|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 3, 2015 17:56:10 GMT
Sig ... Here are two graphs for Grand Forks, 1895 to 2014. One shows the NCDC temperatures (% of norm). The other shows cooling degree days and heating degree days. All with annual precipitation. Looks like your HDD is much more stable (little % of norm variation) ... but it sure looks like a downward trend ,.. hence warmer winters ... that could change ! And try these CDD-adjusted temps. The problem, of course, is that the temporal deviation is not a linear equation, which is all I have. The high points of the 30s to 50s, which is the center of the distribution show the most deviation, and a linear adjustment will over-adjust the ends. But, it shows just how easy it would be to change history, if one had an inclination. Oh what a tangled web we weave.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 4, 2015 16:07:11 GMT
missouriboy: Your graphs present some interesting analysis.
A few historical points:
1. Historically, at least till recently, the 1934-1937 period was by far the warmest period known. From old timers who lived through it, there has not been anything close to how brutal that period was. 2. 1988 was a drought year. Started in the fall of 87, lasted to the spring of 89. And it most assuredly was a drought. However, the temperatures were not close to as high, nor the duration of high temps as long, as during the 30's. Remember now, that in 1989 folks who lived through the 30's weren't that old yet, so their antidotal evidence has weight. In fact, enough weight that away back then, the actual data supported their memories. 3. I don't know how the NCDC changes stuff. I do know that when folks got even older, and fewer were left, the changes started. 4. I know that my grandfather, without the benefit of short season hybrids, grew corn on the farm I live on from about 1925 through the mid 40's. Even had corn husk machines etc. Fed the corn to hogs and calves. Got to cold to continue to grow corn. Switched to barley. I started growing corn in the later 70's again. Everyone thought I was nuts, as all the old timers told me it wouldn't mature. Their experience....just sayin. Even back then I was aware of cycles, and was confident that I could achieve a more positive economic outcome with corn verses wheat/barley. It worked. 5. 3 years ago I stopped growing corn. Thing is, everyone around me is still growing corn. When I started, no one was growing corn for grain. But the folks still growing it have been burnt by immature corn, and acreage is going down fast now. I figured I had played the warming as long as I could with positive outcomes. 6. I did an analysis several years ago from actual temps in my area that were hand recorded. I saw the trends, and acted on that information. According to climate experts we were still warming. Yeah right, tell that to my corn.
The information you presented is based on that mmm...more knowledgeable record. I will just say it doesn't jive with reality.
Have our winters gotten slightly warmer? Yes, they have. But our summers have gotten cooler. It has been 6 years since I have been in the field in April. The winters have gotten warmer, but they have also gotten somewhat later in expiration date.
But this is just my little neck of the woods. But also, I know that there are adjustments to data being made, for whatever reason, that the reality doesn't match.
I am not going to bother calling NCDC. Have already done the work, for my little area. Your great work only cements that the grifters continue to hold the keys to the vault.
My huge concern is, if localized results have been adjusted to fit the memo of AGW, what, in reality, has happened to the world results?
When someone tells me that some year is 0.002C warmer than any other year, I just smile knowing that they are blowing smoke out of their ***.
Rather disenheartening isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 4, 2015 16:09:11 GMT
Sig ... Here are two graphs for Grand Forks, 1895 to 2014. One shows the NCDC temperatures (% of norm). The other shows cooling degree days and heating degree days. All with annual precipitation. Looks like your HDD is much more stable (little % of norm variation) ... but it sure looks like a downward trend ,.. hence warmer winters ... that could change ! View AttachmentView AttachmentAnd try these CDD-adjusted temps. The problem, of course, is that the temporal deviation is not a linear equation, which is all I have. The high points of the 30s to 50s, which is the center of the distribution show the most deviation, and a linear adjustment will over-adjust the ends. But, it shows just how easy it would be to change history, if one had an inclination. Oh what a tangled web we weave. View AttachmentI commend you for your work. You need to go get a PhD in climate and continue this exposure. I am too old to do that, but your interest, and how you looked at CCD and temps shows that you have a great mind.
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Mar 6, 2015 9:07:56 GMT
So NOAA call Nino? With the SOI forecast to plummet into record territory by mid March it appears the walker Cell is about to flip? With a record sized warm pool for the nino to feed upon what will we see?
PDO also put up another Big positive for Feb so we are already in a configuration that favours Nino's and MJO is also looking bullish for atmospheric cooperation.
with over a decade of heat being sequestered into the upper ocean will the Deniers have a chance to now see that 'stored' heat perculate back into the climate system?
2014 was already a record year so what will folk make of 2015 pushing the record higher?
Anyhow, not long now, we should be seeing atmospheric changes over the next 2 weeks so we will all know what 2015 will hold for us .
