Raw Climate Data - a challenge

[daveman]

Explain that one. What makes Phil Jones an expert in technology? What specific classes in his Hydrology and Environmental Sciences degrees qualify him to write software?

Didn't you know?

He's a liberal. That means he's an expert in EVERYTHING.

 

[asterism]

And for those not into conspiracy theories ...

The WMO (World Meteorlogical Org) around 1957 established a communication protocol for worldwide sharing of weather data. There are World Data Centers that collate the data in several locations. One is in the USA (Asheville, NC), with counterparts elsewhere in the world.

Using WDC Asheville as the example, they receive the data from around the world. When almost all of it comes in, it gets autoprocessed down into a more digestible lump. Which can be downloaded here.

NOAA: WMO Resolution 40

If you actually want raw station data, WDC Asheville will send it to you, but it's not a website download. You have to request specifically what you want, and pay them for the additional processing and handling.

Some weather station data is declared as proprietary by the country of origin. If someone has gotten it from WDC Asheville, they are not allowed to redistribute it by publicly posting it on the internet. Hence why you don't find worldwide raw station data on the internet.

And if that's the vast conspiracy, it's been going on since 1957 or so. Crafty, how those warmers planned ahead like that.

I'll take a look.

I'm not calling this a conspiracy, it's incompetence. When it comes to data, these folks were amateurs.

 

[asterism]

There is no data, turd, so what is there to discuss?

I'd like to discuss how the kooks are melting down so hilariously after yet another of their retard conspiracy theories has bitten the dust.

If you had a pair, you'd go after the people who lied to you. But you don't, so you'll attack the messenger, and then run back to your masters to beg for more lies. I'd tell you to enjoy life on your knees, if it wasn't already so clear how much you do.

Anyways, kooks, don't be discouraged. You've bounced back from worse beatings than this. Haven't you? Maybe not. Whatever. Just buck up, crack another 40 open, guzzle, and think up a new conspiracy. Try to make this one a little less retarded.

Go back and read the thread and this one.

The meltdown is happening by those who claim to have already posted links to the raw data.

So now you're saying that it's not available online? That's a new twist. You might want to educate the others that have said otherwise, those who claim I'm just too stupid to see that there is actual raw data.

 

[asterism]

Here's your daily data, hotshot.

The United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) Main Page

Did you even look for it?

How do you define comprehensive? Was there some particular, DIFFERENT data format you were expecting to see? Date and temperature below in red.

Here's your daily data, hotshot.

The United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) Main Page

Did you even look for it?

Yes I did.

Show me where they provide comprehensive (even if it's incomplete) data for temperature readings.

None are there.

USHCN daily data are available as ASCII files.
The format of each record in an ASCII data file, be it a state-level
file (e.g., state01_AL.txt) or the file for the entire U.S. (us.txt)
is as follows. (Each record in a file contains one month of daily data.)

Variable Columns Type
COOP ID 1-6 Character
YEAR 7-10 Integer
MONTH 11-12 Integer
ELEMENT 13-16 Character
VALUE1 17-21 Integer
MFLAG1 22 Character
QFLAG1 23 Character
SFLAG1 24 Character
VALUE2 25-29 Integer
MFLAG2 30 Character
QFLAG2 31 Character
SFLAG2 32 Character
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
VALUE31 257-261 Integer
MFLAG31 262 Character
QFLAG31 263 Character
SFLAG31 264 Character

These variables have the following definitions:

COOP ID is the U.S. Cooperative Observer Network station identification
code. Note that the first two digits in the Coop Id correspond to the state.

YEAR is the year of the record.

MONTH is the month of the record.

ELEMENT is the element type. There are five possible values:
PRCP = precipitation (hundredths of inches)
SNOW = snowfall (tenths of inches)
SNWD = snow depth (inches)
TMAX = maximum temperature (degrees F)
TMIN = minimum temperature (degrees F)

VALUE1 is the value on the first day of the month (missing = -9999).

