• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Perspectives on Temperature

Quaestio said:
You're wrong, because it's not necessary - if you actually read and understood how and why the adjustments are done and why anomalies are used, not absolute temperature. Like I said already, any adjustments made for urban heat island areas would necessarily include any effects from evapotranspiration. Perhaps you don't actually understand what evapotranspiration is or what it isn't. That's why I linked that paper for you- the paper that you apparently just skimmed for something you could use to prop up your confirmation bias.

And you still can't explain why you still don't know how to do a literature search yourself.
Click to expand...

When a hedgerow is removed from a position 100m away from a weather station it does not change the classification of that station. There is no adjustment of temperature values.

It does change the temperature now recoreded.
 
Quaestio said:
Oh sorry, longview likes pseudoscience conspiracy blogs too.
Click to expand...
Do you think they understand the basis of the diurnal and seasonal asymmetry?
Here is what Svante Arrhenius said in 1896 about Tyndail thoughts, in his opening paragraph.
http://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf
A great deal has been written on the influence of the absorption of the atmosphere upon the climate.
Tyndail in particular has pointed out the enormous importance of this question.
To him it was chiefly the diurnal and annual variations of the temperature that were
lessoned by the circumstance.
Click to expand...
Or Hansen a century later saying that the "damping" will not continue.
https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1995/1995_Hansen_ha09800r.pdf
The temperature changes, as we have shown, represent the combination of an overall warming and a damping
of the diurnal cycle. We can safely predict that on the long run the effect of the diurnal
damping on maximum temperatures will be small, for the following three reasons.
Click to expand...
 
[h=2]2018 6th Warmest Year Globally of Last 40[/h]December 20th, 2018Even before our December numbers are in, we can now say that 2018 will be the 6th warmest year in the UAH satellite measurements of global-average lower atmospheric temperatures, at +0.23 deg. C (+0.41 deg. F) above the thirty-year (1981-2010) average.
The following plot ranks all of the years from warmest to coolest, with the ten warmest and ten coolest years indicated:

The first (1979) and last (2018) years in the record are indicated in purple.
2018 is also the 40th year of satellite data for monitoring global atmospheric temperatures.
We are currently working on Version 6.1 of the dataset, which will have new diurnal drift corrections. Preliminary results suggest that the resulting linear warming trend over the 40 years (+0.13 C/decade) will not change substantially, and thus will remain considerably cooler than the average rate of warming across the IPCC climate models used for energy policy, CO2 emissions reductions, and the Paris Agreement.



 
Lord of Planar said:
It would seem to support what I have been saying about the loss of evaporation cooling.
Click to expand...

Because you un-sceptically swallow whatever a pseudoscience conspiracy blog claims if it agrees with your ideology.
 
Quaestio said:
Because you un-sceptically swallow whatever a pseudoscience conspiracy blog claims if it agrees with your ideology.
Click to expand...

You keep proving your arrogant ignorance to me. Other too, except for fellow AGW worshipers.

My conclusions are from my own research of peer reviewed papers and my knowledge of chemistry and physics. I do not read blogs except those posted here, and I really don't read them. I go to the linked source papers if any. If you believe your accusations of me, then you really are, both arrogant and ignorant.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You keep proving your arrogant ignorance to me. Other too, except for fellow AGW worshipers.

My conclusions are from my own research of peer reviewed papers and my knowledge of chemistry and physics. I do not read blogs except those posted here, and I really don't read them. I go to the linked source papers if any. If you believe your accusations of me, then you really are, both arrogant and ignorant.
Click to expand...

You just keep on proving your ignorant arrogance and self-delusion. You and a couple of other climate truthers on this anonymous political forum, are the only ones you're fooling. Why don't you post on science forums? Got laughed at?
 
Reconstructing a dataset of observed global temperatures 1950-2016 from human and natural influences

Posted on January 3, 2019 by curryja | 25 comments
by Frank Bosse
A demonstration that multidecadal variation since 1950 leads to overestimation of the Transient Climate Response (TCR).
Continue reading →

Conclusions
The annual GMST 1950-2016 are a composition of:

  • Anthropogenic forcing with the sensitivity TCR=1.27 °C (best estimate, calculated with the result of Eq. (1) multiplied by 3.8 W/m² for the doubling of CO2) for the C&W product, consistent with the findings of Lewis&Curry
  • Solar- , volcano forcing and ENSO- influence. The calculation follows here the cited “Tamino” post with thanks to Grant Foster for releasing the “filter”.
  • Some (multi) decadal internal variability with the amplitude of about 0.25°C (see fig.2) which can be well modeled by scaling the SST difference between the areas mentioned.
  • Weather noise (6%).
The (multi) decadal variability mentioned in (3) will lead to estimates of TCR based on trends over periods starting after 1950, particularly trends during the satellite period (post 1978), being biased upwards.

