Occasional Thoughts on Climate Change

[csnavywx]

Back in the real world.

Something I've been following closely over the past few years, finally getting some data on recent land sink trends:

https://x.com/ciais_philippe/status/1813909550891983318

 

[ChescoWx]

A refresher for those considering joining the dust bowl heatwave deniers. Showing how Chester County like most of the USA experienced summers hotter than we have experienced since...even in our current warming cycle of climate change.

https://arcfieldweather.com/blog/2024/7/3/the-deadly-heat-wave-of-july-1936in-the-middle-of-one-of-the-hottest-summers-on-recordin-the-middle-of-one-of-the-hottest-decades-ever

[ChescoWx]

On 7/12/2024 at 8:48 AM, FPizz said:

The thing is, people can probably do this for many stations around the country, we are just lucky enough to have people doing it here for a county.  There are also hundreds of ghost stations around the country too that don't exist but are assigned temps from surrounding areas.  Look that up, it is interesting.

Hey Frank sounds like another of the Ghost Stations found right here in PA

[ChescoWx]

By popular request....More updated charts based on the data refinements last week identified by Charlie.

As you can see below with the actual raw data (blue) over the last 130 years (at least here in Chester County PA) there is almost a flat trend to our annual average temperatures by decade. Of course if we apply the NCEI adjustments we now see the warming trend. I will also attach the NCEI adjustments by decade. Which after 11 decades of consistent cooling adjustments...we now have post observation warming adjustments being applied.

[bluewave]

4 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

A refresher for those considering joining the dust bowl heatwave deniers. Showing how Chester County like most of the USA experienced summers hotter than we have experienced since...even in our current warming cycle of climate change.

https://arcfieldweather.com/blog/2024/7/3/the-deadly-heat-wave-of-july-1936in-the-middle-of-one-of-the-hottest-summers-on-recordin-the-middle-of-one-of-the-hottest-decades-ever

Only in the Great Plains as we regularly get much warmer summers than those were here in the Northeast.

 

 

Time Series Summary for Allentown Area, PA (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

1	1949	75.3	0
2	2018	74.9	0
-	2016	74.9	0
3	2005	74.6	0
-	1980	74.6	0
4	2019	74.4	0
5	2020	74.3	0
-	1943	74.3	0
-	1937	74.3	3
6	1994	74.1	0
7	2010	74.0	0
-	1983	74.0	0
-	1973	74.0	0
-	1966	74.0	0
-	1939	74.0	0
8	1995	73.9	0
-	1993	73.9	0
-	1988	73.9	0
-	1955	73.9	0
9	2011	73.8	0
10	2022	73.6	0
11	2021	73.5	0
-	2012	73.5	0
-	1944	73.5	0
-	1936	73.5	5

 

 

Time Series Summary for Burlington Area, VT (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

1	2020	72.3	0
2	1949	72.2	0
3	2018	72.1	0
4	2021	71.9	0
5	2005	71.5	0
6	2016	71.4	0
-	1995	71.4	0
7	1901	71.2	0
8	2022	71.0	0
-	1899	71.0	0
9	2012	70.9	0
-	1999	70.9	0
-	1895	70.9	0
10	1900	70.8	0
11	1955	70.6	0
12	2019	70.4	0
13	1896	70.3	0
-	1893	70.3	1
14	2023	70.1	0
15	1975	70.0	0
16	2013	69.9	0
17	2011	69.8	0
-	1994	69.8	0
-	1973	69.8	0
-	1959	69.8	0
-	1947	69.8	0
-	1944	69.8	0
18	1898	69.7	0
19	2015	69.6	0
-	2014	69.6	0
-	2010	69.6	0
-	1892	69.6	0
20	2003	69.5	0
21	2001	69.3	0
22	1993	69.2	0
-	1952	69.2	0
-	1937	69.2	0
23	2017	69.1	0
-	1988	69.1	0
-	1984	69.1	0
-	1894	69.1	0
24	2006	69.0	0
25	1991	68.9	0
-	1989	68.9	0
-	1938	68.9	0

 