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 6, 2015 20:31:34 GMT
So NOAA call Nino? With the SOI forecast to plummet into record territory by mid March it appears the walker Cell is about to flip? With a record sized warm pool for the nino to feed upon what will we see? PDO also put up another Big positive for Feb so we are already in a configuration that favours Nino's and MJO is also looking bullish for atmospheric cooperation. with over a decade of heat being sequestered into the upper ocean will the Deniers have a chance to now see that 'stored' heat perculate back into the climate system? 2014 was already a record year so what will folk make of 2015 pushing the record higher? Anyhow, not long now, we should be seeing atmospheric changes over the next 2 weeks so we will all know what 2015 will hold for us . I give it longer than 2 weeks, but I will remember your post Graywolf. You might be like Netanayua, and finally be right. He has stated every year for the past 19 that Iran was one year from getting the "bomb". However, I am not holding my breath.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Mar 6, 2015 22:16:05 GMT
[ Snip ] However, I am not holding my breath. You should try it Sig; it reduces CO2.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 6, 2015 23:48:34 GMT
[ Snip ] However, I am not holding my breath. You should try it Sig; it reduces CO2. When I deep dived in Guam, I could hold my breath for a bit over 4 mins. Never tried two weeks tho......just sayin.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 7, 2015 1:45:15 GMT
in an attempt to educate myself on how climate changes in the Upper and Lower Midwest, I created some seasonal, mean temperature time series for four stations extending approximately 600 miles from Grand Forks, ND to Columbia, MO. In addition to the north and south anchors, the other stations are Sioux Falls, SD and Ottumwa, IA. The upper two stations are about 200 miles west of the two lower stations. So, it should be a reasonable north-south swath across the western part of the grain belt. The plotted time series extends from 1970 to 2014 ... also containing updates for meteorological winter 2014-15. It is a 3-year running average. I am assuming that these stations have not been significantly "improved" in the more recent years. Notes: Most of the major highs and lows are identifiable in all the station records. Meteorological winter temperatures appear to have peaked in 2000, and have been declining since ... to the tune of about 2 deg.C in the south, to about 5 deg. C in the north. Fall trends have been similar to winter in the south, peaking in 2000 ... in the north they peaked later ... all are now declining. Spring values peaked in the 1987-88 drought year and have done some odd things since ... perhaps that season shift that Sig has mentioned. Summer values also peaked in 1987-88, and while the general trend appears downward, it is not as consistent as winter across the four stations.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 7, 2015 1:51:30 GMT
And Fall ....
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 7, 2015 16:17:43 GMT
According to AGW hypothesis, the largest deviations should be in the upper latitudes. The Arctic is getting warmer, but that trend started long before 1970, when all of a sudden CO2 became the climate driver. Your charts show that for winter, the southern latitudes appear to be getting warmer. That can't be true, as it is counter to the AGW hypothesis. Missouriboy, didn't you get the memo on this?
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Mar 22, 2015 22:09:31 GMT
m.pnas.org/content/112/11/3253.short?rss=1&utm_source=Daily+Carbon+Briefing&utm_campaign=858bb8ee5a-cb_daily&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_876aab4fd7-858bb8ee5a-303430909I apologise for the long link. [Dynamical evidence for causality between galactic cosmic rays and interannual variation in global temperature Authors Significance Here we use newly available methods to examine the dynamical association between cosmic rays (CR) and global temperature (GT) in the 20th-century observational record. We find no measurable evidence of a causal effect linking CR to the overall 20th-century warming trend; however, on short interannual timescales, we find a significant, although modest, causal effect of CR on short-term, year-to-year variability in GT. Thus, although CR clearly do not contribute measurably to the 20th-century global warming trend, they do appear as a nontraditional forcing in the climate system on short interannual timescales, providing another interesting piece of the puzzle in our understanding of factors influencing climate variability.] I don't understand how a process which continually affects climate systems on short timescales can avoid affecting longer term trends. Cosmic rays tend to arrive all the time.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 23, 2015 0:33:41 GMT
m.pnas.org/content/112/11/3253.short?rss=1&utm_source=Daily+Carbon+Briefing&utm_campaign=858bb8ee5a-cb_daily&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_876aab4fd7-858bb8ee5a-303430909I apologise for the long link. [Dynamical evidence for causality between galactic cosmic rays and interannual variation in global temperature Authors Significance Here we use newly available methods to examine the dynamical association between cosmic rays (CR) and global temperature (GT) in the 20th-century observational record. We find no measurable evidence of a causal effect linking CR to the overall 20th-century warming trend; however, on short interannual timescales, we find a significant, although modest, causal effect of CR on short-term, year-to-year variability in GT. Thus, although CR clearly do not contribute measurably to the 20th-century global warming trend, they do appear as a nontraditional forcing in the climate system on short interannual timescales, providing another interesting piece of the puzzle in our understanding of factors influencing climate variability.] I don't understand how a process which continually affects climate systems on short timescales can avoid affecting longer term trends. Cosmic rays tend to arrive all the time. Thanks for the link to the paper. Good question Doug.
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Mar 24, 2015 9:36:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 24, 2015 10:11:37 GMT
We shall see Graywolf. The atmospheric coupling isn't happening, which is a critical step wouldn't you say?
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Mar 24, 2015 22:58:50 GMT
|
|