Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Climate Etc.
Viewing all 147842 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2

0
0

I was looking at the Memme 2009 link. The chart has about 350 pm stations and 750 am stations and a little over 100 midnight stations. In fig. 2 he has about 1040 or so total stations, so are the zombies mid-night or mixed in with am/pm group :)


Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Steven Mosher

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by nottawa rafter

0
0

Mosher says no problem, they are just estimates. I take him at his word. Apparently in Climate World this interpretation is just part of their Standard Operating Procedures.

I hope this example comes up during the Congressional hearings. Having been involved in a lot of legislative hearings, I can assure you the reaction by Committee members and staff will be something like, “Say what?”

Mosher thinks it is scientifically defensible. I say, how will it play in Peoria?

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Nickels

0
0

Thx Mish, interesting.
Otherwise there would be an opportunity to start a company with reduced costs to beat out competitors.
And business hates a cost gradient!!

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Nickels

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Bill_W

0
0

Joshua, I said “MAY only make the pause longer”, not that it would definitely. Yes, if the error bars are smaller, it could work the other way and shorten the “not significant” trend. Perhaps, I should have said “may simply” instead of “may only” as that is closer to what I meant.

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by stefanthedenier

0
0

Zeke Hausfather, who is recording all the other variation in temp between the hottest and the coldest minute in 24h?! Aren’t the other 1338 minutes more important than the other only two minutes?! Did ever anybody told you that: there isn’t any uniformity in temp for the other minutes from day to day? That sandpit job in ”collecting data” is used to rob the pensioners and give the money to the Warmist Organized Crime (WOC) to which you belong…
When the truth is known – people will ask for money back, with modest interest! Think about then, when you go to bed; because I have already the real proofs of the scam. And that: the phony ”global” warming doesn’t exist.

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Steven Mosher

0
0

angech

Satellite data should not have a TOB bias?

Another rocket scientist. yes, when you work with satellite data one of the horrible things you have to account for is the actual time of day they pass over.. DUHHHHHHH.

Here is Spencer

“A NOAA polar orbiter is nominally “sun synchronous,” meaning whenever it observes a particular spot on the earth at nadir, the local time on the earth is constant from year to year, usually being referenced to the crossing time over the equator [i.e., local equatorial crossing time (LECT)]. In practice, however, all of the spacecraft experienced an east–west drift away from their initial LECT. The morning satellites (about 1930/0730 UTC; NOAA-6, -8, -10, -12) remained close to their original LECTs, but after a few years would drift westward to earlier LECTs, for example from 1930/0730 to 1900/070.3 The afternoon satellites (about 1400/0200 – TIROS-N, NOAA-7, -9, -11, and -14) were purposefully given a small nudge to force them to drift eastward to later LECTs to avoid backing into local solar noon. NOAA-11, for example, drifted from 1400/0200 to about 1800/0600 during six years, becoming essentially a morning satellite. Figure 3 displays the LECTs for the northbound (ascending) pass of each of the spacecraft during their operational service.4

As a satellite drifts through new LECTs, it consequently samples the emissions from the earth at changing local times, in effect allowing local diurnal cycle variations to appear in the time series as spurious trends. This is particularly true for the afternoon spacecraft since the temperature change is greater as the afternoon (northbound) pass drifts to new times than the nighttime (southbound) pass. Thus there is a net trend in the daily average of the measured temperature.

For T2, the net effect of the drift is to introduce small artificial changes. For example, over oceans, Tb tends to rise to a peak in late afternoon as the troposphere warms due to the combination of mechanisms affecting the vertical transport of heat, that is, convection which transports sensible and latent heat combined with direct solar heating of the atmosphere. However, over bare ground, Tb may decrease as the skin temperature, which contributes more to Tb over land than ocean, becomes cooler after local noon. Over vegetated regions, the effect on Tb of an eastward drift is a combination of tropospheric warming and surface cooling and is difficult to detect for a few hours of orbit drift in the daily average. Only in land regions such as the Sahara Desert do we see a systematic drop in Tb shortly after solar noon. Globally, these effects are very small for the inner views (i.e., T2) of the MSU. We find, however, that Tb of the outer view positions used in T2LT cool at a greater rate during the drift than the inner view positions. The net impact is to introduce an artificial warming trend almost everywhere in T2LT.”


Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by R Graf

0
0

Thanks! Another study just published by Nature using models to establish likelihood of hiatus continuing. They don’t mention if the models could be wrong but they give a 25% change of hiatus continuing for another 5 years. A twenty-one-year hiatus has less than 1% likelihood using the models starting in 1999. One would think it would call for reconsideration if models remain outside 95% bars for 5 more years.
Here’s the abstract: http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2531.html

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by omanuel

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Curious George

0
0

CaptDallas, thanks for posting a graph of a number of meta-records. Do you have anything to contribute for my question?

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Steven Mosher

0
0

“Zeke; One “large non-random systemic bias: a change from afternoon to morning observation times,..” I ask again, could you please quantify it? Has it been measured? Calculated? Guessed?”

Quantify IT?

Figure 1. Shows you the number of stations, when they observed
and how they changed.

Figure 2 shows you the amount of bias that is removed.

in 1986 a test was conducted using hourly data to predict the TOB bias for the US. Depending on the place and time you get different Bias’
The purpose was to create a prediction code that could correct for changes in TOB. that is covered in Karl 1986

The approach was tested again in 2006

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/about/2003rv20grl.pdf

Data for the analysis were extracted from the Surface
Airways Hourly database [Steurer and Bodosky, 2000]
archived at the National Climatic Data Center. The analysis
employed data from 1965 –2001 because the adjustment
approach itself was developed using data from 1957 –64.
The Surface Airways Hourly database contains data for 500
stations during the study period; the locations of these
stations are depicted in Figure 2. The period of record
varies from station to station, and no minimum record
length was required for inclusion in this analysis.

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Mark Silbert

0
0

Typical Mosher wise ass response.

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by John S.

0
0

If, in your mind, “Tmax+Tmin/ 2 is an estimator of the integrated temperature over the day,” then you don’t even get an F; you simply show that you never went to a proper school.

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Curious George

0
0

John, please suggest a better estimator for 1800-1950 time frame.


Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by GaryM

0
0

So it’s the Global Integrated Temperature?

Oh, that’s just so much better. Why didn’t you say so before? I now vote for decarbonizing the global energy economy.

Comment on Mitigating CO2 emissions: a busted flush? by barn E. Rubble

0
0

RE: “Angry Birds…”

Not so bright &/or perceptive either . . . these little guys (pictured) fly into my windows often and (unfortunately) many don’t recover . . . a solar panel field must be akin to a killing field for these optically challenged critters.

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Mi Cro

0
0

IMO you calculate rising and falling slope from daily min/max, you can also calculate the slope of the seasonal change as well.

Comment on Mitigating CO2 emissions: a busted flush? by ghl

0
0

I have never seen a government commission a professional report on climate change or alternative power.They are always choosing self-initiated external reports. The degree of commitment to AGW is a measure of a government’s corruption. They are not that stupid.

Comment on Understanding Time of Observation Bias by Mi Cro

0
0

I don’t believe they exist, or if they do the ability to correctly identify them programmatically. This is the same issue with all of the changes to the data, the ability to programmatically identify and correctly adjust the data and to be able to validate it. Getting it 99% right still means there over a million wrong.

Viewing all 147842 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images