MFLAG1 is the measurement flag for the first day of the month. There are
ten possible values:

Blank = no measurement information applicable
B = precipitation total formed from two 12-hour totals
D = precipitation total formed from four six-hour totals
H = represents highest or lowest hourly temperature
K = converted from knots
L = temperature appears to be lagged with respect to reported
hour of observation
O = converted from oktas
P = identified as "missing presumed zero" in DSI 3200 and 3206
T = trace of precipitation, snowfall, or snow depth
W = converted from 16-point WBAN code (for wind direction)

QFLAG1 is the quality flag for the first day of the month. There are
fourteen possible values:

Blank = did not fail any quality assurance check
D = failed duplicate check
G = failed gap check
I = failed internal consistency check
K = failed streak/frequent-value check
L = failed check on length of multiday period
M = failed megaconsistency check
N = failed naught check
O = failed climatological outlier check
R = failed lagged range check
S = failed spatial consistency check
T = failed temporal consistency check
W = temperature too warm for snow
X = failed bounds check
Z = flagged as a result of an official Datzilla
investigation

SFLAG1 is the source flag for the first day of the month. There are
nineteen possible values (including blank, upper and
lower case letters):

Blank = No source (i.e., data value missing)
0 = U.S. Cooperative Summary of the Day (NCDC DSI-3200)
6 = CDMP Cooperative Summary of the Day (NCDC DSI-3206)
7 = U.S. Cooperative Summary of the Day -- Transmitted
via WxCoder3 (NCDC DSI-3207)
A = U.S. Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS)
real-time data (since January 1, 2006)
B = U.S. ASOS data for October 2000-December 2005 (NCDC
DSI-3211)
F = U.S. Fort data
G = Official Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) or
other government-supplied data
H = High Plains Regional Climate Center real-time data
K = U.S. Cooperative Summary of the Day data digitized from
paper observer forms (from 2011 to present)
M = Monthly METAR Extract (additional ASOS data)
N = Community Collaborative Rain, Hail,and Snow (CoCoRaHS)
R = NCDC Reference Network Database (Climate Reference Network
and Historical Climatology Network-Modernized)
S = Global Summary of the Day (NCDC DSI-9618)
NOTE: "S" values are derived from hourly synoptic reports
exchanged on the Global Telecommunications System (GTS).
Daily values derived in this fashion may differ
significantly
from "true" daily data, particularly for precipitation
(i.e., use with caution).
T = SNOwpack TELemtry (SNOTEL) data obtained from the Western
Regional Climate Center
U = Remote Automatic Weather Station (RAWS) data obtained
from the Western Regional Climate Center
W = WBAN/ASOS Summary of the Day from NCDC's Integrated
Surface Data (ISD).
X = U.S. First-Order Summary of the Day (NCDC DSI-3210)
Z = Datzilla official additions or replacements

When data are available for the same time from more than one
source,
the highest priority source is chosen according to the following
priority order (from highest to lowest):
Z,R,0,6,X,W,K,7,F,B,M,r,E,z,u,b,a,G,Q,I,A,N,H,S

VALUE2 is the value on the second day of the month

MFLAG2 is the measurement flag for the second day of the month.

QFLAG2 is the quality flag for the second day of the month.

SFLAG2 is the source flag for the second day of the month.

... and so on through the 31st day of the month. Note: If the month has less
than 31 days, then the remaining variables are set to missing (e.g., for
April, VALUE31 = -9999, MFLAG31 = blank, QFLAG31 = blank, SFLAG31 = blank).

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/ushcn_daily/data_format.txt

So, data is not destroyed and is available for examination.

What are the chances that all will remember that point?

What are the chances you'll remember that you think you found raw data and have been proven wrong?

 

[mamooth]

What specific classes in his Hydrology and Environmental Sciences degrees qualify him to write software?

Having a computer with a compiler qualifies him to write software.

Believe it or not, it _is_ possible to write software without first having a team create a thousand-page requirements document.

 

[mamooth]

Asterism, now that you were shown to be wrong, when do you plan to apologize for slurring ethical scientists? You claimed data was hidden or destroyed, an unsupported conspiracy on your part. Most likely unintentional on your part, as you were bamboozled by the denialist cult, but you're still responsible for your words. Are you going to come clean, or double down?

Remember, if you do come clean, you're kicked out of the gang. That's a lot of pressure on you. It's like that scene in Goodfellas where young Henry Hill gets nabbed by the cops, but says nothing, and all the mobsters congratulate him. Getting caught spouting crap and doubling down on it is like a rite of passage to the denialists, and it will definitely increase your standing in the cult.

