Giss at .77c for September!

ahem....Just in the area around Chicago alone there are temperature readings per town/city. Per city the high for a day is mostly always different. Middway airport is the hottest reading most days, Aurora is most often the coolest. So, aren't there people in these cities, and for those who are in Aurora feeling the same heat as those around Midway? Nope!! So your big arse term global ain't accurate at all. BTW, it is an average you're referring to, so there is a high number and there is a low number are those two tossed out for the report? Is that done in their dataset? Just exactly what is done? In laymens terms.

In layman's terms? The UHI is a known factor, and it is compensated for in temperature averages.

Also, rural stations show the same upwards temperature trend as urban stations, in the same amounts, hence we know the warming is not a UHI artifact.
no they don't. they just don't.


CRN says that the trend for the US is downward....when the adjustments routinely show an upward trend and a triple redundant network so meticulously placed that it requires no adjustment whatsoever says the trend is downward, which one are you going to believe?...If you are a warmer wacko, you will believe whatever supports your cult belief...if you are rational, you tend to go with the one that needs no adjustment.
 
View attachment 33065
Hmmm.........

Care to name whatever you are yowling about, Elektra, ol' fart?
Old Crock made claims that jobs for 100k were available in the steel industry then could not link to the company.

Further Old Crock disparaged my profession stating my profession has zero to do with the quality of steel.

I challenged old crock to prove his knowledge of steel by explaining what this graphic of my work has to do with high quality steel.



This would have been quite the snappy comeback if only your "graphic" had approached legibility. That you post a phone pic of the graphic tells me you don't have an electronic copy of the thing. I guess they don't trust you with the complicated stuff.

And, seems to me you're a business major. Just what WOULD your line of work have to do with the quality of steel??
It is a thumbnail you can open, once open you can see in the lissajou window I am calibrating the absolute channel, which is the 240 khz. On the strip charts you can see the P1 mix channel which eliminates the support signal, which can be seen in the channel 4 strip chart.

I am calibrating the system to analyze inconell 600. In the lissajou window you can see the phase difference between the 20%, 40%, 60%, as 80% threw wall signals manufactured into the calibration standard.

It is not a graphic I took a pic of, it's simply a pic of the computer screen I use to do work. I am on an old Unix system that is running proprietary software, the data is owned by the customer, so there is non-disclosure agreements and stuff.

yes, what does phase analysis, hysteresis, inductive reactance, and Faraday have to do with metal.

A business major? Hardly, this is science, after I analyze the data my results, my report will go to engineers and metallurgist.

Energy and steel go hand and gand, I am involved in both.





Don't they use that alloy in nuke reactors?
 
Steam generator tubes are inconel, as is some seawater piping. It's a very expensive and hard-to-work alloy, so it's only used where absolutely necessary.

It's also odd to refer to inconel as "steel", given how little iron is in the alloy.
 
In layman's terms? The UHI is a known factor, and it is compensated for in temperature averages.

Also, rural stations show the same upwards temperature trend as urban stations, in the same amounts, hence we know the warming is not a UHI artifact.

no they don't. they just don't.

As is usual, your denial of reality has no effect on reality. Here, I'll point you to a source. Which you could have looked up yourself easily enough. Don't keep counting on us to give free education to the lazy.

Quantifying the effect of urbanization on U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperature records - Hausfather - 2013 - Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres - Wiley Online Library
---
An assessment quantifying the impact of urbanization on temperature trends from the U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) is described. Stations were first classified as urban and nonurban (rural) using four different proxy measures of urbanity. Trends from the two station types were then compared using a pairing method that controls for differences in instrument type and via spatial gridding to account for the uneven distribution of stations. The comparisons reveal systematic differences between the raw (unadjusted) urban and rural temperature trends throughout the USHCN period of record according to all four urban classifications. According to these classifications, urbanization accounts for 14–21% of the rise in unadjusted minimum temperatures since 1895 and 6–9% since 1960. The USHCN version 2 homogenization process effectively removes this urban signal such that it becomes insignificant during the last 50–80 years. In contrast, prior to 1930, only about half of the urban signal is removed. Accordingly, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Institute for Space Studies urban-correction procedure has essentially no impact on USHCN version 2 trends since 1930, but effectively removes the residual urban-rural temperature trend differences for years before 1930 according to all four urban proxy classifications. Finally, an evaluation of the homogenization of USHCN temperature series using subsets of rural-only and urban-only reference series from the larger U.S. Cooperative Observer (Coop) Network suggests that the composition of Coop stations surrounding USHCN stations is sufficiently “rural” to limit the aliasing of urban heat island signals onto USHCN version 2 temperature trends during homogenization.
---
 
In layman's terms? The UHI is a known factor, and it is compensated for in temperature averages.

