Archive for februari, 2011

How the world temperature “record” was manipulated through HUGE smoothing radius

15 februari, 2011

As a continuation of my previous post How the world temperature “record” was manipulated through dropping of stations I will continue my expose of official ways to manipulate data. This time about the smoothing radius.

It sounds like a very boring technical detail, and it is, but it plays an important part in the official manipulation of the temperature record. Others have shown this before and done a very good job presenting it. But it is worth repeating because most people have no idea on what shaky grounds the temperature records are based.

I have written extensively on this blog about the tweaking, “adjustment” and manipulation of the historic and present temperature “record” which are presented in the official figures.

With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN 3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect, use huge smoothing radius, the historical “adjustment and tweaking” to cool the past etc.

Not to mention the great slaughter of GHCN stations around 1990 – roughly 63 % of all climate measuring stations were “dropped”. Oddly enough many of them in cold places – Hmmm? Now the number of GHCN stations are back at the same numbers as in 1890.

Also remember that the US stations are now nearly a third of the all GHCN world stations.

So what is a “smoothing radius”? And why is it so important?

A smoothing radius is: EVERYTHING within 1200 km in ALL directions from the weather station IS GIVEN THE SAME TEMPERATURE AS AT THE STATION!

Regardless of facts, geography and data.

Here is the official description: “Smoothing radius: Distance over which a station influences regional temperature.”

This is of course a VERY HANDY tool. First you drop most of the measuring stations. And the one you chose and keep are very strategically placed. Then you let the stations you ”kept” decide,  or as they so nicely put it “influence” the temperature within a radius of 1200 km.

Now you can influence and “control” the official world temperature “record”.

And remember –This dropping of stations was done on purpose. And what “happened” to the temperature after that – the temperature went up sharply.

Hmnnn??

Can there be a connection???

To recapitulate:

In 3 years, from 1989 to 1992, 5218 stations were purposely “dropped”.

From 1993 to 2000 1384 more stations were “dropped”. A total of 6602 stations.

And if we compare with 1970 with1992 8445 stations have been “dropped”.

If we compare 1970 with year 2000 9829 stations have been “dropped”.

And remember – Nearly ALL OF THESE STATIONS ARE STILL THERE AND GENERATING DATA.

This is the ”logic and science” behind the Global warming Hysteria.

So let’s look at the difference so you can understand why this “technicality” plays such a big role:

                           1200 km (745.7 miles) smoothing

                           250 km (155.3 miles) smoothing

Noticing any difference?

The difference is HUGE and VERY revealing.

See ALL these grey areas that “suddenly appears” in the 250 km one? These huge areas of the globe which are grey are the ones where they don’t have ANY DATA. (I.e. the data is there but they don’t use it since dropping of ALL these stations).

That is also why they always “officially” use the 1200 km smoothing in their graphics.

So that you wouldn’t know that Antarctica, Arctic, HUGE PARTS of Africa and Asia is NOT covered in “their measurements”.

Also notice, and this is VERY TYPICAL of them, that ALL these parts that ARE NOT COVERED ARE ALL VERY RED (i.e. very hot).

Do you think this is by coincidence?

And what does that says about the “science” behind this?

And also remember that a 250 km smoothing in it self is VERY large.

If you could use a 100 km smoothing you would see EVEN more parts of the world in grey – i.e. there is no data.

This is the ”logic and science” behind the Global warming Hysteria.

To show you how ABSURD a 1200 km (745.7 miles) smoothing is if used in ANY “scientific” way or shape or form, I am going to give you 3 examples.

Stockholm.

If the weather station is placed in Stockholm (Sweden) the temperature there would be given to Moscow, Amsterdam, Berlin, Warszawa, Kiev, Oslo, Helsinki and Prague etc.

You see how TOTALLY ABSURD THIS IS.

Paris.

If the weather station is placed in Paris (France) the temperature there would be given to London, Amsterdam, Berlin, Madrid, Rome, Dublin, Budapest and Prague etc.

