|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 23, 2019 15:07:54 GMT
There would appear to be a problem in the way climate 'science' generates temperatures. It takes the maximum temperature observation and the minimum and then calculates the arithmetic mean - which the then call 'the average temperature'. This average temperature can rise because the lows are not as low. However, the climate 'scientists' use the average and the 'anomaly' in the average to claim we are all going to fry. Max 85.00 84.80 84.60 84.40 84.20 84.00 83.80 83.60 83.40 83.20 83.00 82.80 Min 40.00 40.30 40.60 40.90 41.20 41.50 41.80 42.10 42.40 42.70 43.00 43.30 Avg 62.50 62.55 62.60 62.65 62.70 62.75 62.80 62.85 62.90 62.95 63.00 63.05 Maximum Temperature dropped by 2.2 Minimum temperature rose by 3.3 Reported as a rise in temperatures/anomaly of 0.55 However, top temperatures are actually generally reducing. This appears to be carried out in the initial processing of the observations - can anyone check if I am right? Looks that way to me. The NWS station records contain daily maximum and minimum temperatures in whole degrees with a calculated daily mean (rounded). I am assuming a simple algorithm that selects the max and min from the recorded values as a first step.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Mar 23, 2019 15:15:20 GMT
There would appear to be a problem in the way climate 'science' generates temperatures. It takes the maximum temperature observation and the minimum and then calculates the arithmetic mean - which the then call 'the average temperature'. This average temperature can rise because the lows are not as low. However, the climate 'scientists' use the average and the 'anomaly' in the average to claim we are all going to fry. Max 85.00 84.80 84.60 84.40 84.20 84.00 83.80 83.60 83.40 83.20 83.00 82.80 Min 40.00 40.30 40.60 40.90 41.20 41.50 41.80 42.10 42.40 42.70 43.00 43.30 Avg 62.50 62.55 62.60 62.65 62.70 62.75 62.80 62.85 62.90 62.95 63.00 63.05 Maximum Temperature dropped by 2.2 Minimum temperature rose by 3.3 Reported as a rise in temperatures/anomaly of 0.55 However, top temperatures are actually generally reducing. This appears to be carried out in the initial processing of the observations - can anyone check if I am right? Looks that way to me. The NWS station records contain daily maximum and minimum temperatures in whole degrees with a calculated daily mean (rounded). I am assuming a simple algorithm that selects the max and min from the recorded values as a first step. So is the entire basis of the 'rise in temperature' a fake figure? This is rather fundamental to the whole hypothesis
|
|
|
Post by mondeoman on Mar 23, 2019 16:20:48 GMT
The whole "high and low to get an average" thing is just wrong anyway. Modern instruments can log every minute (or as required), so we should be able to take the average of all the readings. Would avoid short term spikes (high or low) from influencing the data.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Mar 23, 2019 18:02:36 GMT
but you need to do the same thing for a long time to get a result. What did they do 100 years ago because in all likelihood you don't have an hour by hour record to work differently.
We have all had a Min Max thermometer a lot of fun but just two numbers since last zeroed.
its valid so long as they use the same process. However what you can say about the world when you look at this data is maybe not what they are saying. In NZ we have seen the lows come up a bit but not so much the highs over the last 150 years. the papers talk about all boiling.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Mar 25, 2019 0:44:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Mar 25, 2019 1:17:54 GMT
but you need to do the same thing for a long time to get a result. Absurd. I'm sure you have taken a temperature reading before. It is an instantaneous event. If I want the temperature of a room I don't need to measure for months. If I want to take the temperature of a large area that involves multiple thermometers then I take an instantaneous reading of multiple thermometers. Instantaneous; not a "long time"
|
|
jopo
New Member
Posts: 30
|
Post by jopo on Mar 26, 2019 10:35:21 GMT
Was not sure where to post this But a new paper out. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682618304541Fancy that a Global Network on how electricity interacts with our CLIMATE. No one would have guessed that! A global atmospheric electricity monitoring network for climate and geophysical research
Highlights
• We describe the first near global database (GloCAEM) for real time monitoring of atmospheric electric potential gradient (PG).
