CFS tends to overdo the intensity of ENSO, but there is little to no doubt that we are going into an El Nino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 A bit OT but I'm not likeing our winter chances for a Nino that strong. Hopefully this sets us up for another 2010-2011 winter. The guidance is also suggesting the possibility of a basinwide El Niño. In 2009-10, there was a Central Pacific based El Niño event. Often the former are warm. 1957-58 was an exception. The key will be blocking. Unless there is frequent strong blocking, a basinwide El Niño event could make for another "lost" winter. Fortunately, much can still change from this far out, so nothing is cast in stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailMan06 Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 The guidance is also suggesting the possibility of a basinwide El Niño. In 2009-10, there was a Central Pacific based El Niño event. Often the former are warm. 1957-58 was an exception. The key will be blocking. Unless there is frequent strong blocking, a basinwide El Niño event could make for another "lost" winter. Fortunately, much can still change from this far out, so nothing is cast in stone. So this could be a situation of a brief but intense few weeks of winter during blocking periods preceeded and followed by much milder weather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 So this could be a situation of a brief but intense few weeks of winter during blocking periods preceeded and followed by much milder weather. Several warm CONUS El Ninos did have some brief periods of impressive cold. 1994-1995 was one such El Nino. So was 2006-2007. Usually the month most likely for the cold is February. However, years like 1997-1998 never saw any very impressive arctic intrusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 The guidance is also suggesting the possibility of a basinwide El Niño. In 2009-10, there was a Central Pacific based El Niño event. Often the former are warm. 1957-58 was an exception. The key will be blocking. Unless there is frequent strong blocking, a basinwide El Niño event could make for another "lost" winter. Fortunately, much can still change from this far out, so nothing is cast in stone. Blocking is more key then anything, if an Alaskan vortex sets up, we are also screwed. Sent from my ADR6425LVW 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 I'm curious as to why Spencer only used 300 stations in that graph. According to the NCDC, there is data available for over 108,000 stations. It's called My computation of a daily average temperature from each station requires 4 observations (at 00, 06, 12, and 18 UTC, which are standard synoptic reporting times), and there must be at least 80% of the days present for a monthly average to be computed for a station. Then there must be 80% of the months available over the 1973-2012 period of record, including all of 1973 and 2011. This doesn't work to well. Currently for St. Louis. 00z is 7PM, 06z is 1AM, 12z is 7AM, 18Z is 1PM. I understand that satellite measurements can typically do two global passes everyday. But Roy is taking surface temperature data. These are very hard static numbers. But I am not sure how his method doesn't have error because of his extraction points. Taking the High and Low and averaging them together at least covers the coldest and warmest points in the 24 hour period. For example: In St. Louis, Mo: HI 46F Low: 35F = 40.5F Feb 18th 2012: 06Z: 42F 12z: 35F 18z: 43F 00z: 41F 40.25F Saturday Feb 25th: High 43F Low 28F Average: 35.5F 06Z: 36F 12Z: 28F 18Z: 37F 00Z: 32F 33.25F Again, I am not saying either way is perfect, but at least for Feb 25th the max temp was not included and the next closest temperature was 6F below. Because peak solar heating was over by 1-2pm and by 00z, it was dark or almost dark. 12z for St. Louis typically falls right near or on the coldest temp for the day. 18Z and 00Z fluctuate by sun angle with many times the warmest temps in between these two times. I am sure this is different all over and if someone would fill me in on what's what I'd be grateful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Global Temperatures spiked up slightly from the flatline they were in yesterday. 0.04 Degrees warmer than yesterday. Still way below 2010, and still running in the middle of the pack. You said 2012 was a half a degree below 2010 at all latitudes. While it's obvious that 2012 has fallen well behind 2010 that is a huge embellishment of the reality of it. 2012 is also 4th on amsu at channel 5. It was in 2nd and 1st during most of June. Now it's running in the middle of the pack at 4th. Ok. For starters at channel 5. 2012 is currently .300C behind 2010. It never was a half a degree behind 2010 any time recently. 