Wednesday, July 29, 2009

The Error in the Data

Let's look at the strange behavior of the daily temperatures of two Illinois towns, just 24 miles apart. One would expect that two towns that close together the temperatures would move in sync. But they don't. Below is the difference between the temperature at Carlinville, IL and Hillsboro, IL. I put a 6-month moving average on it.



One can see that there is an approximately 3 year variation in temperature between these two towns. They don't go up and down together. One can do one of two things with this kind of data. One can say that this is erroneous as there is no meteorlological phenomenon which can cause this kind of variation over a 24 mile distance; or one can say "EUREKA, I HAVE FOUND A NEW METEOROLOGICAL PHENOMENON!!! HOT AND COLD BLOBS OF AIR THAT REMAIN STATIONARY FOR MONTHS AND YEARS!!"

As much as one would like to say the latter, one knows that this can't be the case. It is silly to think that this kind of variation can actually happen. It would be like having a local heater or air-conditioner over the entire town.

So, what we see there is not a new meteorological phenomenon, it is bad data, and the amount of variation seen above is the amount of intrinsic error in the data. That means that the data is no more accurate than +/- 3 degrees F. And that means that when the global warming hysteriacs tell you that they know that the world has warmed by 1 degree over the past century you can tell them that they don't know that because the error in the data is greater than 1 degree. If the error is +/- 3 degrees, they can't possibly know that the world has warmed by 1 degree. That is statistical lunacy.

Let's look at a couple of detailed areas of this data. This is the data between 1973-1977



One can see that from 1973 to 1975 Carlinville was generally hotter than the town 24 miles away, hotter by as much as 2.5 degrees F for months at a time. Then for 1976 it swung the other way except for July and August. So, do we have blobs or hot and cold air? Or is this data just bad--too bad to be used to determine global warming?

Let's look at another detailed area, only this time lets only use a 30-day moving average on the temperature.



Here we have the crappy database saying that Carlinville was colder than Hillsboro for 1984. Then 1985 and 1986 in general Carlinville was hotter than Hillsboro and it stayed that way mostly until 1990.



Again we see silly patterns in the data

Hagiograph has wanted me to use statistical tools on a geographical grid to deal with the variations and problems I see in the raw data. The problem is that if one is to use statistical tools, the problem one seeks to fix MUST BE STATISTICAL.

If one has a station which is consistently hotter than the other, or if the average of the differences between the two towns is not zero, that is the bias. One fixes this problem by removing the bias.

But the difference between Carlinville, Illinois and Hillsboro, Illinois, two towns just 24 miles apart is not one of mere statistical variation. It is variable bias.

One can see that the temperature is biased one direction for several years and then the other for several years. That is not a normal kind of statistical bias. It is a sinusoidal wave not a bias. Temperature varies over time. It goes up and down one short and long scales. The problem with the kind of data shown above is that if one removes the sinusoidal signal seen above, then how is one to know if he is removing actual data? If you have an actual DC shift, a bias, one knows that it should be removed, but should one remove a sinusoid with a ~3 year period?

Because of thse problems, geographical manipulation of the data is not valid.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

3000 record lows in July

I thought it would be good to recognize that there have been 3000 record low temperatures for July 2009 so far.

source


As I have noted thousands of times over the past year and a half that I have been looking into this data, mostly on another list that the dearth of sunspots causes the sun to output less energy. That, in turn, cools the earth. I have been told, by many that the authoritative IPCC says that solar variations have nothing to do with the warming or with the cooling because its impact is far too small to make any difference. The problem is, these guys are not looking out their windows to see what the dearth of sunspots is actually doing to the weather! Guys, look outside rather than at those 'authoritative' IPCC pdfs.

One final thing, some of the more radical global warming hysteriacs have tried to say that global warming itself is causing the cooling. What Orwellian group think that is. Anyway, couldn't pass this one up.

Oh yeah, there are no sunspots again today. So far more than 50% of July's days have been spotless. This is not normal behavior for the sun, not that the true believers in the God of global warming will pay any attention to that. In fact, they might think that global warming might be stopping the sunspot cycle!

