|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 22:04:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 22:07:40 GMT
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. View AttachmentView AttachmentWhoa.....I didn't know that Fargo/Grand Forks etc didn't exist prior to 1950 or so...Amazing!!!!
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 22:09:31 GMT
www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/usThis is an area that Fargo is in. I am going to call the State Climate guy tomorrow. Fargo used to have data....I didn't save it. Holy cow....do ya have to save everything anymore? ?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2015 22:17:36 GMT
To my own area...and I have done this before and find it fun. If you grew up....when I did, the alarm of AGW was hard to fathom...and I wonder why? www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/us
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 1, 2015 22:47:46 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. _ Sig. Here are Grand Forks and Fargo. Let me know what you think. IGNORE ... REFRESH INTERVAL MADE ME THINK THEY DIDN'T GO.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 1, 2015 22:58:18 GMT
That site is where I got my other questionable data, and where Columbia is only shown since 1970. My original Columbia data came from... www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/searchand the later is where I took the Fargo and Grand Forks data from.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 1, 2015 23:03:00 GMT
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. Whoa.....I didn't know that Fargo/Grand Forks etc didn't exist prior to 1950 or so...Amazing!!!! That climate station is the Grand Forks International Airport ... I tried to find the station with the longest record, or two I could mesh. Could have missed something, I'll recheck. Just rechecked ... I think missed the University series that supposedly goes back to 1893 ... have ordered and will check. If so, it double covers the time period for the airport, so we'll check the vermin-competence index. My fault ... missed it ... am collating ... will recompile ... and compare ...
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 2, 2015 0:26:49 GMT
I have a friend at the NWS in gf. I will get raw data from him and we can compare to what is currently published.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 2, 2015 0:28:13 GMT
For my little area in pembina county it was all screwed up.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 2, 2015 5:45:12 GMT
I have a friend at the NWS in gf. I will get raw data from him and we can compare to what is currently published. That would be great. I got the university station for Grand Forks ... goes back to 1895 ... missed it...but i've worked it up and i'll get it online tomorrow. I've been downloading mean monthly data.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Mar 2, 2015 10:17:44 GMT
Finland has been unusually mild all Winter. Hardly any minus degree days in February in Helsinki which is more or less unknown. I have been assuming winter would finally arrive but it seems like it will not.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Mar 2, 2015 11:50:05 GMT
Finland has been unusually mild all Winter. Hardly any minus degree days in February in Helsinki which is more or less unknown. I have been assuming winter would finally arrive but it seems like it will not. Looks like Finland has had South West to South South West winds for sometime - all blowing over what there is of the North Atlantic Drift so you will be warmer than normal. Meantime the central and eastern US has the opposite air coming down from the 'Great White North'. The only State in the USA without snow this morning is Florida. It is what happens when you have blocking Highs and the jets have huge looping Rossby waves. Could mean that Finland will get a fast warm up into an early spring if the jets stay as stable as they have been.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Mar 3, 2015 3:40:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 3, 2015 4:19:03 GMT
There is hope, as the article quoted scientists who see NO connection between AGW and the California drought. And now with Mikey Mann realizing the oceans cycles play a huge part... Why....before you know it, sanity and real science will once again reign!!! (OK....hopefully before I am feeble and can't remember things)
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Mar 3, 2015 17:16:05 GMT
There is hope, as the article quoted scientists who see NO connection between AGW and the California drought. And now with Mikey Mann realizing the oceans cycles play a huge part... Why....before you know it, sanity and real science will once again reign!!! (OK....hopefully before I am feeble and can't remember things) Science might regain sanity - but: * the bureucrats won't EPA and EU will carry on enforcing rules, regulations and taxes to stop 'climate change' even though science is saying there is no such thing * Politicians won't alter anything they will continue shouting climate change - as the bogey man that gets them more power and money in their insider trading carbon futures accounts * Bankers won't as they see a way of getting more money out of the air - literally * The media won't as they are onto a good thing - the more arguments there are on things the more 'sticky' the websites and more advertising Poor unethical scientists started this snowball now they can't stop it - even if they wanted to.
|
|