Time Series Summary for Caribou Area, ME (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

1	2020	66.9	0
2	2021	66.2	0
-	2018	66.2	0
3	1973	66.0	0
4	1970	65.8	0
5	2014	65.7	0
-	2012	65.7	0
-	1995	65.7	0
6	2010	65.4	0
7	2023	65.2	0
-	1990	65.2	0
8	2016	64.9	0
9	2005	64.8	0
-	1975	64.8	0
-	1967	64.8	0
10	2019	64.7	0
11	2022	64.6	0
-	1999	64.6	0
-	1952	64.6	0
12	1979	64.5	0
13	1994	64.4	0
14	2011	64.3	0
-	1949	64.3	0
15	2006	64.2	0
16	1991	64.1	0
17	2001	64.0	0
-	1981	64.0	0
18	2017	63.9	0
-	1978	63.9	0
-	1974	63.9	0
-	1947	63.9	1
19	2008	63.8	0
-	1998	63.8	0
-	1955	63.8	0
20	2003	63.7	0
-	1944	63.7	0
21	1983	63.6	0
-	1939	63.6	0

[TheClimateChanger]

10 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

A refresher for those considering joining the dust bowl heatwave deniers. Showing how Chester County like most of the USA experienced summers hotter than we have experienced since...even in our current warming cycle of climate change.

https://arcfieldweather.com/blog/2024/7/3/the-deadly-heat-wave-of-july-1936in-the-middle-of-one-of-the-hottest-summers-on-recordin-the-middle-of-one-of-the-hottest-decades-ever

Count me as a denier. Here is the county-by-county minimum temperature ranks for July 1936. What do we see from this map? First, we see it was actually very cold. Second, there's a VERY odd pattern to the map. The rankings are almost inversely proportional to population density. The coldest locations are some of the least densely populated in the Commonwealth. The warmest are the most densely populated counties. If UHI was affecting the trends, we would expect to see the most populated counties look colder on this map, but in fact the opposite is true. USHCN applies some sort some of urban heat island correction, but it looks to me like the correction is in the wrong direction and the UHI was more significant in 1936.

[chubbs]

I posted the chart and table previously. The Phoenixville spike in 95F days in the 30s is completely spurious. It was shown upthread that Phoenixville ran warm in the afternoon and had a warm time of day bias. It was also shown that Coatesville and West Chester were in warmer, more urban locations, in the 30s and 40s. Unlike Phoenixville, July 36 was a normal month in Philadelphia, much cooler than the current July, Sorry no dust bowl in Chester County. Not even close. 

[ChescoWx]

4 hours ago, chubbs said:

I posted the chart and table previously. The Phoenixville spike in 95F days in the 30s is completely spurious. It was shown upthread that Phoenixville ran warm in the afternoon and had a warm time of day bias. It was also shown that Coatesville and West Chester were in warmer, more urban locations, in the 30s and 40s. July 36 was a normal month in Philadelphia, much cooler than this July, Sorry no dust bowl in Chester County. Not even close. 

 

Coatesville and West Chester "more urban" than Philly in 1936? It was just warmer west of Philly in 1936 before the UHI contamination of Philly was underway.

[TheClimateChanger]

1 hour ago, ChescoWx said:

Coatesville and West Chester "more urban" than Philly in 1936? It was just warmer west of Philly in 1936 before the UHI contamination of Philly was underway.

I suspect the urban heat island was a lot worse in the 1930s. I have seen a lot of photos from that era, and there were like zero trees anywhere. Pittsburgh, no trees. Even the Blue Ridge Parkway was mostly devoid of trees. Basically clear cut everywhere. I think we have billions more trees today than 100 years ago. This probably played a factor in some of the daytime heat.

[chubbs]

2 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Coatesville and West Chester "more urban" than Philly in 1936? It was just warmer west of Philly in 1936 before the UHI contamination of Philly was underway.

As usual you are all talk and no evidence. Coatesville and West Chester had a clear reverse heat island effect. Moving from more to less urban sites. If there wasn't a "dust bowl" in Philadelphia or Delaware, there wasn't one in Chester Co.