2012 is .037C behind 2011 right now for the June 28th reading June 1st-15th was 0.185C warmer for 2012 over 2011. June 16th-28th has been 0.046 Warmer for 2011. June 2011 is tied for the 3rd warmest June on UAH. On UAH April and May finished 4th out of 33 years. Behind, 1998, 2010, 2002, and 2005. June is going to finish 3rd behind 1998 and 2010. Nino lag hasn't even kicked in. Nina's influence may be waning or gone, but we still have a ways to go before the Nino influence takes hold. The rest of the albedos are in the tank while the Northern Hemisphere is going towards it's apex. The models have shown for a few days height raises over the Northern Hemisphere. And temperatures to warm up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Friv, I was on a different computer, and eyeballing the charts, it looked like a half degree. Today didn't see as much of an increase compared to yesterday at 14,000 feet. At 25,000 feet we've started to flatline again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 I agree that we should see the full effects of the lag take shape in 6 or so months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 No comments on how the global temperatures on AQUA have been faring over the last several days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 No comments on how the global temperatures on AQUA have been faring over the last several days? We're 0.29C behind 2010 and close to 2005 right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 We're 0.29C behind 2010 and close to 2005 right now. Yeah, we are still cooling on AMSU at at 25,000 feet we are the 2nd coolest over the last 11 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipS Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Yeah, we are still cooling on AMSU at at 25,000 feet we are the 2nd coolest over the last 11 years. Is that the same as being the 11th warmest since records began? (assuming 1998 was warmer) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Is that the same as being the 11th warmest since records began? (assuming 1998 was warmer) It's just one sensing level of the atmosphere. like an average on a vertical plain at different points along the surface of the plain. From the surface which is not actually the surface, it's a bit above the actual surface to weed out contamination. So this is measured numerically by many different channels that represent different heights in the Earth's atmosphere. We then blend these heights to create 4 different zones. This is a pretty plain view of how each zone get's weighed into the final product. TLT is the main one we follow on RSS and UAH. The surface upwards to 2.5KM is weighed near equally bias. Then by Channel 5(4.4KM) weighing rapidly loses bias. By Channel 6(7.5km) impact on the TLT temp is much less. The reason I am so big behind global temperatures continuing to rise overall is explained in the graph below. I know there will be plenty of short term variance in temperatures so dips are not unexpected at all. But we can't ignore reality and history here. Seriously, look at that graph. It is the end all be all of what we need to predict what's happening. What an easy layout that we never use on here. Anyways. I am sure you notice the NINO EFFECT. Yeah, look at that the summer of 2011 barely had a Nino effect and it ended up posting very warm anomaly's. Now the summer of 2012 through May has had a NINA EFFECT. It's faily obvious that 2012 is running rather warm for having no help from the tropics for it. Now we wait to see how warm it gets when El Nino makes a long enough apperance. 2010 Tropics UAH anomaly Jan: .63 Feb: .78 March: .73 April: .65 May: .71 June: .48 July: .37 Aug: .32 Sept: .23 2011: Tropics UAH Anomaly Jan: -.39 Feb: -.35 March: -.35 April: -.23 May: -.04 June: .24 July: .22 Aug: .15 Sept: .18 2012 Tropics UAH anomaly: Jan: -.14 Feb: -.28 March: -.10 April: -.12 May: .02 What I find more interesting is this: UAH TLT Global Anomaly: in order 2010, 2011, 2012 April: .40, .12, .30 May: .46, .14, .29 June: .39, .32, NA Now there channel 5 monthly difference: April 2010 was .258 warmer than 2012 at channel 5, but the actual TLT anomaly was a .10 Difference. May 2010 was .345 warm than 2012 at channel 5, but the actual TLT anomaly was a .16 difference. Again massively diverging from the channel 5 number. Channel 6 was even warmer for 2010 vs 2012 during those months. So does this mean 2012 is that much warmer closer to the surface? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT450R Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 June UAH came in with a +0.37 for the month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 So UAH came in as the 3rd warmest June then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT450R Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 So UAH came in as the 3rd warmest June then? Yea 1998 0.51 2010 0.39 2012 0.37 2011 0.32 2002 0.32 1991 0.28 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.