I also looked up the total number of spotless days this year--157, or 76% of all days have had no sunspots in 2009. Normally by this time in the cycle, the sunspot number should be around 100. As it is we hover around zero.

Friday, July 17, 2009

Is there such a thing as variable bias?

This was written July 13th for posting later

Let's look at the strange behavior of the daily temperatures of two Illinois towns, just 24 miles apart. One would expect that two towns that close together the temperatures would move in sync. But they don't. Below is the difference between the temperature at Carlinville, IL and Hillsboro, IL. I put a 6-month moving average on it.



One can see that there is an approximately 3 year variation in temperature between these two towns. They don't go up and down together. One can do one of two things with this kind of data. One can say that this is erroneous as there is no meteorlological phenomenon which can cause this kind of variation over a 24 mile distance; or one can say "EUREKA, I HAVE FOUND A NEW METEOROLOGICAL PHENOMENON!!! HOT AND COLD BLOBS OF AIR THAT REMAIN STATIONARY FOR MONTHS AND YEARS!!"

As much as one would like to say the latter, one knows that this can't be the case. It is silly to think that this kind of variation can actually happen. It would be like having a local heater or air-conditioner over the entire town.

So, what we see there is not a new meteorological phenomenon, it is bad data, and the amount of variation seen above is the amount of intrinsic error in the data. That means that the data is no more accurate than +/- 3 degrees F. And that means that when the global warming hysteriacs tell you that they know that the world has warmed by 1 degree over the past century you can tell them that they don't know that because the error in the data is greater than 1 degree. If the error is +/- 3 degrees, they can't possibly know that the world has warmed by 1 degree. That is statistical lunacy.

Let's look at a couple of detailed areas of this data. This is the data between 1973-1977



One can see that from 1973 to 1975 Carlinville was generally hotter than the town 24 miles away, hotter by as much as 2.5 degrees F for months at a time. Then for 1976 it swung the other way except for July and August. So, do we have blobs or hot and cold air? Or is this data just bad--too bad to be used to determine global warming?

Let's look at another detailed area, only this time lets only use a 30-day moving average on the temperature.



Here we have the crappy database saying that Carlinville was colder than Hillsboro for 1984. Then 1985 and 1986 in general Carlinville was hotter than Hillsboro and it stayed that way mostly until 1990.



Again we see silly patterns in the data

Hagiograph has wanted me to use statistical tools on a geographical grid to deal with the variations and problems I see in the raw data. The problem is that if one is to use statistical tools, the problem one seeks to fix MUST BE STATISTICAL.

If one has a station which is consistently hotter than the other, or if the average of the differences between the two towns is not zero, that is the bias. One fixes this problem by removing the bias.

But the difference between Carlinville, Illinois and Hillsboro, Illinois, two towns just 24 miles apart is not one of mere statistical variation. It is variable bias.

One can see that the temperature is biased one direction for several years and then the other for several years. That is not a normal kind of statistical bias. It is a sinusoidal wave not a bias. Temperature varies over time. It goes up and down one short and long scales. The problem with the kind of data shown above is that if one removes the sinusoidal signal seen above, then how is one to know if he is removing actual data? If you have an actual DC shift, a bias, one knows that it should be removed, but should one remove a sinusoid with a ~3 year period?

Because of thse problems, geographical manipulation of the data is not valid.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Another China Station

This was written July 13 for posting later. It is being posted July 22.

The anthropological-global-warming-beliving, Holocene-deniers act as if the data in other parts of the world is as good as data here in the US. I have documented multiple times below that the data here in the US is really lousy. But in China, it is even worse. Below is a couple of weather records from near Wuhan, China. This is not a mountainous part of China. You can clearly see that these two stations, 45 miles apart hardly correlate at all.





Below is the difference between these two stations. When US citizens look at this, realize that you are looking at degrees Centigrade. Centigrade degrees are approximately twice as big as Fahrenheit degrees. So, that 8 degree difference you see is really a 15 deg Fahrenheit difference



One would think that if the thermometers were measuring climate that they would actually go up and down somewhat together over a very short distance. Unfortunately in China or in the US, they don't.