[ChescoWx]

Charlie so where was the Philadelphia obs taken in the above data you are using? It looks to me like the Philadelphia data from the 1890's thru 1930's was taken near Roxborough correct??

[bdgwx]

On 7/18/2024 at 11:05 AM, csnavywx said:

Back in the real world.

Something I've been following closely over the past few years, finally getting some data on recent land sink trends:

https://x.com/ciais_philippe/status/1813909550891983318

 

I did a quick review of IPCC AR6 WGI chapter 5 regarding the carbon cycle. Based only off a cursory read I don't think they are expecting the land sink's ability to buffer carbon to wane until much later this century. So if we're already seeing signs that it's ability to take carbon is saturating then that's not good obviously. 

[bdgwx]

3 hours ago, TheClimateChanger said:

I suspect the urban heat island was a lot worse in the 1930s.

Dust bowl. It's effects were large and widespread easily encompassing the eastern states and impacting temperatures there.

[Meehle et al. 2022]

[ChescoWx]

3 hours ago, chubbs said:

As usual you are all talk and no evidence. Coatesville and West Chester had a clear reverse heat island effect. Moving from more to less urban sites. If there wasn't a "dust bowl" in Philadelphia or Delaware, there wasn't one in Chester Co.

So what is the "required adjustment" for these reverse heat island impacts when they moved to the more suburban sites?? Should the adjustment... at let's say Coatesville be to adjust the temperature up or down?? What years should be decreased and which ones increased??

[AdMC]

7 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

So what is the "required adjustment" for these reverse heat island impacts when they moved to the more suburban sites?? Should the adjustment... at let's say Coatesville be to adjust the temperature up or down??

Do you do anything else with your life besides post about your sorry sad little weather stations in East Bumblef**k? You are relentless man. Go outside, smell the fresh air. Give the hate posting from the toilet seat a break, maybe?

Actually I get it. He's a russian troll. Or a guy who the Russians have Kompromat on. Or an ex oil exec. Or an angry boomer upset that "colored" people can use the same bathrooms as him now.

Just teasing?

[donsutherland1]

On 7/18/2024 at 4:46 PM, bluewave said:

Only in the Great Plains as we regularly get much warmer summers than those were here in the Northeast.

 

 

Time Series Summary for Allentown Area, PA (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

1	1949	75.3	0
2	2018	74.9	0
-	2016	74.9	0
3	2005	74.6	0
-	1980	74.6	0
4	2019	74.4	0
5	2020	74.3	0
-	1943	74.3	0
-	1937	74.3	3
6	1994	74.1	0
7	2010	74.0	0
-	1983	74.0	0
-	1973	74.0	0
-	1966	74.0	0
-	1939	74.0	0
8	1995	73.9	0
-	1993	73.9	0
-	1988	73.9	0
-	1955	73.9	0
9	2011	73.8	0
10	2022	73.6	0
11	2021	73.5	0
-	2012	73.5	0
-	1944	73.5	0
-	1936	73.5	5

 

 

Time Series Summary for Burlington Area, VT (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

1	2020	72.3	0
2	1949	72.2	0
3	2018	72.1	0
4	2021	71.9	0
5	2005	71.5	0
6	2016	71.4	0
-	1995	71.4	0
7	1901	71.2	0
8	2022	71.0	0
-	1899	71.0	0
9	2012	70.9	0
-	1999	70.9	0
-	1895	70.9	0
10	1900	70.8	0
11	1955	70.6	0
12	2019	70.4	0
13	1896	70.3	0
-	1893	70.3	1
14	2023	70.1	0
15	1975	70.0	0
16	2013	69.9	0
17	2011	69.8	0
-	1994	69.8	0
-	1973	69.8	0
-	1959	69.8	0
-	1947	69.8	0
-	1944	69.8	0
18	1898	69.7	0
19	2015	69.6	0
-	2014	69.6	0
-	2010	69.6	0
-	1892	69.6	0
20	2003	69.5	0
21	2001	69.3	0
22	1993	69.2	0
-	1952	69.2	0
-	1937	69.2	0
23	2017	69.1	0
-	1988	69.1	0
-	1984	69.1	0
-	1894	69.1	0
24	2006	69.0	0
25	1991	68.9	0
-	1989	68.9	0
-	1938	68.9	0