You see how TOTALLY ABSURD THIS IS.

Denver.

If the weather station is placed in Denver(Colorado) the temperature there would be given to Las Vegas (NV), Phoenix (AR), over the border to Canada and Mexico, St Louis (IL), Minneapolis (MN) and Dallas (TX) etc.

You see how TOTALLY ABSURD THIS IS.

That’s why “officially” the high Bolivian Andes can have a “record warm” when the temperature is actually measured 1200 km away at the beaches in Peru. Or in the jungles of Brazil.

There has not been any thermometer data in GHCN since 1990 from Bolivia.

None. Nada. Zilch. Nothing. Empty Set.

So just how can it be so Hot Hot Hot! in Bolivia if there is NO data?

Easy. GIStemp “makes it up” from “nearby” thermometers up to 1200 km away.

The official excuse given is that the data acceptance window closes on one day of the month and Bolivia does not report until after that date. Oh, and they never ever would want to go back and add date into the past after a close date. Yet they are happy to fiddle with, adjust, modify, and wholesale change and delete old data as they change their adjustment methods…”

The same goes on in the Arctic.

And the Antarctic.

And over huge parts of Africa.

And over huge parts of Asia.

And over huge parts of Latin America.

And over the oceans which make up 70% of the surface of earth.

So to sum up the “science” behind the “Global Temperature Record”:

It doesn’t cover 70% of the surface, Antarctic, Arctic, huge parts of Africa, huge parts of Asia and huge parts of Latin America.

Besides that everything is just fine.

Another brilliant example of the trustworthiness of the Global Warming Hysteria.

And “their science”.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

Texas Cold’em

15 februari, 2011

(Sorry, I could not resist the pun).

As a complement to my previous post January U.S. Temperature – 9.74 F cooler than the warmest January I thought it would be interesting to look at large state, in this case Texas, the second largest state with an area of 695,621 km2 (268,580.82 sq mi).

Texas is bigger than France, Afghanistan, and Ukraine etc. And is double the size of Germany.

As I always point out:

And remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN 3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect, use huge smoothing radius, the historical “adjustment and tweaking” to cool the past etc.

Not to mention the great slaughter of GHCN stations 1990-1993 – roughly 63 % of all stations were “dropped”. Oddly enough many of them in cold places – Hmmm? Now the number of GHCN stations are back at the same numbers as in 1890.

Also remember that the US stations are now nearly a third of the all GHCN world stations.

Texas January temperature 1900-2011

This year, the January temperature is – 10.3 F cooler than 1923, the warmest January. And if we compare this year’s January with 1998 it is – 5.9 F cooler.

If we compare with1952 this year’s January is – 9.1 F cooler. And if we compare with 1911 is – 9.3 F cooler

This January is – 1.58 F degrees cooler than the average for 1900-2011.

And the “warming trend” 1900-2011 is exactly – 0.14 F degrees a decade.

And notice the dramatic drop from 2006 to 2007. A drop of – 10.1 F degrees.

That’s what I call RAPID WARMING and an eminent treat to humankind!

Texas recent 3 months (Nov-Jan) 1900-2011

This year, the Nov – Jan temperature is – 5 F cooler than 1923, the warmest Nov – Jan. And if we compare this year’s Nov – Jan with 1907 and 1934 it is – 3.7 F cooler.

If we compare with 2006 this year’s is – 2.7 F cooler. And if we compare with 2000 it is – 3 F cooler

This recent 3 months is nearly exactly as the average for 1900-2011.

And the “warming trend” 1900-2011 is exactly 0.06 F degrees a decade.

Texas recent 12 months (Feb-Jan) 1900-2011

This year, the Feb – Jan temperature is – 5 F cooler than 1923, the warmest Feb – Jan. And if we compare this year’s Feb – Jan with 1907 and 1934 it is – 3.7 F cooler.

If we compare with2006 this year’s January is – 2.7 F cooler. And if we compare with 2000 is – 3 F cooler

This recent 12months is – 0.09 F degrees cooler than the average for 1900-2011.