Also, rural stations show the same upwards temperature trend as urban stations, in the same amounts, hence we know the warming is not a UHI artifact.

no they don't. they just don't.

As is usual, your denial of reality has no effect on reality. Here, I'll point you to a source. Which you could have looked up yourself easily enough. Don't keep counting on us to give free education to the lazy.

Quantifying the effect of urbanization on U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperature records - Hausfather - 2013 - Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres - Wiley Online Library
---
An assessment quantifying the impact of urbanization on temperature trends from the U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) is described. Stations were first classified as urban and nonurban (rural) using four different proxy measures of urbanity. Trends from the two station types were then compared using a pairing method that controls for differences in instrument type and via spatial gridding to account for the uneven distribution of stations. The comparisons reveal systematic differences between the raw (unadjusted) urban and rural temperature trends throughout the USHCN period of record according to all four urban classifications. According to these classifications, urbanization accounts for 14–21% of the rise in unadjusted minimum temperatures since 1895 and 6–9% since 1960. The USHCN version 2 homogenization process effectively removes this urban signal such that it becomes insignificant during the last 50–80 years. In contrast, prior to 1930, only about half of the urban signal is removed. Accordingly, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Institute for Space Studies urban-correction procedure has essentially no impact on USHCN version 2 trends since 1930, but effectively removes the residual urban-rural temperature trend differences for years before 1930 according to all four urban proxy classifications. Finally, an evaluation of the homogenization of USHCN temperature series using subsets of rural-only and urban-only reference series from the larger U.S. Cooperative Observer (Coop) Network suggests that the composition of Coop stations surrounding USHCN stations is sufficiently “rural” to limit the aliasing of urban heat island signals onto USHCN version 2 temperature trends during homogenization.
---
I read that already, your point is what? adjusted readings are..... adjusted readings. It isn't raw temperatures.
 
In layman's terms? The UHI is a known factor, and it is compensated for in temperature averages.

Also, rural stations show the same upwards temperature trend as urban stations, in the same amounts, hence we know the warming is not a UHI artifact.

no they don't. they just don't.

As is usual, your denial of reality has no effect on reality. Here, I'll point you to a source. Which you could have looked up yourself easily enough. Don't keep counting on us to give free education to the lazy.

Quantifying the effect of urbanization on U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperature records - Hausfather - 2013 - Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres - Wiley Online Library
---
An assessment quantifying the impact of urbanization on temperature trends from the U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) is described. Stations were first classified as urban and nonurban (rural) using four different proxy measures of urbanity. Trends from the two station types were then compared using a pairing method that controls for differences in instrument type and via spatial gridding to account for the uneven distribution of stations. The comparisons reveal systematic differences between the raw (unadjusted) urban and rural temperature trends throughout the USHCN period of record according to all four urban classifications. According to these classifications, urbanization accounts for 14–21% of the rise in unadjusted minimum temperatures since 1895 and 6–9% since 1960. The USHCN version 2 homogenization process effectively removes this urban signal such that it becomes insignificant during the last 50–80 years. In contrast, prior to 1930, only about half of the urban signal is removed. Accordingly, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Institute for Space Studies urban-correction procedure has essentially no impact on USHCN version 2 trends since 1930, but effectively removes the residual urban-rural temperature trend differences for years before 1930 according to all four urban proxy classifications. Finally, an evaluation of the homogenization of USHCN temperature series using subsets of rural-only and urban-only reference series from the larger U.S. Cooperative Observer (Coop) Network suggests that the composition of Coop stations surrounding USHCN stations is sufficiently “rural” to limit the aliasing of urban heat island signals onto USHCN version 2 temperature trends during homogenization.
---
Homogenization is a fools errand. You loose the factual temps by rearranging temperature values in a model. By creating higher temps to accommodate the poorly sited stations in areas where there are no recording devices it gives a false increase every time.
 
Besides your ego, what does this conversation have to do with anything pertinent to this forum?
Well, idiot, this will be a surprise you can not link or Google, but, conversations do not always follow the OP, Conversations sometimes are dictated by our thought as inspired by the thread.

Intelligent people need not be told this, I point it out here not to educate crick, but to simply show that crick is a fool.
 
One can clearly see the human effect in this data.

Berkeley Earth

Human Effect

Many of the changes in land-surface temperature can be explained by a combination of volcanoes and a proxy for human greenhouse gas emissions. Solar variation does not seem to impact the temperature trend.


Temperature, CO2, and volcano data | More recent data | High-resolution image

Temperature, CO2, and volcano data | More recent data | High-resolution image
The annual and decadal land surface temperature from the BerkeleyEarth average, compared to a linear combination of volcanic sulfate emissions and the natural logarithm of CO2. It is observed that the large negative excursions in the early temperature records are likely to be explained by exceptional volcanic activity at this time. Similarly, the upward trend is likely to be an indication of anthropogenic changes. The grey area is the 95% confidence interval.