 

Time Series Summary for Caribou Area, ME (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

1	2020	66.9	0
2	2021	66.2	0
-	2018	66.2	0
3	1973	66.0	0
4	1970	65.8	0
5	2014	65.7	0
-	2012	65.7	0
-	1995	65.7	0
6	2010	65.4	0
7	2023	65.2	0
-	1990	65.2	0
8	2016	64.9	0
9	2005	64.8	0
-	1975	64.8	0
-	1967	64.8	0
10	2019	64.7	0
11	2022	64.6	0
-	1999	64.6	0
-	1952	64.6	0
12	1979	64.5	0
13	1994	64.4	0
14	2011	64.3	0
-	1949	64.3	0
15	2006	64.2	0
16	1991	64.1	0
17	2001	64.0	0
-	1981	64.0	0
18	2017	63.9	0
-	1978	63.9	0
-	1974	63.9	0
-	1947	63.9	1
19	2008	63.8	0
-	1998	63.8	0
-	1955	63.8	0
20	2003	63.7	0
-	1944	63.7	0
21	1983	63.6	0
-	1939	63.6	0

The Dust Bowl Era of the 1930s illustrates the kind of extremes that can take place in an aridification scenario. Conditions for exceptional heat resulted from the combination of persistent drought and low soil moisture from bad farming practices/soil management. That 1930s extremes are beginning to be challenged in the Plains States in the absence of such conditions illustrates the reality that a warming climate is bringing temperatures toward levels that once occurred under extraordinary conditions.

In terms of larger regions and the contiguous U.S., recent summers have generally exceeded those of the 1930s. In fact, 3 of the 10 hottest summers have all occurred since 2020 on a national basis. In addition, 1930s figures have been surpassed in all but two climate regions.

[bluewave]

12 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

The Dust Bowl Era of the 1930s illustrates the kind of extremes that can take place in an aridification scenario. Conditions for exceptional heat resulted from the combination of persistent drought and low soil moisture from bad farming practices/soil management. That 1930s extremes are beginning to be challenged in the Plains States in the absence of such conditions illustrates the reality that a warming climate is bringing temperatures toward levels that once occurred under extraordinary conditions.

In terms of larger regions and the contiguous U.S., recent summers have generally exceeded those of the 1930s. In fact, 3 of the 10 hottest summers have all occurred since 2020 on a national basis. In addition, 1930s figures have been surpassed in all but two climate regions.

Yeah, human-induced land degradation was one of the leading causes of the Dust Bowl. 
 

https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.0810200106

 

The “Dust Bowl” drought of the 1930s was highly unusual for North America, deviating from the typical pattern forced by “La Nina” with the maximum drying in the central and northern Plains, warm temperature anomalies across almost the entire continent, and widespread dust storms. General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

[ChescoWx]

18 hours ago, AdMC said:

Do you do anything else with your life besides post about your sorry sad little weather stations in East Bumblef**k? You are relentless man. Go outside, smell the fresh air. Give the hate posting from the toilet seat a break, maybe?

Actually I get it. He's a russian troll. Or a guy who the Russians have Kompromat on. Or an ex oil exec. Or an angry boomer upset that "colored" people can use the same bathrooms as him now.

Just teasing?

Actually it's 25 sad little stations to best analyze the climate of Chester County PA.

The true defining question to ask is.....can a man get pregnant?

[GaWx]

3 hours ago, bluewave said:

Yeah, human-induced land degradation was one of the leading causes of the Dust Bowl. 
 

https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.0810200106

 

The “Dust Bowl” drought of the 1930s was highly unusual for North America, deviating from the typical pattern forced by “La Nina” with the maximum drying in the central and northern Plains, warm temperature anomalies across almost the entire continent, and widespread dust storms. General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

During the heart of the DB (1934-6), the PDO was mainly + and ENSO was neutral.

