[Vision2020] NOAA: NCDC: June 2010, Jan. Through June 2010, Global Temperatures are Warmest on Record

[Paul Rumelhart]

The period covers 1895 through 2009.  I'm using data from the United 
States Historical Climatology Network, which is, I believe, the same 
data that the NOAA's NCDC uses.  Although I still don't have it straight 
who collected exactly what data and who has gathered it together and 
analyzed it.  According to this NCDC's website 
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/ushcn/), the data has been 
adjusted to account for station relocations, among other things.  They 
use both station histories if available and tests to look for abnormal 
differences between local station pairs in an attempt to find 
undocumented change points.

So, presumably that has been accounted for.  The question is, did they 
account for it by lowering the previous values or raising the later values?

Paul

Craine Kit wrote:
> Paul,
>
> What is the period for your NOAA averages? If it is the entire period 
> of record, there is a glitch in the data. When the station was moved 
> from where the Ag Sciences complex is located to the Plant Science 
> Farm there was an instaneous change in our climate by (if I recall 
> correctly) 3-4 degrees cooler.
>
> Kit Craine
>
>
> On Jul 18, 2010, at 3:01 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> This reminds me.  I've been meaning to run Moscow's numbers for 
>> temperature graphed over time.  So I went to the USHCN website 
>> (http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2/monthly/) and downloaded 
>> their massaged averages file (9641C_201007_F52.avg.gz).  I also 
>> downloaded their list of stations (ushcn-v2-stations.txt).  I then 
>> looked up Moscow in the stations file to get it's station ID, which 
>> is 106152, and selectively extracted those rows from the averages 
>> file after unzipping it.  I then loaded this data into the Open 
>> Office Spreadsheet application (Excel would also work, but doesn't 
>> run on my operating system).  I removed the monthly data, leaving 
>> only the year and the annual mean columns.  I then made a computed 
>> column which divided the annual mean numbers by 10, since they have 
>> one decimal place and are saved in the file as integers.  I averaged 
>> the annual mean temperatures and then made another computed column 
>> where I subtracted the average from the individual annual mean / 10 
>> numbers.  This gives me the temperature anomaly for each year, the 
>> amount that it differs from the average.
>>
>> I then plotted that using Open Office, and told it to compute the 
>> trend line.  The trend comes out to be negative, Moscow is according 
>> to the data cooling at about a degree a century.
>>
>> Ted Moffett wrote:
>>> Given the reasoning of many of the so called "skeptics" (many are 
>>> not really skeptics, of course, but confirmation bias driven 
>>> denialists, while all competent scientists are skeptics by training, 
>>> including the climate scientists who state that the scientific 
>>> evidence, after rigorous skeptical analysis, is compelling that 
>>> human impacts are altering climate to a degree requiring action)
>>
>> I have to admit, I'm skeptical that this definition of the group of 
>> people who question the AGW theory is really accurate.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> <Moscow.jpg>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>               http://www.fsr.net
>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>