• The largest single analysis of PG data from multiple datasets at geographically distinct locations is presented.
• Approaches to selecting PG data for global electric circuit monitoring are discussed.
• Recommendations are provided on the most suitable GloCAEM sites for the study of various scientific phenomena.AbstractThe Global atmospheric Electric Circuit (GEC) is a fundamental coupling network of the climate system connecting electrically disturbed weather regions with fair weather regions across the planet. The GEC sustains the fair weather electric field (or potential gradient, PG) which is present globally and can be measured routinely at the surface using durable instrumentation such as modern electric field mills, which are now widely deployed internationally. In contrast to lightning or magnetic fields, fair weather PG cannot be measured remotely. Despite the existence of many PG datasets (both contemporary and historical), few attempts have been made to coordinate and integrate these fragmented surface measurements within a global framework. Such a synthesis is important in order to fully study major influences on the GEC such as climate variations and space weather effects, as well as more local atmospheric electrical processes such as cloud electrification, lightning initiation, and dust and aerosol charging.
The GloCAEM (Global Coordination of Atmospheric Electricity Measurements) project has brought together experts in atmospheric electricity to make the first steps towards an effective global network for atmospheric electricity monitoring, which will provide data in near real time. Data from all sites are available in identically-formatted files, at both 1 s and 1 min temporal resolution, along with meteorological data (wherever available) for ease of interpretation of electrical measurements. This work describes the details of the GloCAEM database and presents what is likely to be the largest single analysis of PG data performed from multiple datasets at geographically distinct locations. Analysis of the diurnal variation in PG from all 17 GloCAEM sites demonstrates that the majority of sites show two daily maxima, characteristic of local influences on the PG, such as the sunrise effect. Data analysis methods to minimise such effects are presented and recommendations provided on the most suitable GloCAEM sites for the study of various scientific phenomena. The use of the dataset for further understanding of the GEC is also demonstrated, in particular for more detailed characterization of day-to-day global circuit variability. Such coordinated effort enables deeper insight into PG phenomenology which goes beyond single-location PG measurements, providing a simple measurement of global thunderstorm variability on a day-to-day timescale. The creation of the GloCAEM database is likely to enable much more effective study of atmospheric electricity variables than has ever been possible before, which will improve our understanding of the role of atmospheric electricity in the complex processes underlying weather and climate.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Mar 26, 2019 13:28:26 GMT
A global atmospheric electricity monitoring network for climate and geophysical research AbstractThe Global atmospheric Electric Circuit (GEC) is a fundamental coupling network of the climate system connecting electrically disturbed weather regions with fair weather regions across the planet. The GEC sustains the fair weather electric field (or potential gradient, PG) which is present globally and can be measured routinely at the surface using durable instrumentation such as modern electric field mills, which are now widely deployed internationally. In contrast to lightning or magnetic fields, fair weather PG cannot be measured remotely. Despite the existence of many PG datasets (both contemporary and historical), few attempts have been made to coordinate and integrate these fragmented surface measurements within a global framework. Such a synthesis is important in order to fully study major influences on the GEC such as climate variations and space weather effects, as well as more local atmospheric electrical processes such as cloud electrification, lightning initiation, and dust and aerosol charging.