 

[daveman]

What specific classes in his Hydrology and Environmental Sciences degrees qualify him to write software?

Having a computer with a compiler qualifies him to write software.

Believe it or not, it _is_ possible to write software without first having a team create a thousand-page requirements document.

Computer: A good gaming system will be nice and fast, and run a compiler quickly. Call it a thousand dollars.

Compiler: Free download.

So anyone with a thousand bucks can write software.

Pffft. And people waste all that time going to college to learn to write code.

Really? I'd give you a moment to realize the ridiculousness of your claim, but an eternity wouldn't be sufficient.

Now project your own failings on me! Quickly, now! You're on the clock!

 

[asterism]

What specific classes in his Hydrology and Environmental Sciences degrees qualify him to write software?

Having a computer with a compiler qualifies him to write software.

Believe it or not, it _is_ possible to write software without first having a team create a thousand-page requirements document.

True on the second point, and I reject the premise that all good software has been written that way. That's why I referenced Facebook (written by one person).

However if one is not properly skilled or educated, errors can occur. Losing data, compounding rounding errors, injecting statistical biases, etc.

Check out the errors in this file, part of a climatology suite of programs:

FOIA HARRY_READ_ME.txt


But go ahead and claim that anyone with a computer is qualified to write software, but it takes a degree in Hydrology to know how to manage temperature data.

 

[daveman]

If the AGW cult were interested in accuracy (and obviously, they're not), they'd have had statisticians write their models.

But then, statisticians would have seen the fudge factors the cultists insisting on building in.

 

[asterism]

Asterism, now that you were shown to be wrong, when do you plan to apologize for slurring ethical scientists? You claimed data was hidden or destroyed, an unsupported conspiracy on your part. Most likely unintentional on your part, as you were bamboozled by the denialist cult, but you're still responsible for your words. Are you going to come clean, or double down?

If the data is there, I'll admit my error. So far I haven't seen it, despite numerous claims that it's in a few places. Yours is the most recent claim, and I'll see if the data is indeed there.

You do see that others have given sources claiming that the raw data is in their links but it's not there right?

Remember, if you do come clean, you're kicked out of the gang. That's a lot of pressure on you. It's like that scene in Goodfellas where young Henry Hill gets nabbed by the cops, but says nothing, and all the mobsters congratulate him. Getting caught spouting crap and doubling down on it is like a rite of passage to the denialists, and it will definitely increase your standing in the cult.

Total bullshit.

That might be how things work on your side of the aisle, but I've never been "kicked out" of anything and certainly not for holding a dissenting view.

 

[mamooth]

So Dave is now claiming someone can't write a fortran program without a full computer science degree.

There's no need to comment on it more. He really is that detached from reality.

 

[mamooth]

If the AGW cult were interested in accuracy (and obviously, they're not), they'd have had statisticians write their models.

Can you settle on a single idiot conspiracy theory? Those goalposts are flying back and forth way too fast for anyone to keep track of.

But then, statisticians would have seen the fudge factors the cultists insisting on building in.

But there are no fudge factors. That's just one of your cult lies. Which you fell for, hard.

By the way Dave, are you one of the Soviet wannabees who want Dr. Mann sent to a political gulag, or do you disagree with your cult on that point? I just ask because I haven't yet found a denialist who doesn't want jail sentences for scientists who disagree with TheParty. It's funny. There isn't anyone in the reason-based community calling for denialist scientists to be jailed, yet nearly every denialist wants AGW scientists to be jailed. One side, the denialists, is very Soviet in their actions, while the reason-based community supports academic freedom.

 

[daveman]

So Dave is now claiming someone can't write a fortran program without a full computer science degree.

There's no need to comment on it more. He really is that detached from reality.

I never mentioned anything about a full computer science degree -- but honesty is not one of your strengths.

You claimed all a person needs is a computer and a compiler. You never mentioned anything about any training at all.

I showed you how silly that idea is. That's why you're mindlessly lashing out.

You do that a lot.

 

[daveman]

If the AGW cult were interested in accuracy (and obviously, they're not), they'd have had statisticians write their models.

Can you settle on a single idiot conspiracy theory? Those goalposts are flying back and forth way too fast for anyone to keep track of.

Normal people have no problem keeping up with this stuff.

But I can see why it would be a challenge for you.

But then, statisticians would have seen the fudge factors the cultists insisting on building in.

But there are no fudge factors. That's just one of your cult lies. Which you fell for, hard.

Good strategy: Hit bottom, dig.

Climategate Code Reveals East Anglia?s ?Fudge Factor? | RedState

Predictably, you will lie about this article, or pretend it doesn't exist, or do anything but acknowledge its truthfulness.

By the way Dave, are you one of the Soviet wannabees who want Dr. Mann sent to a political gulag, or do you disagree with your cult on that point? I just ask because I haven't yet found a denialist who doesn't want jail sentences for scientists who disagree with TheParty.

Odd -- a Google search shows only one guy calling for AGW scientists to be jailed for fraud.

So it looks like yet again, you're wrong. Aren't you tired of being wrong?

Apparently not.

It's funny. There isn't anyone in the reason-based community calling for denialist scientists to be jailed, yet nearly every denialist wants AGW scientists to be jailed. One side, the denialists, is very Soviet in their actions, while the reason-based community supports academic freedom.

If only that were true. Sadly, reality says you're full of crap:

?Execute? Skeptics! Shock Call To Action: ?At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers? ? ?Shouldn?t we start punishing them now?? | Climate Depot

Green Environmentalist Wants Eco-Gulags For Climate Change Deniers | Tory Aardvark

Columnist says that global warming skeptics 'should have their houses burnt down' | Mail Online

Jail politicians who ignore climate science: Suzuki

I have a question:

Why do you lie all the time?

 

[mamooth]

Good strategy: Hit bottom, dig.

That snippet is from some test code, never used with the actual data. It's just a sanity check on the algorithm.

You didn't know that, of course, since your cult didn't tell you. Follows the pattern of you knowing nothing on every topic. All you can do is cut-and-paste links that you don't understand, being you're so ignorant of all the issues involved.

Predictably, you will lie about this article, or pretend it doesn't exist, or do anything but acknowledge its truthfulness.

I notice you've started pre-emptively crying about the beatdowns you know you're going to get. Interesting strategy. Still leaves you on the hook to explain why you fell so hard for yet another scam.

Odd -- a Google search shows only one guy calling for AGW scientists to be jailed for fraud.

Most of the Republican Party, politicians and voters, is not one guy. And you didn't answer the question. Do you support Ken Cuccinelli in his quest to have Dr. Mann jailed?

Sadly, reality says you're full of crap

Reality says if that you have to dig for an unknown professor and unknown local Green Party member from Australia, you're really reaching.

On the other hand, I can point to Republican congressmen and attorney generals, plus a rank and file that loves the idea of jailing scientists. Not a single peep of protest from any of the herd over it.

But maybe you can break with your herd. I have no issue with condemning those few green nutcases. Will you similarly condemn GOP candidate Ken Cuccinelli and every Republican who has called for climate scientists to be jailed?

 

[SSDD]

But there are no fudge factors. That's just one of your cult lies. Which you fell for, hard.

You can always be counted on to say something completely stupid. The effect of clouds in the climate is a giant fudge factor within modern models. Hell mamooth, the greenhouse effect itself is a fudge factor as indicated by climate science's inability to state how much warming will occur from a given increase in atmospheric greenhouse gasses. Climate science is literally crawling with fudge factors.

 

[Abraham3]

What are the chances you'll remember that you think you found raw data and have been proven wrong?

DEAR ASTERISM,

080211193103TMAX 73 0 59 0 55 0 53 0 57 0 60 0 71 0 55 0 51 0 57 0 64 0 70 0 66 0 67 0 74 0 62 0 62 0 64 0 69 0 65 0 66 0 59 0 67 0 70 0 73 0 67 0 68 0 69 0 67 0 62 0 67 0
080211193103TMIN 57 0 51 0 45 0 39 0 40 0 47 0 55 0 47 0 43 0 38 0 46 0 47 0 48 0 58 0 57 0 48 0 41 0 44 0 48 0 54 0 55 0 50 0 47 0 51 0 56 0 53 0 61 0 55 0 42 0 48 0 50 0
080211193103PRCP 0 0 57 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0T 0 24 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 0 163 0 0 0 72 0 66 0
080211193103SNOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193103SNWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193104TMAX 57 0 67 0 69 0 71 0 71 0 66 0 68 0 73 0 68 0 72 0 70 0 72 0 73 0 70 0 69 0 77 0 76 0 74 0 73 0 74 0 74 0 72 0 68 0 71 0 76 0 80 0 76 0 74 0 75 0 77 0-9999
080211193104TMIN 48 0 48 0 60 0 63 0 54 0 47 0 49 0 54 0 52 0 51 0 61 0 63 0 58 0 62 0 61 0 58 0 63 0 60 0 62 0 66 0 64 0 54 0 49 0 56 0 64 0 66 0 62 0 58 0 57 0 57 0-9999
080211193104PRCP 1 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0T 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999
080211193104SNOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999
080211193104SNWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999
080211193105TMAX 77 0 78 0 82 0 78 0 79 0 79 0 81 0 79 0 83 0 82 0 77 0 79 0 74 0 76 0 79 0 80 0 76 0 77 0 77 0 77 0 81 0 83 0 80 0 75 0 77 0 79 0 88 0 81 0 81 0 81 0 86 0
080211193105TMIN 64 0 67 0 65 0 63 0 70 0 70 0 67 0 64 0 72 0 65 0 65 0 60 0 55 0 58 0 57 0 61 0 61 0 61 0 67 0 68 0 65 0 68 0 61 0 55 0 60 0 61 0 65 0 67 0 65 0 70 0 69 0
080211193105PRCP 0 0 0T 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193105SNOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193105SNWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193106TMAX 85 0 85 0 81 0 82 0 82 0 89 0 87 0 87 0 84 0 82 0 84 0 84 0 85 0 85 0 88 0 88 0 90 0 89 0 86 0 86 0 88 0 87 0 88 0 88 0 93 0 87 0 86 0 88 0 96 0 87 0-9999
080211193106TMIN 68 0 63 0 66 0 68 0 68 0 70 0 74 0 66 0 62 0 67 0 67 0 74 0 72 0 74 0 70 0 71 0 77 0 77 0 76 0 75 0 73 0 75 0 76 0 74 0 70 0 75 0 77 0 77 0 75 0 74 0-9999
080211193106PRCP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 131 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 0 1 0 0T 0 0 0 30 0 0 0-9999
080211193106SNOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999
080211193106SNWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999
080211193107TMAX 88 0 91 0 94 0 90 0 91 0 91 0 92 0 92 0 90 0 88 0 89 0 89 0 84 0 84 0 88 0 86 0 88 0 89 0 89 0 90 0 91 0 82 0 86 0 87 0 87 0 91 0 89 0 89 0 89 0 90 0 90 0
080211193107TMIN 77 0 77 0 77 0 78 0 80 0 80 0 78 0 76 0 75 0 74 0 73 0 74 0 74 0 76 0 78 0 76 0 75 0 76 0 77 0 80 0 79 0 72 0 71 0 77 0 77 0 75 0 76 0 81 0 76 0 76 0 76 0
080211193107PRCP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0T 0 0 0 12 0 80 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 48 0 140 0 1 0 26 0 16 0 0T 0 0T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 132 0 15 0 0T 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
080211193107SNOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193107SNWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193108TMAX 90 0 89 0 93 0 93 0 89 0 88 0 89 0 88 0 84 0 82 0 88 0 86 0 85 0 82 0 83 0 86 0 87 0 87 0 89 0 89 0 87 0 90 0 86 0 83 0 82 0 87 0 85 0 86 0 87 0 87 0 85 0
080211193108TMIN 79 0 78 0 76 0 73 0 76 0 78 0 76 0 78 0 75 0 70 0 70 0 68 0 68 0 71 0 72 0 73 0 77 0 76 0 77 0 76 0 74 0 73 0 70 0 69 0 72 0 72 0 75 0 74 0 74 0 75 0 74 0
080211193108PRCP 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 2 0 13 0 244 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 180 0 313 0 189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 19 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0T 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0T 0 0 0
080211193108SNOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193108SNWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
080211193109TMAX 84 0 88 0 89 0 90 0 91 0 86 0 89 0 89 0 85 0 84 0 85 0 88 0 81 0 85 0 85 0 84 0 86 0 90 0 92 0 88 0 87 0 86 0 87 0 88 0 91 0 89 0 81 0 78 0 80 0 83 0-9999
080211193109TMIN 72 0 74 0 75 0 77 0 74 0 74 0 75 0 78 0 74 0 74 0 76 0 76 0 73 0 71 0 77 0 77 0 75 0 72 0 74 0 78 0 78 0 78 0 77 0 75 0 76 0 77 0 64 0 58 0 62 0 65 0-9999
080211193109PRCP 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 8 0 5 0 0 0 107 0 50 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999
080211193109SNOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999
080211193109SNWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999
080211193110TMAX 81 0 79 0 79 0 78 0 82 0 81 0 84 0 82 0 86 0 85 0 81 0 84 0 82 0 84 0 90 0 87 0 78 0 78 0 78 0 79 0 76 0 75 0 81 0-9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999
080211193110TMIN 68 0 68 0 74 0 75 0 72 0 71 0 73 0 73 0 73 0 70 0 72 0 73 0 67 0 65 0 67 0 67 0 59 0 56 0 59 0 60 0 62 0 63 0 61 0-9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999
080211193110PRCP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0T 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999
080211193110SNOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999
080211193110SNWD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999
080211193111TMAX-9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 72 0 71 0 69 0 72 0 77 0 77 0 78 0 76 0 73 0 75 0 74 0 74 0 79 0 74 0 73 0 74 0 76 0 79 0-9999
080211193111TMIN-9999 -

From State08_Fl.txt.gz from the link provided.

You couldn't find the archive, you couldn't understand a GIN file and you couldn't extract a gz. And yet you claim to be a programmer. I don't understand. I really don't undderstand.

 

[daveman]

Good strategy: Hit bottom, dig.

That snippet is from some test code, never used with the actual data. It's just a sanity check on the algorithm.

You didn't know that, of course, since your cult didn't tell you. Follows the pattern of you knowing nothing on every topic. All you can do is cut-and-paste links that you don't understand, being you're so ignorant of all the issues involved.

Predictably, you will lie about this article, or pretend it doesn't exist, or do anything but acknowledge its truthfulness.

I notice you've started pre-emptively crying about the beatdowns you know you're going to get. Interesting strategy. Still leaves you on the hook to explain why you fell so hard for yet another scam.

Odd -- a Google search shows only one guy calling for AGW scientists to be jailed for fraud.

Most of the Republican Party, politicians and voters, is not one guy. And you didn't answer the question. Do you support Ken Cuccinelli in his quest to have Dr. Mann jailed?

Sadly, reality says you're full of crap

Reality says if that you have to dig for an unknown professor and unknown local Green Party member from Australia, you're really reaching.

On the other hand, I can point to Republican congressmen and attorney generals, plus a rank and file that loves the idea of jailing scientists. Not a single peep of protest from any of the herd over it.

But maybe you can break with your herd. I have no issue with condemning those few green nutcases. Will you similarly condemn GOP candidate Ken Cuccinelli and every Republican who has called for climate scientists to be jailed?

If you can do all this stuff you say you can, why didn't you just do it?

Cuccinelli wants to investigate Mann for fraud -- not throw him in jail without trial.

I repeat: Why do you lie all the time?

 

[Abraham3]

If you can do all this stuff you say you can, why didn't you just do it?

Cuccinelli wants to investigate Mann for fraud -- not throw him in jail without trial.

I repeat: Why do you lie all the time?

Cuccinelli wants to persecute Mann because he thinks it will get him votes.

 

[editec]

Is the problem that we're having now about average really the same problem people have measuring say coastlines?

Doesn't the TEMP really depend on how LONG the time span?

Would for example you get the same average temp if you average was taking a temp every minute versus every hour or every three hours etc?

What appears on the surface to be a hard number turns out to be anything BUT....

Anybody understand my point here or have I just annoyed the lot of you?