[bluewave]

2 hours ago, GaWx said:

During the heart of the DB (1934-6), the PDO was mainly + and ENSO was neutral.

The removal  of the natural grasslands and poor farming practices were actually able to influence the circulation pattern of the entire Northern Hemisphere during that summer. 

https://news.ucar.edu/132872/1930s-dust-bowl-affected-extreme-heat-around-northern-hemisphere

The 1930s Dust Bowl, fueled by overplowing across the Great Plains and associated with record heat and drought, appears to have affected heat extremes far beyond the United States.

New research finds that the hot, exposed land in the central U.S. during the Dust Bowl drought  influenced temperatures across much of North America and as far away as Europe and East Asia. That’s because the extreme heating of the Great Plains triggered motions of air around the Northern Hemisphere in ways that suppressed cloud formation in some regions and, in combination with the influence of tropical oceanic conditions, led to record heat thousands of miles away.

“The hot and dry conditions over the Great Plains during the Dust Bowl spread extreme heat to other areas of the Northern Hemisphere,” said Gerald Meehl, a scientist with the National Center of Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and lead author of the new study. “If you look at daily record high temperatures, some of these areas are just now breaking the records that were set in the 1930s.”

To determine the climatic impact of the Dust Bowl, the research team drew on observed high and low daily temperatures, as well as advanced computer models of the global climate system. They focused on the role of a teleconnection pattern, known as wave-5, that can regulate the meandering of jet streams and link far-flung weather patterns around the Northern Hemisphere during summer.

The study was published in Scientific Reports. It was funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation, which is NCAR’s sponsor, as well as by the U.S. Department of Energy.

TEASING OUT THE DUST BOWL’S INFLUENCE

The Dust Bowl is widely viewed as one of the nation’s worst environmental disasters. Farmers in the early part of the 20th century plowed up millions of acres of native grassland across much of the Great Plains to plant wheat and other crops. When a multiyear drought struck in the 1930s, the exposed land became exceptionally hot and topsoil blew away, causing devastating dust storms as well as a health and economic catastrophe.

The new research points out that extreme weather conditions extended far beyond the immediate vicinity of the Dust Bowl. Much of North America, northern Europe, and eastern and northeastern Asia experienced such heat that some record high temperatures of the 1930s are only now being exceeded as temperatures rise with climate change.

Previous research pointed to patterns of warm and cool surface temperatures in the tropical oceans as triggering the drought in the Great Plains. These conditions were associated with a pair of multidecadal phenomena known as the Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation (IPO) and Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). The question addressed by Meehl and his co-authors was whether such oceanic conditions could also explain the hot and dry weather around so much of the Northern Hemisphere, or if the Dust Bowl itself played a role.

To tease out the influence of the Dust Bowl, the scientists first used an NCAR-based model of global climate, known as the Community Earth System Model (CESM). They ran a series of simulations on the Cheyenne supercomputer at the NCAR-Wyoming Supercomputing Center to see whether the IPO and AMO could fully account for the distribution of extreme daily high temperatures across three continents. But even though they set the model to capture the likely oceanic conditions of the time, they could not reproduce the high daily temperatures of the 1930s.

They then turned to a version of the CESM atmospheric model that is a component of the DOE Energy Exascale Earth System Model, and set the model to isolate the influence of the extreme heat over the Great Plains during the 1930s. This time the results closely matched actual climate records, indicating that the Dust Bowl generated an atmospheric reaction that, in combination with conditions in the tropical Pacific and Atlantic, triggered extreme heat across vast areas of the Northern Hemisphere.

“When you put the influence of the Great Plains Dust Bowl drought in the model, you get record-breaking heat in the areas where we saw them in the Northern Hemisphere during the 1930s,” Meehl said.

INFLUENCE OF WAVE-5

Additional analysis of the simulations revealed the reason the Dust Bowl had such a pronounced effect on other regions: it generated a series of far-reaching vertical motions in the atmosphere. Such movements are known as a wavenumber-5 or wave-5 teleconnection — so named because it consists of five pairs of alternating high- and low-pressure features that encircle the globe along jet streams.

