|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 28, 2015 16:20:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 28, 2015 16:22:56 GMT
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4319/lo.1996.41.5.0890/epdfRatios of the stable isotopes of oxygen and carbon in benthic ostracodes and marl from cores taken from two lakes in north-central Minnesota reflect Holocene hydrological and vegetation changes. Oxygen isotopes show that Williams and Shingobee Lakes, located in the same watershed but with different positions along a hydrologic gradient, were connected before 9.8 ka as part of a larger lake, Lake Willobee. From 9.8–7.7 ka, the level of Lake Willobee fell as a result of glacial retreat and increasing evaporation, leaving small separated basins. Further decreases in lake level after 7.7 ka due to increasing aridity triggered the inflow of ground water in Williams Lake at about 7 ka, and in Shingobee Lake at about 5 ka. After 4 ka effective moisture increased. The carbon-isotope record reflects changes in vegetation with higher ?13C values during the prairie period (7.7–4 ka) and lower values during preceding and succeeding forest periods. The differences in timing of hydrological events show that the biotic and geochemical response of the lakes to climate variations is mediated by their hydrologic systems. The response may be strongly spatially heterogeneous and can result in contrasting information from geochemical and biotic proxies from the same paleorecord.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 28, 2015 17:04:11 GMT
Do a graph of annual precip using 1915-1970 as the mean value. Will show two things. Deviation from average on a full pdo cycle and tell u what effect that may have. Here you go Sig! The normal picked was 1913-74 (bottom to bottom). Just to check stability, I ran a top to top (1944-2005) ... hardly a dime's worth of difference ... the second being about 1 inch higher in terms of mean precip. You can see it as the pale, gray line in the background. As expected, the one-year precip. plots appear noisy, with large variation ... BUT there appears to be amazing regularity in that noise. The pattern is still there. What is on the leading edge of this declining AMO and solar cycle? ?? As a farmer, I guess you have to be a betting man ... with a multitude of hedges! If you had to choose a small set of stations (assuming unadjusted data timeseries) to adequately represent macro areas of the upper great plains (the grain producing areas), what would they be?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 28, 2015 17:19:43 GMT
Do a graph of annual precip using 1915-1970 as the mean value. Will show two things. Deviation from average on a full pdo cycle and tell u what effect that may have. Here you go Sig! The normal picked was 1913-74 (bottom to bottom). Just to check stability, I ran a top to top (1944-2005) ... hardly a dime's worth of difference ... the second being about 1 inch higher in terms of mean precip. You can see it as the pale, gray line in the background. As expected, the one-year precip. plots appear noisy, with large variation ... BUT there appears to be amazing regularity in that noise. The pattern is still there. What is on the leading edge of this declining AMO and solar cycle? ?? As a farmer, I guess you have to be a betting man ... with a multitude of hedges! View AttachmentIn regards to hedges, wow do you have that one correct. Problem is, I didn't hedge 2015 production back in spring 2014. Kept thinking the risk of lower prices was lower than the risk of higher prices. Wrong AGAIN!!!!
