This is what I mean by the warmer then avg being larger

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Matthew, Sep 13, 2011.

  1. Matthew
    Online

    Matthew Blue dog all the way!

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Messages:
    49,593
    Thanks Received:
    4,583
    Trophy Points:
    1,885
    Location:
    Portland Oregon
    Ratings:
    +15,081
    Here is a map of the past 30 days....What do you see?
    1# That the area of warmer then "means/avg"l is much larger then the colder then normal temperatures.
    2# The intensity of the warmer then the "means" area is more severe...Look over Antarctica with the -6 above means to the small -4 to -6c areas...Much larger within scope within the larger geographical area. This is what gets added together by hundreds of land stations, buoy's, ship reports to make up the warm anomaly we see at the giss, noaa. Or of course the trillions of points on the earth that the satellite carrying the rss and uah looks at.
    [​IMG]

    This is why that is so.

    Lets see, parts of northwestern Antarctica and south America or notably below the means, but area's 3 times there size are above it...And within some cases far more above normal then the cold area's. Like I said above, this is why one area doesn't make global climate as it is only a point or a few points within it. Of course it gets factored into it, but when you have a much larger part of the global that is above means then you still have a warmer anomaly overall.

    Texas is one of those points,
    South America is another
    California for much of the summer is another
    The Arctic is another
    The Antarctic is yet another

    Lets say the overall warm anomaly's are much bigger(covering a larger percentage of the globe) with a max anomaly over a much bigger percentage of there area being +4 to 6c above normal. Lets say that is 4 times as large as the equal cold anomalies. Seriously, the warm anomalies are over powering the cold ones...Avging the global temperature to above normal for the baseline.

    How does it avg as a whole? That is what the global means within global warming.

    Case in point
    60 percent of the earth is near the avg within -1c to +1c
    30 percent of the earth is above the avg +1c to +6c
    10 percent of the earth is below the avg -1c to -6c
    The weight favors a above normal anomaly...And as you go into the future this will weigh heavier and heavier in that favor if you're dealing with a warming planet.

    Seriously, can all this data be wrong? Somehow if so, how could we even tell one way or the other...That on this scale(Global) that is so? Being that a area of below normal for days, weeks, months or even years doesn't tell the global scale story of what is going on. The UK the past few winters surely didn't tell the story any more then the antarctic now or the arctic last winter did.

    :eusa_whistle:
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2011
  2. wirebender
    Offline

    wirebender Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,723
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NC
    Ratings:
    +120
    Interesting thin is that some of the "warmest" areas are places where few, if any gathering stations exist. That allows the hoaxters to put in whatever anomoly they wish.
     
  3. IanC
    Online

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,186
    Thanks Received:
    1,068
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,438
    your two graphics point out one thing that has bothered me for a long time. temperature anomaly graphs should have a standardized colour key with white showing a neutral reading.
     
  4. wirebender
    Offline

    wirebender Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,723
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NC
    Ratings:
    +120
    Yeah, they play with the colors a great deal in an attempt to create some anxiety where none should exist. I am guessing that packaging and marketing will soon become required courses for would be climate "scientists".
     
  5. IanC
    Online

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,186
    Thanks Received:
    1,068
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,438
    one thing that should be more obviously taken into consideration is the latitude of observation. the equitoria region is where most of the energy is absorbed and the smallest differences found. the further away from the equator you get, the more the readings are an effect of equitorial shedding of heat and subject to weather and circulation patterns. perhaps the poles are the canary in the mine for global warming but more likely they are more sensitive to naturally changing patterns.

    and wirebender is correct in pointing out the weaknesses of temperature readings in remote and undersurveyed areas. arctic areas are especially affected by poorly compensated UHI and capricious infilling. I wish BEST would be faster in reporting their database and open code for adjustments but it is better to do it correctly than quickly.
     
  6. IanC
    Online

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,186
    Thanks Received:
    1,068
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,438
    unfortunately climate science has already become rather facile with using colour schemes to hide unwelcome data. the Hockey Stick Graph was so successful that clever and distracting colour choices have become commonplace. a recent example was the sea level rise graphic that used light yellow to make the embarrasing envisat data almost invisible.
     
  7. Old Rocks
    Online

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,371
    Thanks Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,250
    There are big areas on Earth not covered by satellites?
     
  8. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    Can you explain how some of the cooler than normal areas on the bottom graph are smack dab in the middle of the warmer than normal areas in the top graph?
     
  9. Matthew
    Online

    Matthew Blue dog all the way!

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Messages:
    49,593
    Thanks Received:
    4,583
    Trophy Points:
    1,885
    Location:
    Portland Oregon
    Ratings:
    +15,081
    Well, there are a crap load of reasons for each "below" the 'means' area on that map. Within western Russia(near moscow), I'd say it's because the jet stream is dipping into the area bringing "below normal" air southward, which means less cold air within the eastern Arctic ocean. Some of the above normal "air" throughout the arctic ocean is arctic amplification caused by way below normal sea ice too...Should get a lot bigger as we head into fall and the sun sets over the area....Why? The why is because the oceans took up a lot of energy and that energy will go from the arctic ocean to the Atmosphere above it as the oceans lose there energy...

    You can clearly see how the jet stream working with high and lows. Over western Europe it has been 2-3c as there has been a large area of high pressure, but as I said above there is a trough over western Russia. Look at the midwest a month ago and how the west was below normal...This works the same way!

    Anyways the eastern Pacific is cool because of cooler surface sst's within area's. Caused by the nina.

    Africa could be "clouds", which don't allow as much solar energy to make it to the surface...

    South America is caused for a lot of the reason western Russia is cold. Jet stream further northward pulling cooler air northward(southern Hemisphere). Antarctic is something that is rather interesting as it could be some form of amplification in some form or another like the arctic. Don't understand the full dynamics of such, but I'd guess it has something to do with the upper Atmospheric circulations...Antarctica has been losing land ice mass too...I've seen studies that it maybe close to warming its self.

    When you take cold air away from the poles it "warms", but this air is still below normal for the area that it moves to, but normally the airmass that sat over a area(ice pack) is newer and less cold as radiation from surface to space over the cold ice pack hasn't had as much time to cool the air mass...You will see this during the winter over northern Canada and northeastern Russia...
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2011
  10. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    What about the fact that the coast of Southern/Baja California toward Hawaii is showing both higher and lower temperatures than normal? Do you want to try and bamboozle me by talking about other palces, or will you deal with the fact that the graphs show contradictory data?
     

Share This Page