|
Post by Ratty on Jan 21, 2018 3:38:08 GMT
Does anyone know whether any climate models accommodate barycenters? Manilow?
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Jan 22, 2018 21:51:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 22, 2018 22:50:31 GMT
DON'T DO IT!
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 23, 2018 5:36:50 GMT
What is In Other Climate Records is Not What You Get With NCDC - Winnipeg, CanadaThere is a strange upward bump in Winnipeg's monthly temperature data that diverges sharply from deviations for other stations about 2009. It is in the station-specific data that you get from climate online. I went in and checked on weather underground and sure enough ... starting in 2009 each July's mean temp is between 1.8 and 2 C lower in the Weather Underground data. So far, every year before 2009 looks OK. Graphs for every month seem to show that anomaly. AND NOW I've got to go back and fix it. I'm not sure if I'm madder that I've got to go back and recalculate 108 numbers and re-enter them ... OR because they are so surprisingly stupid ... and lazy. I think I can hear the conversation ... "Oh, just add about 2 C to every month for the last decade. No one will notice." WABOFI argxxx@%#$ The Canadian Climatists may have done the number on this one and passed it along. I'm incredibly pissed (in the American sense) and will use this as an excuse to get incredibly pissed (in the English sense). I'm a culturally inclusive pisser.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 23, 2018 16:05:27 GMT
What is In Other Climate Records is Not What You Get With NCDC - Winnipeg, CanadaThere is a strange upward bump in Winnipeg's monthly temperature data that diverges sharply from deviations for other stations about 2009. It is in the station-specific data that you get from climate online. I went in and checked on weather underground and sure enough ... starting in 2009 each July's mean temp is between 1.8 and 2 C lower in the Weather Underground data. So far, every year before 2009 looks OK. Graphs for every month seem to show that anomaly. AND NOW I've got to go back and fix it. I'm not sure if I'm madder that I've got to go back and recalculate 108 numbers and re-enter them ... OR because they are so surprisingly stupid ... and lazy. I think I can hear the conversation ... "Oh, just add about 2 C to every month for the last decade. No one will notice." WABOFI argxxx@%#$ The Canadian Climatists may have done the number on this one and passed it along. I'm incredibly pissed (in the American sense) and will use this as an excuse to get incredibly pissed (in the English sense). I'm a culturally inclusive pisser. Interesting. I live very close to Winnipeg. Funny that I haven't noticed that bump in temps except for July.
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Jan 23, 2018 17:17:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 23, 2018 23:34:10 GMT
If you look at Figure 90 in the paper: From the peak in 1984 to the next trough in 2004 is a long amplitude wave. That to me does not look like the effect of the atmosphere or currents- that is what can be seen in the daily changes in LOD in the top line. But what that long sinusoidal wave could be is the effect on length of day of the orbit around a Sun that itself is moving. It would depend where the Earth was in its annual orbit and on the path of the Sun. I don't have the information to assess that - but it seems more probable that the long term effects are from planetary orbits and not from atmospheric effects which are far shorter lived than 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 23, 2018 23:40:22 GMT
If you look at Figure 90 in the paper: From the peak in 1984 to the next trough in 2004 is a long amplitude wave. That to me does not look like the effect of the atmosphere or currents- that is what can be seen in the daily changes in LOD in the top line. But what that long sinusoidal wave could be is the effect on length of day of the orbit around a Sun that itself is moving. It would depend where the Earth was in its annual orbit and on the path of the Sun. I don't have the information to assess that - but it seems more probable that the long term effects are from planetary orbits and not from atmospheric effects which are far shorter lived than 20 years. Bary again?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 24, 2018 4:50:07 GMT
www.wired.com/story/meet-the-amateur-scientist-who-discovered-climate-change/ampClimate change entered the modern public arena on June 23, 1988, when NASA researcher James E. Hansen testified before the US Senate about its potential effects. Colorado Senator Tim Wirth, an avid environmentalist and unusually cerebral politician, had learned about the Callendar Effect and wanted Hansen, a climate expert, to ring the bell and warn the nation. To bolster the narrative, Wirth deliberately scheduled the hearing for what historically was the summer’s hottest day and shut off the room’s air conditioning.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 24, 2018 12:51:18 GMT
www.wired.com/story/meet-the-amateur-scientist-who-discovered-climate-change/ampClimate change entered the modern public arena on June 23, 1988, when NASA researcher James E. Hansen testified before the US Senate about its potential effects. Colorado Senator Tim Wirth, an avid environmentalist and unusually cerebral politician, had learned about the Callendar Effect and wanted Hansen, a climate expert, to ring the bell and warn the nation. To bolster the narrative, Wirth deliberately scheduled the hearing for what historically was the summer’s hottest day and shut off the room’s air conditioning. I would have done that ... to make a point. I'm devious though.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 24, 2018 17:58:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 24, 2018 18:41:25 GMT
Yep, imagine if that happened today? The world would be coming to an end.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 24, 2018 23:17:12 GMT
Yep, imagine if that happened today? The world would be coming to an end. I thought it was .....
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Jan 25, 2018 17:20:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 25, 2018 19:56:23 GMT
I won't buy a carbon offset when I make my sandwich.
|
|