 

How to NOT find a slowdown

Sheldon Walker – (agree-to-disagree.com) The slowdown/pause/hiatus, would probably be only a dim memory, if Alarmists didn’t keep digging up the imaginary corpse, in order to show that it really is dead. The website called “The Conversation”, recently featured an article called “Global warming ‘hiatus’ is the climate change myth that refuses to die”, by Stephan…
Continue reading →

[FONT=&quot]– The strongest slowdown (the one with the lowest warming rate), went from 2002 to 2012. It had a warming rate of +0.14 degrees Celsius per century. Because it went from 2002 to 2012, it had nothing to do with the 1998 super El Nino.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]– The average warming rate from 1970 to 2018, is about +1.8 degrees Celsius per century. So the slowdown from 2002 to 2012, had a warming rate that was less than 8% of the average warming rate.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]– If the average warming rate was a car travelling at 100 km/h, then the slowdown was a car that was travelling at less the 8 km/h. Doesn’t that sound like a slowdown?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]– The strongest slowdown WHICH INCLUDED THE YEAR 1998 (the one with the lowest warming rate), went from 1998 to 2013. It had a warming rate of +0.96 degrees Celsius per century.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][this is the slowdown interval that Lewandowsky and Cowtan used][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]– So the false Alarmist slowdown (1998 to 2013), had a warming rate which was 6.9 times greater than the warming rate of the real slowdown (2002 to 2012).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]-If the real slowdown (2002 to 2012) was a car that was traveling at 100 km/h, then the false Alarmist slowdown (1998 to 2013), would be a car that was traveling at 690 km/h.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Perhaps this is one of the reasons why Alarmists don’t believe that there was a slowdown. They are not even looking at the real slowdown.[/FONT]

 
Quaestio said:
You just keep on proving your ignorant arrogance and self-delusion. You and a couple of other climate truthers on this anonymous political forum, are the only ones you're fooling. Why don't you post on science forums? Got laughed at?
Click to expand...

We, who ask difficult questions, get laughed at here. Very seldom answered.
 

Hansen’s 1988 Predictions Redux

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach Over in the Tweeterverse, someone sent me the link to the revered climate scientist James Hansen’s 1988 Senate testimony and told me “Here’s what we were told 30 years ago by NASA scientist James Hansen. It has proven accurate.” I thought … huh? Can that be right? Here is a…
Continue reading →

[FONT=&quot]
hansen-observations-scenario-a-loti-hadcrut.png
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Figure 4. The line marked “Observations” in Hansen’s graph shown as Figure 1 above, along with his Scenario A, and modern temperature estimates. All observational data is expressed as anomalies about the 1951-1980 mean temperature.[/FONT]​


 
 
[FONT=&quot]Land Surface Air Temperature Data[/FONT]
[h=1]A condensed version of a paper entitled: “Violating Nyquist: Another Source of Significant Error in the Instrumental Temperature Record”.[/h][FONT=&quot]By William Ward, 1/01/2019 The 4,900-word paper can be downloaded here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-cont...yquist-Instrumental-Record-20190112-1Full.pdf The 169-year long instrumental temperature record is built upon 2 measurements taken daily at each monitoring station, specifically the maximum temperature (Tmax) and the minimum temperature (Tmin). These daily readings are then averaged to calculate the daily mean temperature as Tmean = (Tmax+Tmin)/2. Tmax…
[/FONT]
 
[h=1]Historical Perspectives on Climate – The Super El Nino of 1876-78[/h]Posted on 06 Feb 19 by JAIME JESSOP • 2 Comments
In March 2016, a climate emergency was declared by Stefan Rahmstorf. Gavin Schmidt also tweeted: Normally I don't comment on individual months (too much weather, not enough climate), but last month was special.https://t.co/nALWMlNDcP — Gavin Schmidt (@ClimateOfGavin) March 12, 2016 The ’emergency’ related to the NASA GISS Feb temperature anomaly of 1.35C above 1951-80 … Continue reading →
 
Japan Winter Temperatures, Typhoons Both Defy Alarmist Predictions As 30-Year Trends Go The Other Way

By P Gosselin on 6. February 2019
By Kirye

Since the global warming scare started some 30 years ago, Japan’s winters in fact have have not been warming – but rather many areas show the opposite is happening: cooling.
January in Japan no warming in over 30 years

For Japan as a whole, the entire country has not seen any rise in January mean temperature over the past 30 years, according to data from the Japanese Meteorology Agency (JMA):

As the chart above shows, if anything, Japan mean January temperature has been falling a bit, thus contrdicting the warming claims of climate alarmists. . . .
 
[h=1]Met Office try to hide forecast fail[/h]Posted on 06 Feb 19 by PAUL MATTHEWS • 20 Comments
The Met Office have today issued their latest piece of warmest propaganda, Forecast suggests Earth’s warmest period on record. It includes this graph, showing observations (black), forecast (blue) and previous forecasts (red). The climate scientists quoted seem to be in denial of the recent cooling shown in their own graph, claiming that the Earth’s average global … Conti
 
Japan’s Northern Island Of Hokkaido Shock-Freezes…”Coldest Air Mass Ever Recorded”!