The GloCAEM (Global Coordination of Atmospheric Electricity Measurements) project has brought together experts in atmospheric electricity to make the first steps towards an effective global network for atmospheric electricity monitoring, which will provide data in near real time. Data from all sites are available in identically-formatted files, at both 1 s and 1 min temporal resolution, along with meteorological data (wherever available) for ease of interpretation of electrical measurements. This work describes the details of the GloCAEM database and presents what is likely to be the largest single analysis of PG data performed from multiple datasets at geographically distinct locations. Analysis of the diurnal variation in PG from all 17 GloCAEM sites demonstrates that the majority of sites show two daily maxima, characteristic of local influences on the PG, such as the sunrise effect. Data analysis methods to minimise such effects are presented and recommendations provided on the most suitable GloCAEM sites for the study of various scientific phenomena. The use of the dataset for further understanding of the GEC is also demonstrated, in particular for more detailed characterization of day-to-day global circuit variability. Such coordinated effort enables deeper insight into PG phenomenology which goes beyond single-location PG measurements, providing a simple measurement of global thunderstorm variability on a day-to-day timescale. The creation of the GloCAEM database is likely to enable much more effective study of atmospheric electricity variables than has ever been possible before, which will improve our understanding of the role of atmospheric electricity in the complex processes underlying weather and climate. The fact that instead of writing how the purpose is to study the effects on the environment, but instead write that the purpose is to study the effects on "climate" tells me that science will be the absolute last thing I should expect to find in this paper. I already know at this point that if I keep reading that I should expect a voodoo fiction novel. It is clear that the authors are trying to take advantage of some scientifically illiterate Climate Change moron for his grant money. Then I see the term Global atmospheric Electrical Circuit (GEC) and realize that, yep, they are trying to pull a fast one. The only kind of "circuit" the atmosphere could possibly be is a shorted one with the ground. The first author listed should know this. But as I read the abstract, I couldn't help but think of the abstract for the stadium wave: "A hypothesized low-frequency climate signal propagating across the Northern Hemisphere through a network of synchronized climate indices was identified in previous analyses of instrumental and proxy data. The tempo of signal propagation is rationalized in terms of the multidecadal component of Atlantic Ocean variability – the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. Through multivariate statistical analysis of an expanded database, we further investigate this hypothesized signal to elucidate propagation dynamics. The Eurasian Arctic Shelf-Sea Region, where sea ice is uniquely exposed to open ocean in the Northern Hemisphere, emerges as a strong contender for generating and sustaining propagation of the hemispheric signal. Ocean-ice-atmosphere coupling spawns a sequence of positive and negative feedbacks that convey persistence and quasi-oscillatory features to the signal. Further stabilizing the system are anomalies of co-varying Pacific-centered atmospheric circulations. Indirectly related to dynamics in the Eurasian Arctic, these anomalies appear to negatively feed back onto the Atlantic‘s freshwater balance. Earth’s rotational rate and other proxies encode traces of this signal as it makes its way across the Northern Hemisphere."
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Mar 26, 2019 17:24:46 GMT
The most glaring problem with the article is that it completely ignores physics. The earth's average global temperature will not be changing. The atmosphere will not be disappearing. The planet's water isn't going anywhere. There will always be conditions for snow somewhere on the planet. Mars? Thank you. I should have written "There will always be conditions for snow somewhere on this planet." I normally post from earth.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Mar 26, 2019 23:13:44 GMT
[ Snip ] I normally post from earth. Sounds very environmentally friendly ....
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 26, 2019 23:39:58 GMT
[ Snip ] I normally post from earth. Sounds very environmentally friendly .... Dust to dust.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 28, 2019 13:06:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Mar 29, 2019 1:08:27 GMT
The name Mann came up the other day ... again. And I ran across this 4 year old beauty today. It may have been posted before.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Mar 30, 2019 2:09:25 GMT
Did you, by chance, catch this in the article: It doesn't take a genius to smell the boolsch hit. This is another example of speculation about the past based on completely fabricated (i.e. "proxy") data. They claim they can tell how cloudy it was by what was in the soil, as well as being able to tell what the temperatures were when it was cloudy and when it was not ... in the past ... from the tree rings. Somebody conned somebody out of grant money.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on Mar 30, 2019 2:11:59 GMT
Sounds very environmentally friendly .... Dust to dust. Ashes to ashes. Now that it is Lent and all.
|
|