July 16th Old Farmer's Almanac and Global Cooling

This is being written on July 16th, but won't be posted for a week or so. The entry in the Old Farmer's Almanac Daily Calender for today says:

"Legend says that a July forecast of 'rain, hail, and snow' mistakenly appeared in The 1816 Old Farmer's Almanac,. Robert B. Thomas, the Almanac's founder, recalled the books and had new ones printed--but the news got out. Thomas became the subject of much ridicule--until July brought rain, hale, and snow throughout New England." July 16, 2009 The Old Farmer's Almanac Calender.

This is probably the event which gave the Almanac its reputation even though it was a mistake. What is even more interesting is the reason why the mistake was right. Probably unknown to Thomas, the sun, at that time was experiencing a dearth of sunspots in comparison to what had been the case earlier and what was to come later. When the sun has few sunspots, it is known that the earth will cool because the sun puts out less energy. Below is the chart of the sunspots before and after the Dalton Minimum.



Now, many of the global warming hysteriacs and Holocene deniers will try to tell you that the sun has little impact on the earth's temperature. Such nonsense is the output of political partisans, not sober scientists. Below is a chart of the temperature response during the Dalton Minimum in Europe. You can see that some stations dropped by over 2 degrees from 1780 to 1815. And the sun hadn't even shut down at that time.



So, the world was cold just as a volcano in Indonesia exploded.Tambora was huge, and devastating. It occurred at the worst time in the Dalton Minimum--which, you should recall was already a cold time.

“The infamous eruption in 1815 of Tambora, on the Indonesian island of Sumbawa, seven hundred miles east of Krakatoa, ejected twice the volume of material into the atmosphere (eleven cubic miles of rock, ash, and dust, compared with Krakatoa’s six). The devastation it caused locally was profound—supposedly fifty thousand dead, an entire language (Tambora) extinguished, an entire island rendered uninhabitable for years. But its climatic effects were astounding too. For it lowered the world’s temperature by almost one Celsius degree, on average: for every day when the normal temperature might be thirty-three, just above freezing, the temperature in the year after Tambora would be thirty-one degrees Fahrenheit, and ice would have formed on every pond and, more fatally, on every newborn crop, flower and hatching egg.”
“So in New England the farmers claimed that 1816 was ‘the year without summer.’ There were frosts as far south as New Jersey in late May, in upper New England in June and July, and the growing season was slashed from the usual 160 days to seventy. Soup kitchens opened in Manhattan. Livestock had to be fed on fish carried over from the Atlantic seaports—1816 is also still remembered as ‘the mackerel year.’ There were crop failures-“the last great subsistence crisis of the Western world’—and, as a result, there was emigration to the Western states. No small number of today’s Californians can rightly lay responsibility for their being Californians squarely at the door of the proximate cause of that year’s ruinous cold—Tambora, a volcano unknown to most of them, and ten thousand miles away. (Although there was migration into California from Europe, in Newfoundland quite the reverse took place: Migrants were sent back east across the ocean, because there was not enough for them to eat.)"
“And yet back in Europe it was just as bad. The weather for 1816 is the worst recorded, with low temperatures stretching as far south as Tunisia. French grapes could not be harvested until November. The German wheat crop failed entirely, and prices for flour had doubled in a year. In some places there were reports of famine, and in others there were riots and mass migrations. The diaries and newspapers of the day present a litany of miseries. It is said that Byron composed his most miserable poem, “Darkness”—Morn came and went—and came, and brought no day—under the influence of that dismal year; and Mary Shelley may have written Frankenstein while gripped by a similarly unseasonable melancholy.” Simon Winchester, Krakatoa, (New York: HarperCollins, 2003), p. 292-293


Now, let's jump forward to this year. The global warming hysteriacs continue to say that the sun has no impact on the climate. This from the IPCC

"The radiative forcing due to changes in solar irradiance for the period since 1750 is estimated to be about +0.3 Wm-2, most of which occurred during the first half of the 20th century. Since the late 1970s, satellite instruments have observed small oscillations due to the 11-year solar cycle. Mechanisms for the amplification of solar effects on climate have been proposed, but currently lack a rigorous theoretical or observational basis."
source

Let's test the nonsense spouted above. What is the status of the solar cycle? Well, the first thing one should notice is that the sunspot cycle is now about 2 years late! Below is a comparison (up to date as of June 2009) comparing the present cycle (bold red) with the past 5 sunspot cycles. You can clearly see that by this time in the previous cycles the sunspot numbers were well over 50.