In this case, the intense surface heating of the Great Plains created an upward motion of warm air, which then moved downward in surrounding areas, suppressing the formation of clouds over much of the northern U.S. and Canada. It also produced sinking air that suppressed clouds in other regions around the Northern Hemisphere, allowing more sunlight to reach the surface and resulting in soaring temperatures. At the same time, the pattern enabled warm, southerly winds to reach as far north as Scandinavia and eastern Asia. These winds contributed to the extreme heat over much of northern Europe and parts of eastern Asia.

Meehl said the study helps illuminate how conditions on one part of the planet can affect the atmosphere thousands of miles away. Scientists have long known about the climatic influence of the vast tropical oceans, which pump out enormous amounts of relatively moist, warm air affecting weather patterns worldwide, as with El Niño. But it has proven more difficult to tease out linkages that arise from conditions over smaller areas of land in the midlatitudes, especially during summer.

“This is a mechanism that arose in a unique way from human influence — not by burning fossil fuels but from plowing up the middle third of the U.S.,” Meehl said. “It’s possible that intense regional droughts in the future could also influence heat extremes in the Northern Hemisphere.”

 

ABOUT THE ARTICLE

Title: How the Great Plains Dust Bowl drought spread heat extremes around the Northern Hemisphere
Authors: Gerald A. Meehl, Haiyan Teng, Nan Rosenbloom, Aixue Hu, Claudia Tebaldi, and Guy Walton
Journal: Scientific Reports

SEE ALL NEWS

CONTACT

David Hosansky
Media Relations Manager
303-497-8611

TOPICS

Climate, Weather

TAGS

News Release

RELATED NEWS

• Dampening the “seeds” of hurricanes

  MON, 07/01/2024 - 12:00

• Artificial climate control might become ineffective

  THU, 06/27/2024 - 12:00

• Climate models underestimate carbon cycling through plants

  TUE, 06/25/2024 - 12:00

[chubbs]

23 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Charlie so where was the Philadelphia obs taken in the above data you are using? It looks to me like the Philadelphia data from the 1890's thru 1930's was taken near Roxborough correct??

My reading of the NCDC docs is that the station was located at or near the weather bureau office, which had several downtown locations from 1870s to 1950s when it moved to airport. Airport obs started in 1940 and there was some cooling based on a comparison to nearby sites.

[chubbs]

21 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

So what is the "required adjustment" for these reverse heat island impacts when they moved to the more suburban sites?? Should the adjustment... at let's say Coatesville be to adjust the temperature up or down?? What years should be decreased and which ones increased??

Adjustments start from the present and work back in time. Since the rural Doe Run site is the most recent, it sets the baseline. The more urban sites are adjusted to match Doe Run.

[ChescoWx]

27 minutes ago, chubbs said:

Adjustments start from the present and work back in time. Since the rural Doe Run site is the most recent, it sets the baseline. The more urban sites are adjusted to match Doe Run.

So if there was a "reverse heat island effect" why did NCEI chill Coatesville even more with adjustments? Why did they continue to chill the Doe Run baseline site?? Below are the actual and NCEI altered average temps for each station during the period of record. NCEI chilled Coatesville obs each and every year from 1894 thru 1971.  The biggest adjustment by station location was in the 1903-16 timeframe....Charlie mentioned above that no other places in the county had as many 95 plus days during this time. Well actually in the 1910's Sadsburyville had 55 such days - Coatesville 52 days - Phoenixville 46 days.  Important to note there was no time of observation bias evidenced at the Coatesville station. Only during the 1910-1921 timeframe were single evening observations recorded at 9pm (1910-1915) and 8pm (1916-1921). Readings were taken three times a day from 1894 thru 1909 at 7am/2pm/9pm. From 1922 to 1945 readings were taken at 8am and 8pm. From 1946 to 1982 readings were observed at 8am

[chubbs]

