Craig,
You don’t need any AMO indices and scaling for this. Just use a global temperature index, detrend it and subtract it from the original (not detrended) one. The result will be basically the same.
Comment on Global Temperature Trends After Detrending with the AMO by edimbukvarevic
↧
↧
Comment on Watts et al.: Temperature station siting matters by RichardLH
Indeed. Another assumption that needs investigating. Wind means that temperature moves in waves across any sensor. The Field in between multiple copies of those sensors is not a fixed one. Estimation of values in that Field must use some temporal calculation as well as spatial ones to be accurate.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by Peter Lang
Mike Flynn,
You ask “please define ‘geologic time’.
Well it depends. Here is Chapter 15 from the Geology of Ireland. It deals with “Cenozoic: Tertiary and Quaternary (until 11,700 years before 2000)”
Of particular interest is Figure 15:21. It shows rapid, abrupt climate changes from near glacial temperatures to near current temperatures in 7 years (14,600 years ago) and 9 years (11, 600 years ago). The figure caption says:
Figure 15.21 The stable isotope record (∂18O) from the GRIP ice core (histogram) compared to the record of N.pachyderma a
planktonic foraminiferan whose presence indicates cold sea temperatures) from ocean sediments (dotted line). High concentrations
of IRD from the Troll 8903 core are marked with arrows. After Haflidason et al. (1995). The transition times for critical
lengths of the core were calculated from the sediment accumulation rates by the authors and these gave the following results:
Transition A: 9 years; Transition B: 25 years; and Transition C: 7 years. Such rapid transitions have been corroborated from the
recent NGRIP ice core data.
It’s on p391. Do have a look.
Other figures and text nearby show that life loved warming and thrived during the warming periods.
Conclusion: Warming is good.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by Peter Lang
Conclusion: geologic time is anything from minutes, (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, land slides, tsunamis, deep sea turbidity slides, meteor impacts) to billions of years.
↧
Comment on Global Temperature Trends After Detrending with the AMO by vukcevic
further to my comment above:
One major error that is continuously perpetrated by numerous analyses of the climate data is based on the idea that the N. Atlantic surface temperature is somehow made of two independent components: linear uptrend and oscillating components.
They are inseparable consequence of the natural events occurring in the region. Two other data sets that demonstrate falsehood of the above separation are the tectonic records, and magnetic field variability in the area; neither of two could be caused by the minor changes in the temperature records and even less by changes in the miniscule concentration of CO2.
I do not suggest this be a ‘trick’ of the AMO’s well known ‘inventor’, but it came mightily handy to separate two, and ‘reinforce’ the CO2 role in the temperature rise. Many, be it the ‘grandies’ or the ‘minnows’ of the climate science have fallen for it.
Not that I expect the host of the blog, the author One major error that is continuously perpetrated by numerous analyses of the climate data is based on the idea that the N. Atlantic surface temperature is somehow made of two independent components: linear uptrend and oscillatory component.
They are inseparable consequence of the natural events occurring in the region. Two other data sets that demonstrate falsehood of the above separation are the tectonic records, and magnetic field variability in the area; neither of two could be caused by the minor changes in the temperature records and even less by changes in the miniscule concentration of CO2.
I do not suggest this be a ‘trick’ of the AMO’s well known ‘inventor’, but it came mightily handy to separate two, and ‘reinforce’ the CO2 role in the temperature rise. Many be it the ‘grandees’ or the ‘minnows’ of the climate science appear to have fallen for it.
Not that I expect the host of the blog, the author of the paper, one or two other distinguish commentators, or for that matter anyone else would agree.
↧
↧
Comment on Global Temperature Trends After Detrending with the AMO by vukcevic
Sorry, it appears I did a double ‘paste’ click
↧
Comment on Global Temperature Trends After Detrending with the AMO by stevepostrel
JIm D, he isn’t subtracting the forcing from the record. He isn’t assuming that forcing over time is constant (in fact, he shows that it isn’t in his graph [the red curve in figure 2]). .He’s subtracting the pre-defined AMO from the temperature data and showing that (temp – AMO) is closely correlated to this nonlinear forcing series.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by Mike Flynn
Peter Lang,
But, but . . .
Climatologists know everything, don’t they? Geologic time is . . is . . . , well, anything a climatologist wants it to be. If you say short, it’s long. If you say long, it’s short. Time is time, in my view.
A Warmist Wonderment, is what geologic time is.
I’m with you, warm good. Cold bad.
Cheers.