It is clear that the above shows a sun that is seriously NOT doing what it should be doing. What are the effects? June was a very cool month except for where I live, in Texas.

Coolest June in Phoenix since 1913
source

coolest June in New York since 1958source


Coolest June in Philly since 1997
source

Coolest June in Reading PA since 1992
http://www.readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=146770

Sixth coolest June for Boston source


2nd coolest in 10 years for Chicago
source

coolest June for Del Norte Colorado
source

North Dakota had a snowfall in June
Jun 14, 2009 ... North Dakota Gets Snowfall In June: Breaks 60 Year Record ..... that this is the coolest, wettest June since they started keeping records in ...
reference

Yesterday was the coldest July 8th in 18 years.

And last night, July 15, as this will be posted later this month, I received an email from a friend in Canada pointing out how cold it is up there.

From this article


In a typical spring and summer, reports Coulson, there are 10 days
when the Ottawa-area surpasses 30 degrees. So far, we've had two: 30.7
on June 24 and 33.8 on June 25.

By 30-year average, July normally has about five days when the mercury
beats 30. So far, we've had none, with 27 degrees being our peak.


So far this July is colder than any July since 1938 and the article said:

"And the low overnight was expected to hit 8 C. Yes, eight. This is a stone's throw from frost. This is not a July temperature. This is how they medically induce comas. By extended cooling."

Maybe the global warming hysteriacs should loook outside once in a while.

Monday, July 13, 2009

No Change at Cape Leeuwin

This was written July 13 but will be posted later.

Looking at the data from Cape Leeuwin, Australia, obtained from this site, we can see that the maximum yearly temperature has not increased beyond that of the late 1880s, even though there is a huge increase in CO2, which, according to the global warming hysteriacs, should have increased the temperature greately. But it didn't.



CO2 doesn't seem to be affecting much at Cape Leeuwin, Australia.

Going Down at Darwin Australia

CO2 should affect each and every station on earth the same. It is radiative and the effects should occur at the speed of light. Over the past century, we are told, the earth has warmed by around .84 degrees centigrade, all due to CO2, which is all due to human effort. So, if that is the case, we should see warming almost everywhere over the globe. But we don't see that. We certainly don't see it at Darwin, Australia.



The degree-days have consistently declined at Darwin, Australia. In 1883, there were 10,441 degree-days at Darwin. Remember that a degree-day is the multiplication of the average monthly temperature times the days in the month, and then the months are summed up for each year. That give 10,441 degree-days in 1883. But in 2008, after there is almost 100 ppm more CO2 in the atmosphere than there was in 1883, we find that Darwin, Australia is cooler by over 300 degree-days. In 2008, there were only 10,103 degree-days. Darwin, Australia was cooler.

So much for the predictions of those silly global warming hysteriacs

Cooling at Carnarvon



Carnarvon, Australia shows an interesting pattern in the degree-days. Just to refresh everyone's memory a degree-day is the average monthly temperature times the number of days in that month. This measure allows one to see warming if it takes the form of more days at the same temperature or a higher temperature for the same number of days.

So, what do we see at Carnarvon, Airport? Well, from 1949 until 1988, the temperature warmed. In 1949 there were 8098 degree-days. But in 1988 it was 8500 degree-days, clearly a warming trend. But, past 1988 Carnarvon cooled. By 2008, the degree-days were down to 8037, less than in 1949. Where in the hell is the global warming? We have almost 80 ppm more CO2 in the atmosphere in 2008 than we had in 1949, but the number of degree-days is less. Does this make any sense?

Cooling in Albany Australia

As I have mentioned, I have used this site to get data from areas around the world. I downloaded Albany Australia and calculated the degree-days centigrade for this town. It shows a huge amount of cooling over the past 50 years.