Click here to see the historic temperature record with named volcanos.

After accounting for volcanic and human effects, the residual variability in land-surface temperature is observed to closely mirror (and for slower changes slightly lead) variations in the Gulf Stream.
More meaningless bullshit old crock, old crock is wrong about his own job, and lied about a job opening in this thread.

Old Crock, when you lie in a thread, this thread, it simply shows all you green/renewable/agw people have are lies.

These agw green/renewable hacks lie so much, lying ends up being all they do.

Old crock, crock as in a crock of shit, literally.
 
Deniers, do you think rambling conspiracy theories are going to be convincing to anyone outside your cult?

I mean, as in convincing people you're correct, as opposed to convincing people you're part of a pack of conspiracy loons.

Did you hear that NPR has gutted its environmental section? Turns out that people, even liberals, tune out when the topic of conversation slides over to the human caused climate change lie....only the real crazies still believe and contrary to your belief, you are in a very very small minority...a minority so small that even NPR doesn't think you are worth broadcasting to any more. How does it feel when the bastion of liberal broadcasting says that you are barely even marginal.
 
You believe being bored by a topic - perhaps by the lack of any real controversy - is some indication of a change in belief? Hardly. That folks are bored is a good indication that, as has been said before now, the science is settled.

If it weren't - if there actually were some controversy there - people would tune in to hear the arguments. But their isn't any, so they don't.
 
I find it funny that he thinks Nice Polite Republicans (NPR) is "liberal media". That would be the network that was gung-ho for War in Iraq, and which refused to refer to waterboarding as "torture", being that the Bush administration didn't like the term.
 
Last edited:
I find it funny that he thinks Nice Polite Republicans (NPR) is "liberal media". That would be the network that was gung-ho for War in Iraq, and which refused to refer to waterboarding as "torture", being that the Bush administration didn't like the term.

Shows how far left you are if you think NPR isn't liberal....you are a true wacko and an abject liar when you claim to have ever been in the military...you are about as likely to have been in the military as Arlo Guthry.
 
Deniers, do you think rambling conspiracy theories are going to be convincing to anyone outside your cult?

I mean, as in convincing people you're correct, as opposed to convincing people you're part of a pack of conspiracy loons.
yeah I'm 95% confident that I can show anyone who is not related to your delusions the correct way to interpret what the warmers are saying. They are saying blah, blah, blah, because they cannot show one experiment that relates 120 PPM increase of CO2 to temperatures or climate. they can't, I know that. So liar, what else you want? hahahahahahahaahahha you're so LoSiNg :lmao:
 
A warm year for Great Britian

Met Office Could 2014 be the hottest year on record Western Daily Press

Forecasters have not ruled out that 2014 could be the hottest year on record, as long as November and December remain mild.

With just under two months of the year remaining the Met Office is unable to predict for certain what the next few weeks has in store for the UK but if there are not too many cold spells we could have experienced a record breaking year.

Despite it being so wet at the beginning of the year temperatures didn’t take their usual plummet in the winter months.

By the time the summer arrived the country basked in a prolonged heat wave during June and July pushing the average temperature up.

Here in the West the region had some very hot days. Somerset’s hottest temperature this year was 30.2C at Seavington, Hurcott Farm on July 26. In Gloucestershire the hottest temperature was 28.6C at Cirencester on July 26 and in Wiltshire the hottest was 28.9C at Larkhill on July 26. The hottest temperature was 28.3C in Bristol at Filton on July 24.

The heat has lasted until a few days ago when we had the warmest Halloween on record. Areas in Bristol recorded 23C on Friday.



Read more: Met Office Could 2014 be the hottest year on record Western Daily Press
Follow us: @WesternDaily on Twitter | WesternDaily on Facebook
 
Looks like it has been warm almost everywhere.

Global Analysis - September 2014 State of the Climate National Climatic Data Center NCDC

Global Highlights

  • The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for September 2014 was the highest on record for September, at 0.72°C (1.30°F) above the 20th century average of 15.0°C (59.0°F).
  • The global land surface temperature was 0.89°C (1.60°F) above the 20th century average of 12.0°C (53.6°F), the sixth highest for September on record. For the ocean, the September global sea surface temperature was 0.66°C (1.19°F) above the 20th century average of 16.2°C (61.1°F), the highest on record for September and also the highest on record for any month.
  • The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the January–September period (year-to-date) was 0.68°C (1.22°F) above the 20th century average of 14.1°C (57.5°F), tying with 1998 as the warmest such period on record.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top