↧
Comment on Global Temperature Trends After Detrending with the AMO by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.3
craig loehle, “JimD – It is unclear how the AMO could have some forcing when the index sums to 0 over the whole period and shows no trend. You need to demonstrate what you claim rather than just repeating yourself.”
That would be a fun exercise for JimD. Each ocean basin takes a different amount of time to recover from a cooling or warming event and it looks like the North Atlantic has the fastest recovery and largest over shoot, sort of a weakly damped, coupled oscillation pattern. Each over shoot would have some feedback which could be confused with a “forcing”. Looks like plenty of job security if your job is to separate forcing from feedback.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review – science and technology edition by Mike Flynn
Leonard,
Thought I’d responded before. Oh well. Seems clever to me. Won’t bother trying to say what I thought I’d said before. Well, maybe a bit.
Vertical fins on booms allow oil to pile up. Suction more efficient. Use tug. Designed to pull. Sam Colt went bust a few times.
Good luck.
Cheers.
↧
Comment on Week in review – science and technology edition by Mike Flynn
How to make a small fortune.
Start with a large one one, and invest in solar.
Bloomberg –
“Hanergy Thin Film Power Group Ltd., the solar equipment maker that earlier this year briefly became the world’s most valuable clean energy company, is now worth almost $20 billion less than when trading was suspended in Hong Kong more than seven months ago.
Hanergy is currently worth about HK$9 billion ($1.16 billion), compared with a market value of HK$163 billion when the shares were halted on May 20 after falling almost 50 percent. At one point this year, Hanergy’s market value was bigger than those of Sony Corp. and Twitter Inc.”
$163 billion to $1.16 billion. Damned efficient at losing money, that’s for sure!
Cheers.
↧
Comment on Global Temperature Trends After Detrending with the AMO by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.3
Not really. The North Atlantic is a small percentage of “global” mean temperature. If you created a Global – AMO mean temperature then you could compare the two in order to estimate the impact of AMO on variability. Scaling AMO just estimates about the same thing. With interpolation you cannot really produce a Global – AMO product so you are kind of stuck with the less than desirable method. It would be better to create a totally new index, but you are stuck with convention.
↧
Comment on Watts et al.: Temperature station siting matters by evanmjones
Yes but that action doesn’t change a long term trend.
I think it does. A trend is often different depending on the characteristics of the ground alone. We see this in the different rates the different regions warm, regardless of siting, or even adjustment. It’s “baked in”. When you alter the effect by placement of cement, etc., you are affecting that equation.
↧
↧
Comment on Watts et al.: Temperature station siting matters by evanmjones
ASOS gives 24-hour readings, but only TMAX and Tmin are used for USHCN. The others are Max-Min only.
↧
Comment on Watts et al.: Temperature station siting matters by RichardLH
Yes I realise that. I was wondering if there are any detailed data sets that demonstrate the ‘heat sink’ problem you raise.
↧
Comment on Watts et al.: Temperature station siting matters by evanmjones
<i>The bottom line regarding the surface as a heat sink is it loses as much energy as it gains every day (seasonality excepted) so there is no change in a longer term trend.</i>
On a daily average? Quite possibly. (The heat sink lags the temps at, say 10AM.) <b>But we only record Tmax and Tmin.</b> So as far as the data goes, the other points are moot.
Note that in a cooling phase, the process reverses, returning to the original starting point. The only reason we are seeing an overall trend exaggeration during our study period is that we are looking at a real, genuine warming trend.
Deserts, for example, tend to warm faster during the day, cool faster at night.
↧
Comment on Watts et al.: Temperature station siting matters by RichardLH
Of course, a pendulum with a weight attached always follows the same path as one without. Duh!
↧
↧
Comment on Watts et al.: Temperature station siting matters by evanmjones
But even after the input from the sun tapers off the surface is still absorbing more energy than it is losing so it continues to get warmer for a few hours.
Right. And The process is reversed at night, but there is still extra energy in the denser sinks being emitted at Tmin.
The (very loose) closed car example demonstrates this. At 7AM when it is 50 degees, the car is maybe 5F warmer than the outside. By 12:00 is is 70F outside, and closer to 90F in the car. During the 7AM to 12PM “mini-warming phase”, the warming trend inside the car (55F – 90F) is near-double the trend outside the car (50F to 70F).
And, yes, the process reverses itself at night as it cools, producing an exaggerated cooling trend during that stretch.
↧
Comment on Global Temperature Trends After Detrending with the AMO by edimbukvarevic
Yes really. What’s the significant difference between AMO and global temperature
↧
Comment on Global Temperature Trends After Detrending with the AMO by edimbukvarevic
Sorry,
… and detrended global temperature indices?
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