Blimey Mate, better get a coat and get it quick.

CO2 is radiative and there should be no delay in its effect, yet, this place is consistently getting colder. It is kind of hard to say that this is some sort of one-off anomaly as it has been going on for a long time.

I got it. The rest of the world is stealing the heat from Albany, Australia and that is the cause of global warming.

Southern Chile Sees no Warming

Last January I flew to Punta Arenas and then on to Ushuaia, Argentina. Having been to these two towns I wondered what the warming was like there. Punta Arenas Chile, which is only a few hundred miles north of the Antarctican peninsula where hysteriacs say that all the ice is melting, should show this warming. But it doesn't.




Punta Arenas, Chile is getting chilly, contrary to the expectations of Global Warming Hysteriacs.

Ushuaia, Argentina, the port from which I sailed to Antarctica, shows very little evidence of warming over the past 78 years. In 1931, the maximum temperature was 10.5 deg C. In 2009, the maximum temperature (which always occurs during the Austral Summer, in January or February), was merely 8.3 deg C. How can this be when there is all this additional CO2 in the atmosphere today that wasn't there in 1931? Clearly CO2 doesn't seem to move the temperature in Ushuaia.



Below is a picture of me and my oldest son at the Ushuaia dock. the ship we took to Antarctica is behind my son.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

When Hell Froze in July

Those of us who grew up in the southern part of the US know how hellishly hot it can be down here in July. Indeed, it can be hellishly hot all from May to October. During these times we all wish for cool weather all the time.

So, imagine my surprise when I was comparing the temperature records of two southern towns, Hawkinsville, GA and Eastman, GA, two towns separated by only 20 miles, when I noticed that the residents of Hawkinsville, GA got their wish, for 6 days in July 2001. Below is the raw data record for Hawkinsville, GA for July 2001. Notice that all the temperatures dropped into the low 20s from the 6th to the 11th of July. Surely this was one of the more memorable events, weatherwise, ever experienced by anyone in the south.





Sadly the surrounding towns didn't get to experience this cold weather in July as they show that they were not affected. I guess God didn't grant them a week's reprieve from the hellish temperatures which prevail at that time of the year. Maybe only atheists live in Eastman. Below is the chart for the same time for Eastman, GA just 20 miles away.



But winter in July isn't the only thing that one finds in the temperature records of used by the global warming hysteriacs (most of whom have never actually seen the raw data). The following winter in that part of Georgia was also fascinating.

I plotted the average temperature measured by each station for the winter of 2001, starting in Dec. 2001 and ending March 31, 2002. That chart can be seen below.



While the two curves are similar in the low frequency components of the temperature curve, they are not at all similar in the high frequency components. By this, I mean that on a weekly scale, the two temperatures move together, but on a daily basis, the temperature is, well, bizarre.

Subtracting the temperature of Eastman from that of Hawkinsville gives the following curve for that time frame.



Note that a 10 degree difference between the two towns during this period is not at all unusual. I count 9 times when the temperature difference was greater than 10 deg F. As noted before on this blog, such a temperature gradient is almost unheard of in meteorology, yet there it is in the data the hysteriacs use to determine global warming.

In reality what this means is that the data is so bad, and the error bar in measuring temperature is so large that one can't know what the climate is actually doing.

I next ploted the max and min temperatures for the two towns. We see the same kind of nonsense going on. Large differences between the two towns just a few miles apart.



And when the differences between the two maxes and two mins are plotted you can see the same wide error in the measurment of the local temperature.



Indeed, the averaging of the max and min make the temperature stream seem tame by comparison. I count in the above 16 times that the difference of the maximum daily temperature between these two towns exceeded 10 deg. Difference. and 19 times when the difference between the daily minimum temperatures exceeded 10 degrees. I also calculated the standard deviations of the difference of the average temperature, standard deviation of the difference of the maximum temperatures and the standard deviation of the difference of the minimum temperatures.