By P Gosselin on 10. February 2019


Records cold temperatures, transportation disrupted, fire extinguishers freeze as “coldest air mass ever” sweeps over Japanese northern island of Hokkaido.

By Kirye
As the Asahi Shinbum here reports, Japan’s northernmost main island of Hokkaido has been gripped by a deep freeze with the temperature plunging to -31.8°C in Rikubetsu on February 9.

Chart: Japan Meteorology Agency (JMA)​
Three other observation stations in Hokkaido “also reported temperatures below minus 30 degrees,” the Japanese online daily reports. . . .
 
[FONT=&quot]Temperature / Uncertainty[/FONT]
[h=1]SIGNAL CONVOLUTION, MIDPOINT OF RANGE, AND ALL THAT[/h][FONT=&quot]KEVIN KILTY Introduction A guest blogger recently1 made an analysis of the twice per day sampling of maximum and minimum temperature and its relationship to Nyquist rate, in an attempt to refute some common thinking. This blogger concluded the following: (1) Fussing about regular samples of a few per day is theoretical only. Max/Min temperature…
[/FONT]
 
Jack Hays said:
[FONT="][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/15/signal-convolution-midpoint-of-range-and-all-that/"]
equation1-220x126.jpg
[/URL]Temperature / Uncertainty[/FONT]
[h=1]SIGNAL CONVOLUTION, MIDPOINT OF RANGE, AND ALL THAT[/h][FONT="]KEVIN KILTY Introduction A guest blogger recently1 made an analysis of the twice per day sampling of maximum and minimum temperature and its relationship to Nyquist rate, in an attempt to refute some common thinking. This blogger concluded the following: (1) Fussing about regular samples of a few per day is theoretical only. Max/Min temperature…
[/FONT]
Click to expand...
What is strange is that the GISS may not know how the data it receives was collected.
Data.GISS: GISTEMP — The Elusive Absolute Surface Air Temperature
Q. What do we mean by daily mean SAT?
A. Again, there is no universally accepted correct answer. Should we note the temperature every 6 hours and report the mean,
should we do it every 2 hours, hourly, have a machine record it every second, or simply take the average of the highest and
lowest temperature of the day? On some days the various methods may lead to drastically different results.
Click to expand...
I looked at about 5 different cities a few years ago, and calculated the difference between the High Low average, and the
average every 6 hours, every 4 hours and every hour.
I think that most places the high/low average was higher then the higher sampling,
the only exception was places with very low humidity, where the high/low was sometimes lower than the more frequent sampling.
 
[FONT=&quot]measurement[/FONT]
[h=1]In Search of the Standard Day[/h][FONT=&quot]By Dr Fabio Capezzuoli Recent posts and discussions on WUWT regarding air temperature sampling frequencies and their influence on the daily average – propagating to monthly and yearly trends – demonstrated that the classic sampling method of Tmax and Tmin is not adequate to correctly represent daily averages (Tav); to produce a representative value at least…
[/FONT]
 
[h=2]History keeps getting colder — ACORN2 raises Australia’s warming rate by over 20%[/h]
[h=4]More warming adjustments from ACORN2[/h]Once again we find that the oldest thermometers were apparently reading artificially high even though many were newish in 1910 and placed in approved Stevenson screens.) This is also despite the additional urban warming effect of a population that grew 400% since then. What are the odds?!
Fortunately, gifted craftsmen, sorry scientists have uncovered the true readings from the old biased thermometers which they explain carefully in a 67 page impenetrable document.
Chris Gillham has soldiered through the new “ACORN 2″ adjustments that the Australian Bureau of Meteorology has o-so-quietly released and Australians are just waking up to find that our coldest mornings back in 1910 were even colder than anyone realized at the time. Graham Lloyd is reporting in The Australian how the second rewrite in six years increases the warming by 23% . (Where was the ABC announcement?)
The ACORN series of the Bureau of Meteorology includes 112 stations. Their report lists the warming trends per decade in Table 9. I converted that into the total warming since 1910 and graphed that below.
[h=3]About one third of the warming of our mean temperature is due to man-made adjustments[/h]Comparing AWAP (semi-raw) to the latest ACORN2, the mean temp is up from 0.08C up to 0.123C per decade. That’s a 50% increase.
To slow Australia’s warming it’d be much cheaper to replace the BOM rather than our electricity grid. Just a thought.
The Australian BOM uses 112 Stations for the ACORN series. These are the full adjustments to the min, mean and max across all stations for the full range of 1910 – 2016.
​
As Chris points out AWAP is not exactly raw — but it is at least the unhomogenised Australian Water Availability Project dataset. . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom