GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Anomaly North America

In prior postings I did a sample of various countries around the world, and a full set of South America and Antarctica. This extends that set with North America.

I’m goiing to group things into North Continental (USA, Canada, Greenland), Central (Mexico and Central American countries) and Carib, those islands in the Caribbean Sea. Why? Because countries in those areas ought to look a lot more like each other in terms of Anomaly than like those in other groups. The Caribbean is dominated by water and tropical conditions. Central America and Mexico are about the same but with a bit less water influence. The USA, Canada and to some extent Greenland are large land masses prone to cold winters and significantly further north (so more summer / winter sun changes). This also lets me group making the graphs into smaller work units and it is less oppressive ;-)

Here’s the Koppen Climate graph for North America so you have something for comparison.

Koppen Climate Zones for North America

From that I think you can see why I’d put Cuba into the Caribbean rather than count it in South America… like GHCN did…

The Graphs

Northern Big 3 (Canada, USA, Greenland)

Greenland

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Greenland Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Greenland Difference

So about 1 C range of changes both ways. So an error band of about 1 C? Is that what this means? So we can’t know if there is 1/2 C of warming… The the actual anomalies below bounce around by a 3 C range (that might have a flier off the graph – I didn’t check). Looks to me like Greenland data is just chaotic weather. I do note that the really big DIP happens right on the “baseline period” used by GISStemp (1950-1980) or Hadley (1960-1990)…

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Greenland Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Greenland Anomaly

Canada

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Canada Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Canada Difference

Interesting that it’s a roll off to colder. The anomalies (below) look a mess, but without evident warming. More like the loss of some very low going extremes recently. (One wonders if the big freeze in the last couple of years will show up in future data?)

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Canada Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Canada Anomaly

USA

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 USA Anomaly Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 USA Anomaly Difference

Again with recent data cooled. Wonder if they were embarrassed by all the attention over the last few years. We also again see no real warming tops, only loss of cold excursions and a general narrowing of the range. Or perhaps being early to the party, they had already “cooked” the v2 data so no more needed here. /snark;

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 USA Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 USA Anomaly

The Caribbean & Bermuda

These are all in one large shallow water basin with common weather. They ought to be nearly identical.

Antigua & Barbuda

Antigua has no data in GHCN v3.3:

MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom3 AS A 
INNER JOIN country AS C on A.country=C.cnum 
WHERE C.abrev="AC";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)

So all we get is the v4 anomaly graph:

GHCN v4 Antigua & Barbuda Anomaly

GHCN v4 Antigua & Barbuda Anomaly

Bermuda

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bermuda Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bermuda Difference

Not a lot of change in the data. They seem to have cooled since 1980 (see graph below) and were hotter back around 1880 – 1860.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bermuda Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bermuda Anomaly

The Bahamas

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bahamas Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bahamas Difference

About 1/2 of recent data warmed about 1/2 C, and a cool dip about 1940-1980; but now about the same as the mid 1800s. Cyclical changes?

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bahamas Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bahamas Anomaly

Barbados

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Barbados Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Barbados Difference

Drop the past about 0.4 C and warm the recent about 1/4 C – Presto! a trend! Except that those pesky 1800s look about the same as now. Better use that cold snap from 1940 to 1980 as the “baseline period” and ony measure warming against it.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Barbados Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Barbados Anomaly

Cayman Islands

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Cayman Islands Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Cayman Islands Difference

Again with cooling the past a bit. But from 1990 to date is basically flat. Ought not the “warming from CO2” be more now and less in 1970?

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Cayman Islands Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Cayman Islands Anomaly

Dominica

Dominica has no data in v3.3, so all we get is the v4 anomaly graph.

MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom3 AS A 
INNER JOIN country AS C on A.country=C.cnum 
WHERE C.abrev="DO";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.06 sec)
GHCN v4 Dominica Anomaly

GHCN v4 Dominica Anomaly

Dominican Republic

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Dominican Republic Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Dominican Republic Difference

So they had a crazy high 2 C “warming” rate, chop 1 C out of it and get a more respectable 1 C rate. Or is there just 1.5 C of “random” in temperature measuring on islands?

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Dominican Republic Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Dominican Republic Anomaly

Grenada

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Grenada Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Grenada Difference

Again with 2 C of warming, so chop a degree C out of some of it, yet the most recent data points (see below graph) are below normal. But that’s just weather, right?

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Grenada Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Grenada Anomaly

Guadaloupe

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guadeloupe Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guadeloupe Difference

A whopping 5 C range of temperatures, but currently about the same as 1940. Natural variability or error band, one of the other, is way higher than that 1/2 C of Project Fear Warming.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guadeloupe Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guadeloupe Anomaly

Haiti

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Haiti Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Haiti Difference

Looks like nobody fooled with the temperatures between versions. Guess a major hurricane will stop that kind of thing for a while. Anomaly graph below is rather flat too. Had a rise in to 1960, then was ignored for about 20 years, and now the temperatures are like “1940 all over again”.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Haiti Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Haiti Anomaly

Jamaica

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Jamaica Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Jamaica Difference

Push up the 40s (outside the baseline interval) a 1/2 C and drop the baseline spots about 1/2 C but with some noise in it, then lift the very recent by about 1/2 C. I think we’ve seen that before.

Per the anomaly graph below, Jamaica has warmed about 3 C. All that without setting regular record temperatures and with nearby islands not having the same rise. Airport tarmac anyone? Didn’t Jamaica have a big pop in tourism with the whole Bob Marley / Reggae thing? I know I went. Locals were complaining about added traffic, all the airplanes and hotels… I note in passing the hot late 1800s highs are about the same as now.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Jamaica Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Jamaica Anomaly

Martinique

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Martinique Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Martinique Difference

Differences look like about 1 C range of random. Anomaly trend looks like it was cold in the ’60s and recovered.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Martinique Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Martinique Anomaly

Netherlands Antilles

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Netherlands Antilles Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Netherlands Antilles Difference

A nice 1/4 C or so cooling of the past, and another 1/4 C to 1/2 C warming of the recent data, pretty soon you got yourself a trend. Except now is about the same as 1980.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Netherlands Antilles Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Netherlands Antilles Anomaly

Puerto Rico

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Puerto Rico Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Puerto Rico Difference

Well that’s interesting. In v3.3 it was heating up by 1 C in Puerto Rico, so now the change is a 1 C cooling, and Puerto Rico is showing mostly flat trend in the red anomaly spots below. Almost like a decade of scrutiny and being pulled before congress might have caused some folks to fear being caught…

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Puerto Rico Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Puerto Rico Anomaly

St. Kits & Nevis

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Kits & Nevis Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Kits & Nevis Difference

Nothing goning on in St. Ktis & Nevis. Oddly, as all these islands are in the bathtub together, their anomaly graphs ought to all look alike. Yet they don’t…

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Kits & Nevis Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Kits & Nevis Anomaly

St. Lucia

Saint Lucia has no data in either version, so no graphs at all:

MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom3 AS A 
INNER JOIN country AS C on A.country=C.cnum 
WHERE C.abrev="DO";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.06 sec)


MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom4 WHERE abrev="ST";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.31 sec)

Kinda makes you wonder why it is in the inventory at all.

St. Pierre & Miquelon

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Pierre & Miquelon Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Pierre & Miquelon Difference

Nice gentle almost unnoticed 1/4 C cooling of the past, a narrow “dip” in the baseline interval. All in all, nicely done sculpting.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Pierre & Miquelon Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Pierre & Miquelon Anomaly

ST. Vincent & The Grenadines

Saint Vincent & The Grenadines have no data in version v3.3.

MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom3 AS A 
INNER JOIN country AS C on A.country=C.cnum 
WHERE C.abrev="VC";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.01 sec)

So all we get is this v4 anomaly graph:

GHCN v4 Saint Vincent & The Grenadines Anomaly

GHCN v4 Saint Vincent & The Grenadines Anomaly

Trinidad & Tobago

GHCN v4 Trinidad & Tobago Difference

GHCN v4 Trinidad & Tobago Difference

WOW, that 2 C of change down in the “baseline interval” is about the same as the dip in the anomaly graph then… Without that 2 C of down, Trinidad & Tobago would look sort of flat; with “now” temps about the same as the 1920-1930 temps.

GHCN v4 Trinidad & Tobago Anomaly

GHCN v4 Trinidad & Tobago Anomaly

Virgin Islands (US)

One wonders what happened to the British Virgin Islands in terms of temperatures… but moving on…

GHCN v4 U.S. Virgin islands Difference

GHCN v4 U.S. Virgin islands Difference

Sure doesn’t look like warming to me. Given some islands flat, and some with 3 C of warming, I think we’re looking at land use issues, thermometer location, or error bands / data fudging.

GHCN v4 U.S. Virgin islands Anomaly

GHCN v4 U.S. Virgin islands Anomaly

Mexico & Central America

Mexico

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Mexico Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Mexico Difference

Gee, that recent rise at the tail of the anomaly data (below) seems to match in shape the rise in the difference graph (above).

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Mexico Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Mexico Anomaly

Belize

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Belize Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Belize Difference

The actual anomaly data (below) isn’t warming on the top end, though we do see the loss of low going anomalies in the recent data. As though tons of concrete at the airport held heat over night… The change graph isn’t doing much either, though around 1980 got a spike. Sleepy little Belize…

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Belize Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Belize Anomaly

Guatemala

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guatemala Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guatemala Difference

Not really warming though we lose some of the low going anomalies in recent data (see graph below) and the changes between v3.3 and v4 are not much. Looks like nobody is paying attention to Guatemala.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guatemala Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guatemala Anomaly

El Salvador

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 El Salvador Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 El Salvador Difference

Looking at the anomaly plot below, there’s a nice “dip” in the baseline interval, and a gap about 1990-2005, but then some crazy changes in the above difference graph. Looks to me like +/- 1 C of error band and nobody really knowing just what the temperature is in tenths of C.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 El Salvador Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 El Salvador Anomaly

Honduras

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Honduras Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Honduras Difference

Already has a nice “dip” in the baseline interval, but those changes in the recent time are just wild.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Honduras Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Honduras Anomaly

Nicaragua

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Nicaragua Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Nicaragua Difference

We have 1/2 C drop added to the baseline, and 1 C of rise added in recent data. Just about the same as the “warming” found. Looks like someone found a way to get Nicaragua data in line with goals.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Nicaragua Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Nicaragua Anomaly

Coasta Rica

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Costa Rica Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Costa Rica Difference

Nice dip in the baseline interval, but what’s this with the cooing at the end? Costa Rica just not getting hot? And right next to Nicaragua too. Ought to be nearly identical, but isn’t.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Costa Rica Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Costa Rica Anomaly

Panama

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Panama Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Panama Difference

Gee.. Looks to me like Panama is being flat to slightly cooling (see below) and not much change at all between v3.3 and v4. I wonder if this is at a US Military Base and they are grumpy if you play with their data? I wonder if that’s why it cuts off in 1980… Seems to me someone ought to know the temperature in Panama right now.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Panama Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Panama Anomaly

Tech Talk

The specifics on the report / graph making programs is in the first “by country” posting so will not be repeated here.

This SQL produced the list of countries in North America (Region 4):

SELECT cnum, abrev,region, cname 
FROM country WHERE region=4 ORDER BY cname;

Here’s the list:

MariaDB [temps]> source bin/Namerica.sql
+------+-------+--------+------------------------------------+
| cnum | abrev | region | cname                              |
+------+-------+--------+------------------------------------+
| 426  | AC    | 4      | Antigua and Barbuda                |
| 423  | BF    | 4      | Bahamas, The                       |
| 401  | BB    | 4      | Barbados                           |
| 402  | BH    | 4      | Belize                             |
| 427  | BD    | 4      | Bermuda [United Kingdom]           |
| 403  | CA    | 4      | Canada                             |
| 429  | CJ    | 4      | Cayman Islands [United Kingdom]    |
| 405  | CS    | 4      | Costa Rica                         |
| 430  | DO    | 4      | Dominica                           |
| 407  | DR    | 4      | Dominican Republic                 |
| 408  | ES    | 4      | El Salvador                        |
| 431  | GL    | 4      | Greenland [Denmark]                |
| 409  | GJ    | 4      | Grenada                            |
| 432  | GP    | 4      | Guadeloupe [France]                |
| 410  | GT    | 4      | Guatemala                          |
| 411  | HA    | 4      | Haiti                              |
| 412  | HO    | 4      | Honduras                           |
| 413  | JM    | 4      | Jamaica                            |
| 433  | MB    | 4      | Martinique [France]                |
| 414  | MX    | 4      | Mexico                             |
| 434  | NT    | 4      | Netherlands Antilles [Netherlands] |
| 415  | NU    | 4      | Nicaragua                          |
| 416  | PM    | 4      | Panama                             |
| 435  | RQ    | 4      | Puerto Rico [United States]        |
| 417  | SC    | 4      | Saint Kitts and Nevis              |
| 436  | ST    | 4      | Saint Lucia                        |
| 438  | SB    | 4      | Saint Pierre and Miquelon [France] |
| 437  | VC    | 4      | Saint Vincent and the Grenadines   |
| 424  | TD    | 4      | Trinidad and Tobago                |
| 425  | US    | 4      | United States                      |
| 440  | VQ    | 4      | Virgin Islands [United States]     |
+------+-------+--------+------------------------------------+
31 rows in set (0.00 sec)

In Conclusion

So there you have it. A few days of “seat time” at the computer. Hopefully it is of use to someone. I think it does point out what country’s data needs more scrutiny. Then there’s also the question of why trends in some nations are different from another very nearby and in the same body of water. Furthermore, there’s a great “cross check” for this in that there is surface water temperature data from decades of hurricane tracking. On these small islands, air temperature never strays far from water temperature. I was swimming in Jamaica once when rain started. The ocean, air, and rain all at 86 F.

It does look like there was a cyclical “dip” after the hot 1930s-40s into a cool ’50s-70s and we have newspaper and magazine articles from then shouting about a New Little Ice Age (and I personally remember it – IT Happened.) So despite the folks saying that picking it for a “baseline” doesn’t matter, I think it’s just too convenient. The method I used to calculate anomaly has no baseline. A given thermometer is only compared to itself over a selected month across the years. (So, for example, the Jamaica Airport thermometer would have all of its Januaries averaged then the January anomaly computed against that. Repeat for each other month of the year for each instrument.) Then there is just the shortness of most records. Many just start in that cold period and rise out of it, not having an old 1870 hot sample to see in their past.

Finally, with that much change showing up in some very small countries, you know they didn’t have a dozen thermometers to choose from in 1890. It must be some kind of “intervention” when decades of data all move by the same amount. It just screams “Fudging the data” (though I’m sure they would call it fixing errors in the past). But when all the “warming” comes from the “fixing up” and “adjusting” (even of this “unadjusted” data) or from splicing a 1/2 cycle and calling it a trend: Just where is the room for CO2?

It took me a few days of “seat time” to make this set and post it, so don’t worry if you just want to look at a few each day over time. After the first dozen even my eyes started to glaze over ;-) But these will be here for months or years to come, for your pondering.

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in AGW Science and Background, Global Warming General, NCDC - GHCN Issues and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Anomaly North America

  1. Bill in Oz says:

    This all confirms what we already suspect.
    Not really much to add except Bermuda is not a Caribbean Country. It is a British Crown Colony parked way out in the middle of the Atlantic.

    It’s climate should reflect being in that location- in the North Atlantic ocean. Any ship data for that area ?

    The climate data fiddling should reflect the UK Weather service ideology

  2. Bob K says:

    Just a FYI.

    Antigua has no data. In v4 they incorrectly used Swedish meta-data and data for ID ACW00011604. GHCN-D uses the ID with correct meta-data, but has only a few months of data in Antigua.

    Pointed that out to them a couple years ago. Must have been too difficult for them to correct.

  3. E.M.Smith says:

    Not exactly “in the middle” of the Atlantic, being about 600 miles from the USA, but yeah, not Caribbean but still an island closer to the Caribbean than to Greenland. So if GHCN can put Cuba in South America while all the other islands around it are in North America, I think I can lump Bermuda in with the other North American islands.

    It sits in the same Gulf Stream flow that they do and is influenced by the same general weather systems (as in tropical storms run over the Gulf and up the Atlantic).

    So it makes no sense to put them in with the Central America group. They are not at all like the far north cold large continental areas of Canada & Greenland. Can’t be seen as similar to the USA (with the Rocky Mountains, desert southwest, 2000 miles of prairies, etc. etc.

    The only logical place to group them is in with the other islands in the Gulf and Gulf Stream waters.

    If it really bothers you I can change the sub-heading to “Caribbean Islands & Bermuda”…

  4. Bill in Oz says:

    I’ll concede the point re location EM. But the fact that it is British Crown colony with a weather service run from London and by London’s rules, is more important.

  5. Larry Ledwick says:

    I think more than anything these comparisons show there is something fundimentally wrong with the whole concept of global temperature. You have plots like the St. Kits & Nevis plot which is a perfectly straight line (stuck data value due to defective equipment, someone is lazy and just keeps inputting the same number? etc.) That value is just to noise free to be valid.

    Second you have others which are obviously straight lines then suddenly go nuts or others which have huge scatter over the whole time period no meaningful trend at all.

    Either the data gathering network is not fit for purpose (high likelihood)
    Some stations are getting heavily massaged (probable)
    They are trying to hide adjustments of the total average by screwing with selected stations which due to infill methods have high impact on the whole due to sparse coverage ( highly likely when you have a proven propensity to to screw with the data)
    Just plain simple stupid sloppy methods with no serious data hygiene monitoring.

    All of the above. The statistical tests that accountants/auditors use to detect cooked books would be really interesting to apply to some of those data streams. It clearly looks like some of those might be totally fabricated (infill or intentionally cooked)

    Your observation about islands all immersed in the same tub of hot water is most telling, there is no reasonable explanation I can think of why two stations in the middle of the same heat sink should have vastly different patterns of behavior unless the sensors are totally screwed up, or someone is cooking the data. Even poorly calibrated sensors should have similar patterns but different absolute values due to sensor bias.

  6. Pingback: GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Anomaly North America – Climate Collections

  7. Hifast says:

    For the USA records: “they had already “cooked” the v2 data so no more needed here.”

    Indeed.

    Note that the most recent few years have been adjusted warmer.

  8. Hifast says:

    E.M. Are you familiar with Tony Heller’s app: ‘Pulling Back the Curtain’?

    Here’s one of his posts about it:
    https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2016/03/27/pulling-back-the-curtain-version-1-6/

  9. Bill in Oz says:

    E M , any chance of exploring that Panama data some more post 1980 ? If the Panamanian authorities are with the PC program, the post 1980 data will show it..

  10. E.M.Smith says:

    @Bill in Oz:

    Yes, there is a chance.

    If anyone knows of a source for Panama data, or were to do the leg work to find one, of course it would go faster. Just sayin’….

    @HiFast:

    Ap? No. But I’m going to look into it now ;-)

    @Larry L:

    Yeah, that kinda sums it up. Something is just not right in this data…

  11. Steven Fraser says:

    EM: Just back from a week-long ‘not online’ vacation, to see THIS excellent result. Bravo. Agreed that the differences are interestingly and variously anomalous. I was especially interested in the latter-years’ divergence (increased v3-v4 gaps) that are so wide that the vertical alignment of the spots is challenging for my eyes.

    I will, as you suggest, examine some more closely in the coming days. Fine work!

  12. E.M.Smith says:

    @Steven Fraser:

    Thank you for your kind words.

    What is clear from the dramatic variation is that this is NOT caused by a well mixed gas having uniform retention of radiative heat globally. Whatever it is is dramatically variable, even in countries right next to each other.

    I’d intended to have Australia / Pacific Islands done by today, but was “surprised” by 2 cars going off to the mechanic (one with a day of me trying to get it started before dopping lots of lucre on getting it TO the mechanic), so we’re on the backup cars… (why I keep an old beater or two around…) and then yesterday and today spent trying to recover from an unexpected failure of a monitor (the one used for all the graph making… as the other one is a TV and not as easy to read text on it).

    So I’m now back to where I can start figuring out where / what equipment to use to do Australia… I’ll probably just take the path of lowest work (using the already built R.Pi M3 on the TV) and just move the monitor closer ;-)

    So hopefully in a couple of days there will be another of these to look at and compare.

    FWIW, I’m of the opinion that mostly what is being found as “Global Warming” is just a massive collection of “errors and omissions”. Ignoring the heat growth at airports as the moved from a very few prop planes to hundreds of turbo jets / day, and the attendant square miles of added tarmac and runways. Swapping to very fast response electronic gizmos that tend to “fail high” when they age out. Various “wrong way adjustments”. (One is the move from whitewash to latex paint on Stevenson Screens. As the latex ages it gets hotter, then on the discontinuity of a new paint job / screen / swap to electronic they find it’s a bit warmer than the “new one” so adjust ALL the history down (cooling the whole past) not just the part where the paint was old. Etc. etc.

    The only good bit is that we’ve got record cold and snow in places like Morocco, Australia, Turkey, Russia, etc. Hard to ignore that. Take a look at the current stuff here:

    https://www.iceagenow.info/

    Russia – Record cold threatens crops
    April 24, 2019 by Robert

    “Such low temperatures in the south of Russia (far, far below freezing) are very dangerous, since at the end of April there is an active vegetative period of plants, gardens are blooming, the first crops are sprouting,” warns Meteo-TV.

    Read moreRussia – Record cold threatens crops
    Categories Archives, Global Warming Hoax, World News & Records3 Comments
    Record snowfall in Anchorage
    April 23, 2019 by Robert

    23 Apr 2019 – Anchorage boasted another record daily snowfall yesterday, April 22,

    Read moreRecord snowfall in Anchorage
    Categories Archives, Global Warming Hoax, U.S. News & Records4 Comments
    Record cold in several parts of Russia
    April 22, 2019 by Robert

    IA “Meteonovosti” / Sunday, April 21

    Read moreRecord cold in several parts of Russia
    Categories Archives, Global Warming Hoax, World News & Records1 Comment
    Earth Day – A successful con job so far
    April 22, 2019 by Robert

    I want a beautiful and healthy earth. Always have.

    Read moreEarth Day – A successful con job so far
    Categories Archives, Global Warming Hoax, World News & Records14 Comments
    Turkey – Surprise snowfall in Central Anatolia Region
    April 21, 2019 by Robert

    Surprise snowfall in many cities. Almost a foot of snow in some areas.

    Read moreTurkey – Surprise snowfall in Central Anatolia Region
    Categories Archives, Global Warming Hoax, World News & Records1 Comment
    Snowfall this weekend in parts of Morocco
    April 21, 2019 by Robert

    Snow falls are expected on Saturday and Sunday in some provinces of the Kingdom, the National Meteorological Path (DMN) said in a special bulletin.

    Read moreSnowfall this weekend in parts of Morocco
    Categories Archives, Global Warming Hoax, World News & Records1 Comment
    Snowing in Mt Mitchell,NC today
    April 21, 2019 by Robert

    With freezing temps (at 5,800ft)

    Read moreSnowing in Mt Mitchell,NC today
    Categories Archives, Global Warming Hoax, U.S. News & Records2 Comments
    Earliest recorded snow event ever in Western Australia
    April 20, 2019 by Robert

    Good Friday cold blast in Albany brings April snow.

    Read moreEarliest recorded snow event ever in Western Australia
    Categories Archives, Global Warming Hoax, World News & Records8 Comments
    Return of winter in Central Russia
    April 19, 2019 by Robert

    In Kashira snow depth was 19 cm!

    How that can become “Warmest Ever!!!” is not via natural means…

  13. A C Osborn says:

    Hifast says: 19 April 2019 at 9:31 pm mentioning Tony Heller, his latest expose on Tem Adjustments is the RSS Satellite data.
    https://realclimatescience.com/2019/04/adjusting-good-data-to-make-it-match-bad-data/
    It is an absolute Scientific disgrace & outright fraud.

  14. Bill in Oz says:

    Good luck with the analysis for Australia/New Zealand and PNG.
    ( I’m curious what PNG results yield )

    It’s been plain cold here in South Australia for the past few days.
    But no rain. Still no break. All is bone dry dust an inch under the surface.

    I’m currently arguing with my oldish GM Commodore Omega sedan about why it wants to have the dashboard run in ‘police mode”. Hardly any dashboard lighting at all. Fixed before a month ago. And now it’s reverted. Bugger !

  15. H.R. says:

    @Bill in Oz: I’ve never had that ‘police mode’ problem nor had any friends that had cars with that problem. It sounds like an interesting problem.

    Well, interesting if you’re a mechanic getting paid by the hour to remove the dash and go through every wire and connection trying to find some weak ground or cracked wire or corroded terminal. *$igh*

    I wish you luck with that one.

  16. Larry Ledwick says:

    Re: ‘police mode’ problem
    If it is a soft ware setting of some sort, you might try pulling one of the battery cables and stepping on the brake peddle to draw system voltage down to zero. That is a simple way to “reset” engine management computers and clear odd problems. Might resolve your issue with no expense.

  17. Steven Fraser says:

    @EM: Agreed, the measurements (if that is what they are) are not consistent, a hallmark of data quality issues… at the sources. Gack!

    I’d also be interested to see an opinion about error bands. In the older, Stephenson-screened high/lows, if I recall correctly accuracy was +-1/2 degree C, rounded to the nearest whole degree when being recorded. The effect was that it was not really known where in that 1 degree span the temps actually were. I’d be interested in how to approach the averaging of 30 such numbers, and what the error bars would look like.

  18. Steven Fraser says:

    @EM: and way OT: I am configuring systemd on RHEL 7.6 for a custom service. having some real fun now…

  19. Pingback: GHCN v3.3 vs. v4 Anomaly Australia / Pacific Islands – Climate Collections

  20. Pingback: GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Asia Anomaly | Musings from the Chiefio

  21. Pingback: GHCN v3.3 vs v4 – Top Level Entry Point | Musings from the Chiefio

Comments are closed.