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 28, 2015 17:29:53 GMT
Do a graph of annual precip using 1915-1970 as the mean value. Will show two things. Deviation from average on a full pdo cycle and tell u what effect that may have. Here you go Sig! The normal picked was 1913-74 (bottom to bottom). Just to check stability, I ran a top to top (1944-2005) ... hardly a dime's worth of difference ... the second being about 1 inch higher in terms of mean precip. You can see it as the pale, gray line in the background. As expected, the one-year precip. plots appear noisy, with large variation ... BUT there appears to be amazing regularity in that noise. The pattern is still there. What is on the leading edge of this declining AMO and solar cycle? ?? As a farmer, I guess you have to be a betting man ... with a multitude of hedges! View Attachment"What is on the leading edge of this declining AMO and solar cycle? ??" I don't know, but at least you now have DATA to use for YOUR area to potentially help you make management decisions. The next question is...how do we get climate scientists to get over the CO2 fixation? And start doing actual science of merit? All those buggers can think about is CO2 and grant money. Instead of actually presenting USEFUL information. Billions of dollars of funding for "research". One would think some would have caught on to ocean cycles etc, sun cycles and started combining them as you have done. And gosh....do you have a PhD in climate science? Us laymen are so stupid ya know? Why, as farmers we just cant' understand that CO2 is screwing with us. Uh huhhhhhhh.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 28, 2015 19:54:30 GMT
Here you go Sig! The normal picked was 1913-74 (bottom to bottom). Just to check stability, I ran a top to top (1944-2005) ... hardly a dime's worth of difference ... the second being about 1 inch higher in terms of mean precip. You can see it as the pale, gray line in the background. As expected, the one-year precip. plots appear noisy, with large variation ... BUT there appears to be amazing regularity in that noise. The pattern is still there. What is on the leading edge of this declining AMO and solar cycle? ?? As a farmer, I guess you have to be a betting man ... with a multitude of hedges! "What is on the leading edge of this declining AMO and solar cycle? ??" I don't know, but at least you now have DATA to use for YOUR area to potentially help you make management decisions. The next question is...how do we get climate scientists to get over the CO2 fixation? And start doing actual science of merit? All those buggers can think about is CO2 and grant money. Instead of actually presenting USEFUL information. Billions of dollars of funding for "research". One would think some would have caught on to ocean cycles etc, sun cycles and started combining them as you have done. And gosh....do you have a PhD in climate science? Us laymen are so stupid ya know? Why, as farmers we just cant' understand that CO2 is screwing with us. Uh huhhhhhhh. I took a few climate courses in college, and along with history, it's remained one of my interests. I'm a geographer and a data guy. Worked with the USGS for a few years among others. The quality of the PhD is in the person, not the paper. We were taught to follow the data wherever it might lead ... to tailor our understanding to the results ... and not vice versa ... and above all things ... never, ever drink your own cool aid as its toxicity to understanding / intellect / and honesty is well known. Bob Dylan is credited with the phrase ... "you don't need a weatherman, to see which way the wind is blowing". Science is a method not a degree. Long before there were PhDs, there were common people that observed and pondered. The correctness of their pondering may have determined if they survived. Many modern PhDs have forgotten that their privilege to observe and ponder are paid for by others. They owe their benefactors good works that are useful and disseminated for others benefit. In the private sector, they would quickly flounder if nobody bought their crap. Some have sold their souls four seven pieces of silver.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 28, 2015 21:51:16 GMT
The PDO is about 5 years out of phase with the AMO. Close enough tho as the early PDO phase is gueestamites. Sig. Did you say you are in the Red River Valley near Grand Forks?
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Feb 28, 2015 22:41:56 GMT
The PDO is about 5 years out of phase with the AMO. Close enough tho as the early PDO phase is gueestamites. Sig. Did you say you are in the Red River Valley near Grand Forks? MissouriBoy, can you provide a reference link for the graph you posted?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 28, 2015 23:32:23 GMT
Sig. Did you say you are in the Red River Valley near Grand Forks? MissouriBoy, can you provide a reference link for the graph you posted? I could ratty ... but all it would say would be .... "my computer". I generate all these graphs myself on Open Office using raw (hopefully) climate data downloaded from the dark data chambers of NOAA. Don't have a web site to post them on.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 1:15:08 GMT
The PDO is about 5 years out of phase with the AMO. Close enough tho as the early PDO phase is gueestamites. Sig. Did you say you are in the Red River Valley near Grand Forks? Yes, north of Grand Forks about 75 miles. Just below the escarpment.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 16:33:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 1, 2015 20:32:53 GMT
Sig. Did you say you are in the Red River Valley near Grand Forks? Yes, north of Grand Forks about 75 miles. Just below the escarpment. I downloaded the Grand Forks and Fargo timeseries climate data from the same NOAA source that I got Columbia from, and dropped it into my existing spreadsheets. Have a look and let me know what you think. Fargo data goes back to 1900, while Grand Forks only goes back 1949 (first complete year). You can see the 30s drought in the Fargo series... looked to be similar to our area (as a % of normal). The precip trends look similar to Columbia, although the 50s precip is not as low as here. Hate to say it, but Fargo looks more like a hockey stick than we do. Cooler in 30s. Do you have any local temp info that would allow you to check the 1930s? Can't tell if vermin have been at work or not.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 21:04:55 GMT
Sig, That would place you darn close to the border I am very close to the border. In fact, we go to Winnipeg often.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 21:06:12 GMT
Vermin infested Missouri boy.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 21:46:38 GMT
|
|