And the “warming trend” 1900-2011 is exactly 0.01 F degrees a decade.

Notice how the “warming” increases:

The January “warming trend” 1900-2011 is exactly 0.14 F degrees a decade.

The Nov – Jan “warming trend” 1900-2011 is exactly 0.06 F degrees a decade.

The Feb – Jan “warming trend” 1900-2011 is exactly 0.01 F degrees a decade.

That is truly “Global Warming” Texas style.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

January U.S. Temperature – 9.74 F cooler than the warmest January

14 februari, 2011

The official January temperature figures are out. And the cooling continues – Sorry this should of course be that the rapid warming continues in an accelerated pace.

And remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN 3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect, use huge smoothing radius, the historical “adjustment and tweaking” to cool the past etc.

Not to mention the great slaughter of GHCN stations 1990-1993 – roughly 63 % of all stations were “dropped”. Oddly enough many of them in cold places – Hmmm? Now the number of GHCN stations are back at the same numbers as in 1890.

Also remember that the US stations are now nearly a third of the all GHCN world stations.

For the 2010 figures see my post:

2010 U.S.Temperature is -1.32F Cooler than the Warmest Year

For the December figures see my post:

December Temperature Continental U.S. -5.45 F cooler than the warmest December

For the November figures see my post:

November Temperature – Continental U.S. and a Regional Analysis

For the May figures see my post:

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 366

For the April figures see my post:

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 365

For the March figures see my post:

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 357

For the February figures see my post:

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 347 

For the January figures see my post:

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 287

For the December figures see my post:

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 207

January2011 departure from normal temperature

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/cag3.html

It is always ”fascinating” to see the huge difference between the national level when you compare it to the regional picture. Especially if you see the bright red areas in the official “Departure from normal” January picture above.  Which covers the WHOLE western, and parts of central and eastern USA.

It looks very dramatic doesn’t it?

If you contrast that with the regional one, remember this is from the same people and the same “official data”; the difference is HUGE to say the least.

Ehhh?  Where did these huge red areas of North West, West North Central and Northeast go???

You would think that huge bright red spots on a national level would be EVEN more dramatic on a regional level.

But they ARE GONE –zip, nada, nothing.

We are REALLY FACING EXTINCTION ARE WE NOT?

And Northeast with a “warming trend” of exactly 0.03 F degrees a decade??

Whoa – Take cover!  Armageddon is here.

And this is nothing new, it happens time and again. See for example my post:

November Temperature – Continental U.S. and a Regional Analysis

This is the “stuff” that  “Global  Warming” is made of.

And as I said in the beginningalways remember that these figures are based on the official data that has been tweaked, “adjusted” and manipulated to fit there agenda (cool the past, ignore UHI and land use change factors, huge smoothing radius – 1200km etc.).

January temperature 1900-2011

“The average temperature in January 2011 was 30.0 F. This was -0.8 F cooler than the 1900-2000 (20th century) average, the 37th coolest January in 117 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit per decade. “

This year, the January temperature is – 9.74 F cooler than 2006, the warmest January. And if we compare this year’s January with 1998 it is – 5.67 F cooler.

If we compare with1953 this year’s January is – 7.23 F cooler. And if we compare with 1900 is – 4.91 F cooler

This January is – 1.05 F degrees cooler than the average for 1900-2011.

And notice the dramatic drop from 2006 to 2007. A drop of – 8.05 F degrees.

 That’s what I call RAPID WARMING and an eminent treat to humankind!

And take a look at this interesting graph:

US State High Temperature Record by Decade

66% of ALL State High Temperature Records are PRIOR to 1940.

Don’t you see the rapid warming there?

Another brilliant example of RAPID WARMING and an eminent treat to humankind!

(The graph is from a slide presentation given by David Archibald in Melbourne on February 5th. The PDF here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/12/david-archibald-on-climate-and-energy-security/)

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>


%d bloggare gillar detta: