| Submit your comments on this article | |
| -Signs, Portents, and the Weather- | |
| Oddity in NHemisphere daily temps | |
| 2017-01-11 | |
| By lord garth [TheGWPF] Dr. Maue emphasizes a sharp hemisphere temperature drop in a 3 day period but it seems to me there is a cyclical slow rise and sharp fall. Also, it may be confined to the lowest level of the atmosphere and based on satellite measurements. Does anyone in Rantburgland understand this?
| |
| Posted by:lord garth |
| #12 The observation that requires a hypothesis is the cyclic nature of the 5-8 day temperature rise followed by the 3 day temperature drop. That would seem to imply a cycle of relatively slower air mass mixing followed by a relatively faster radiational cooling but how there could be enough measuring sites on the same cycle seems impossible. It's the transit time of the mid-latitude high pressure systems. Ref my comment on sampling bias. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2017-01-11 18:45 |
| #11 typically observations, i.e., of the temperature as measured by thermometers, is about 2 m above the surface (actually a lot of them are about 1.5m above - which is more convenient for maintenance) at the actual surface, the temp depends a lot on the nature of the material surface, e.g., how long ago the grass was mowed) - this is a problem even at 2m but its not as severe many of the numerical models also have a computation field that predicts temperatures at 2m |
| Posted by: lord garth 2017-01-11 11:46 |
| #10 What does "two meter data" mean? |
| Posted by: KBK 2017-01-11 11:00 |
| #9 lord garth, while ascribing to malice is not always the right choice, I think with regards to all things climatological it's the way to bet in lieu of a whole lot of other evidence. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2017-01-11 10:50 |
| #8 I'm not assuming the absolute accuracy of the measurements. They have obvious systemic issues. However, those issues are essentially the same each day. Each site has the same problems of local heat source contamination, drift between calibration, etc. The observation that requires a hypothesis is the cyclic nature of the 5-8 day temperature rise followed by the 3 day temperature drop. That would seem to imply a cycle of relatively slower air mass mixing followed by a relatively faster radiational cooling but how there could be enough measuring sites on the same cycle seems impossible. |
| Posted by: lord garth 2017-01-11 08:13 |
| #7 Lies, damn lies and statistics. Anything that relies on modelling of this kind is so susceptible to data fudging any conclusions are worthless without 100% data and algorithm auditing. GIGO has always been a problem but the people loading that garbage in has been the most likely source. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2017-01-11 07:41 |
| #6 Must be all the hot plasma in the atmosphere from HAARP and plasma balls they have been chasing since World War 2 and the advent of radar! They have been working with it like the Russians for over 6 decades! |
| Posted by: Crinegum Ulaigum2776 2017-01-11 07:27 |
| #5 I want to put 5$ on "botched measurements". |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2017-01-11 04:12 |
| #4 Sun has calmed down recently. Domino affect. |
| Posted by: Blinky Shath3592 2017-01-11 01:25 |
| #3 The shortness of the sample doesn't matter. If surface temperatures were a valid measure of the climate, then clearly the climate has abruptly cooled. However, they are not a valid measure with numerous issues. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2017-01-11 01:17 |
| #2 Uhmm, did anyone see the trend line 1981-2010? Kinda a short sample Rantburgers. Go away! |
| Posted by: jvalentour 2017-01-11 00:44 |
| #1 2 meter data, which would be surface measurements not satellite. I'd say it's mostly the sampling bias of surface stations that are over-whelmingly in mid to highish (populated) latitudes, which have been cold recently. No stations on the oceans, including the Arctic and few in the low latitude desert/arid regions. Although it will be interesting to see the albedo effect of the extensive snow cover currently. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2017-01-11 00:25 |