17 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

So if there was a "reverse heat island effect" why did NCEI chill Coatesville even more with adjustments? Why did they continue to chill the Doe Run baseline site?? Below are the actual and NCEI altered average temps for each station during the period of record. NCEI chilled Coatesville obs each and every year from 1894 thru 1971.  The biggest adjustment by station location was in the 1903-16 timeframe....Charlie mentioned above that no other places in the county had as many 95 plus days during this time. Well actually in the 1910's Sadsburyville had 55 such days - Coatesville 52 days - Phoenixville 46 days.  Important to note there was no time of observation bias evidenced at the Coatesville station. Only during the 1910-1921 timeframe were single evening observations recorded at 9pm (1910-1915) and 8pm (1916-1921). Readings were taken three times a day from 1894 thru 1909 at 7am/2pm/9pm. From 1922 to 1945 readings were taken at 8am and 8pm. From 1946 to 1982 readings were observed at 8am

First lets clear one thing up. NCEI doesn't chill anything. The bias adjustments come entirely from the data collected at other stations. The Coatesville station changes were identified by the other stations, not NOAA. If Coatesville didn't have changes vs other stations it wouldn't get bias adjustments. How do we know? The method has been well tested.

Per chart below big changes occurred at Coatesville that were not related to station moves. and some moves had very little impact on temperatures. All based on comparison to other stations.

Adding Sadsburyville doesn't change the fact that Coatesville had more 95 days than other stations in the region (95F days by decade below). Over time Coatesville changed from having more 95 days than Philadelphia and the Newark De Ag farm, to having roughly the same, to having less. Overall the 95 degree day data is consistent with the bias adjustments Coatesville receives through the years. The Doe Run Rd site should have fewer 95 days than Philadelphia.  95F days isn't the whole story of course, we've also seen that low temperatures dropped with the move to Doe Run Rd. There could have been other changes as well.

You are the guy who is altering Chesco's climate information. While NOAA's method is proven, your is deeply flawed. It is well known that taking a simple average of a changing  network skews the result. Not sure why it is so hard for you to accept that simple fact.

Imagine thinking that the City of Coatesville, the town of West Chester and Phoenixville are a good representation for all of Chester County. Here's a homework assignment for you. Find current stations in the city of Coatesville, the town of West Chester, combine with Phoenixville and compare to your current network. I am betting that the average of those three stations will be much warmer than the county as a whole. We already know that Phoenixville is warmer.

[chubbs]

On 7/19/2024 at 2:41 PM, bdgwx said:

I did a quick review of IPCC AR6 WGI chapter 5 regarding the carbon cycle. Based only off a cursory read I don't think they are expecting the land sink's ability to buffer carbon to wane until much later this century. So if we're already seeing signs that it's ability to take carbon is saturating then that's not good obviously. 

Is concerning. The study linked above was based on 2023 data at Mauna Loa. Data so far this warm season shows an unusually small decline in CO2. We'll see if it can be explained by weather or some other factor.

[ChescoWx]

2 hours ago, chubbs said:

First lets clear one thing up. NCEI doesn't chill anything. The bias adjustments come entirely from the data collected at other stations. The Coatesville station changes were identified by the other stations, not NOAA. If Coatesville didn't have changes vs other stations it wouldn't get bias adjustments. How do we know? The method has been well tested.

Per chart below big changes occurred at Coatesville that were not related to station moves. and some moves had very little impact on temperatures. All based on comparison to other stations.

Adding Sadsburyville doesn't change the fact that Coatesville had more 95 days than other stations in the region (95F days by decade below). Over time Coatesville changed from having more 95 days than Philadelphia and the Newark De Ag farm, to having roughly the same, to having less. Overall the 95 degree day data is consistent with the bias adjustments Coatesville receives through the years. The Doe Run Rd site should have fewer 95 days than Philadelphia.  95F days isn't the whole story of course, we've also seen that low temperatures dropped with the move to Doe Run Rd. There could have been other changes as well.

You are the guy who is altering Chesco's climate information. While NOAA's method is proven, your is deeply flawed. It is well known that taking a simple average of a changing  network skews the result. Not sure why it is so hard for you to accept that simple fact.