Let me explain. These two towns are only 20 miles apart and in some sense, each daily temperatures should be very similar to the measurement of the town only 20 miles away. One can view each day's measurments as two attempst to measure the climate at that location. The difference in daily max, min and average, tell you how accurate the temperature measuring system is. Using this time period, one can see that the measurment of the average daily temperature is only accurate to within 5.4 deg F of the true value. For the Max and Min the measuring system is only accurate to within 6.4 and 7.0 Deg. F. That means that if a global warming hysteriac wants to claim that the earth has warmed by 1.1 deg F over the past century, he has a problem. His data set is only accurate to about 5 deg, and these errors, not being statistical in nature, can't be said to be amenable to normal statistical treatment of random variation. The errors are not random.

Don't let anyone tell you that the measured temperature data is solid evidence for anything. It is utter crap.

The data again comes from Dave's favorite site--Dave who seems to still be absent after chiding me for not using this source for raw data. A source he thought which was solid and truly useful data. data source

Sunday, July 5, 2009

Russia--No warming seen in the Degree-Days Pt 3

This will be the last on Russia for a while. It isn't that I have run out of arctic stations it is just that I want to look at other countries. Hagiograph was the one who questioned me on the rise in Arctic stations. I have shown that there is not this great warming in the Russian data and I have shown one US station, Barrow Alaska. As stated in the previous blog post, I was looking for Russian data that went beyond 1990. I found a few stations. I think I know why so many Russian stations stop in 1990. That was the collapse of the Soviet Union and people were not paid to record temperatures for about 10 years. Most of the few stations I have that go up until 2008 have gaps in them during the 1990s. I will show some of the more recent Russian data now.

Let's first look at the longest Russian weather record I can find, Arhangel'sk.



The Arhangel'sk temperature record shows a step function between 1900 and 1930, when clearly the instrumentation changed. Since 1930, the number of degree-days has been declining at the rate of -.66 degree-days per year. This means Arhangel'sk has been cooling. The temperature here is certainly not behaving as the global warming people claim.

Note the drop in 2008. Lots of Russian stations cooled that year, not all, but lots of them.

Let's look at Murmansk. It doesn't show any warming trend since 1910. Note again the drop in temperature in 2008, which is consistent with a drop in the number of sunspots.



Generally, Murmansk is flat.

In far eastern Russia, at Anadyr, a town I have flown over, the temperature record is spotty but shows no warming



While the record is short, the Russian weather station GMO IM.ET at 80 deg North latitude shows no sign of warming either.



From 1957 to the present, the time of the most global warming, the number of degree-days at 80 deg N. latitude doesn't seem to be warming.

Mysslaurova, Russia also shows no warming, up to the end of its recording history



Finally, even Ostrov Kotel' shows cooling even to the present time. Where oh where has that global warming gone?

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Russia--No warming seen in the Degree-Days Pt 2

This is more data to show that the arctic has not warmed over the past century as the global warming hysteriacs claim. As stated in the previous blog post, the data available at this site stops at 1990. If anyone knows where I can get Russian monthly data for the subsequent time period, I would love to get it. I want the raw data, not the 'corrected' data which is specifically corrected to show global warming.

Back to the Russian data. Where did we leave off. Oh, yeah, Olenek, Russia, one of the few that actually shows warming. Here is the number of degree days for Olenek, Russia. I put it here at the first so I can't be charged with burying it deep in a post. All the stations past this one in this post show no signs of behaving as the global warming hysteriacs claim.



There is a step-function jump in the temperature about 1980, but then over the next 10 years, it cooled until the record ends.

Tura, Russia is basically flat over the past century with a tiny bit of cooling.



Essej, Russia is flat until the spike in 1985 then the temperature plummets to a record low. The drop at the end in 1989 is real. There is no missing data causing it.



Jakusk, Russia shows flat except for a step-function change when probably the station location changed in 1938. Since 1938 it has been gradually cooling. No evidence of the rapid increase in CO2 here.



Viljusjsk, Russia shows merely cooling since the early part of the 20th century. Where is the global warming?



Zhirgansk shows little but cooling over the past century. All these stations are in Siberia, which is supposed to be warming, yet only a few stations show warming.



How can we trust people who tell us that the globe is warming when the data they say shows the warming shows precisely the opposite??? God spare us from those who want to scare us into giving them grant money.