Imagine thinking that the City of Coatesville, the town of West Chester and Phoenixville are a good representation for all of Chester County. Here's a homework assignment for you. Find current stations in the city of Coatesville, the town of West Chester, combine with Phoenixville and compare to your current network. I am betting that the average of those three stations will be much warmer than the county as a whole. We already know that Phoenixville is warmer.

Imagine actually believing that data used to make post hoc adjustments is based on stations that either do not actually exist or are located in an entirely different county or state and these adjusted figures represent a better source of data for the county then the actual National Weather Service data for that county?                                                                  

In looking at the above chart in the 1940's West Chester had far fewer 95 degree days....I know this is just 95 degree days but why in the 1940's would NCEI chill West Chester from an actual average annual temperature of 53.4 degrees to the adjusted altered figure of 50.2 degrees (3 degrees of chilling) which at least regarding 95 degree days is by far the least of all sites you list - but then Coatesville with 2x the 95 degree days only gets adjusted by only 2 degrees of chilling from 52.7 to 50.7.. So NCEI takes West Chester lower than Coatesville with these adjustments!  As we have continually seen the problem remains consistent chilling adjustments with conflicting actual data to support these consistent one way chilling changes.

[ChescoWx]

On 7/18/2024 at 2:04 PM, ChescoWx said:

Hey Frank sounds like another of the Ghost Stations found right here in PA

I want to point out that I cannot find any actual data as proof of what the above Meteorologist is saying about these so called "ghost stations" 

[csnavywx]

On 7/18/2024 at 12:03 PM, csnavywx said:

Stop giving him engagement. There is no scenario under which he would consider his hypothesis falsified. He's admitted this. It's now an article of faith by default. Discussing will only make him dig in harder.

This goes for you too, @PFizz since you so love to drop in tag people on the issue.

Intellectual cowardice and laziness on full display.

[csnavywx]

On 7/19/2024 at 2:41 PM, bdgwx said:

I did a quick review of IPCC AR6 WGI chapter 5 regarding the carbon cycle. Based only off a cursory read I don't think they are expecting the land sink's ability to buffer carbon to wane until much later this century. So if we're already seeing signs that it's ability to take carbon is saturating then that's not good obviously. 

One issue I do see is that the timeseries is a bit shorter than I'd like. What would this method look like in the timespan of something like '97 - '04? One would expect the land sink in '97 to be near zero as well (due to the massive Indonesian peat fires). Seems like the slinky is weighted more towards increasing net respiration in the last two big Ninos over fire events like this, but I'd like to be sure.

[chubbs]

17 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Imagine actually believing that data used to make post hoc adjustments is based on stations that either do not actually exist or are located in an entirely different county or state and these adjusted figures represent a better source of data for the county then the actual National Weather Service data for that county?                                                                  

In looking at the above chart in the 1940's West Chester had far fewer 95 degree days....I know this is just 95 degree days but why in the 1940's would NCEI chill West Chester from an actual average annual temperature of 53.4 degrees to the adjusted altered figure of 50.2 degrees (3 degrees of chilling) which at least regarding 95 degree days is by far the least of all sites you list - but then Coatesville with 2x the 95 degree days only gets adjusted by only 2 degrees of chilling from 52.7 to 50.7.. So NCEI takes West Chester lower than Coatesville with these adjustments!  As we have continually seen the problem remains consistent chilling adjustments with conflicting actual data to support these consistent one way chilling changes.

Not sure what point you are making in the first para, but you are focusing on unimportant points. The county or state borders are irrelevant and I haven't seen any "stations that don't exist". Sounds like a denier fairy tale.

The West Chester adjustments in the 1940s are set by the 1970 move. The West Chester move caused roughly 2.4F cooling.  I get an average adjustment in the 1940s of 2.2F. Again these adjustments are data driven. The chart I posted above showed the sudden West Chester cooling in 1970 relative to nearby stations. Easy to see where the bias adjustments for West Chester come from. Would bias the result if the "chilling" move was not accounted for. Your view of NOAA and science is a strawman.