Sentences with phrase «on radiosonde»

A recent study of water vapor trends above North America based on radiosonde measurements from 1973 to 1993 finds increases in precipitable water over all regions except northern and eastern Canada, where it fell slightly.

The satellite measurements appear to be substantiated by independent trend estimates for this period based on radiosonde data.

Dr. Angell's focus was on the radiosonde measurements of the atmospheric temperature above the Earth's surface but he also gave results for surface temperature.

Miskolczi's quantity depends heavily on the radiosonde data.

«I do not have enough knowledge on radiosonde analyses to be able to render a judgment.»

In conclusion, the research on radiosonde measurement problems looks promising but it is only a small part of a larger problem of poor measurements and poor models.

Steve: My understanding is that reanalysis humindity depends on radiosondes about which there are many inhomogeneity issues — I don't know this for sure, but I suspect that placing the blame on GCMs may be unfair in this case.

Not exact matches

Elena Stautzebach launches her daily weather balloon, or radiosonde, which will provide feedback on atmospheric conditions.

Using U.S. Weather Service data on precipitation, radiosonde measurements of CAPE and lightning - strike counts from the National Lightning Detection Network at the University of Albany, State University of New York (UAlbany), they concluded that 77 percent of the variations in lightning strikes could be predicted from knowing just these two parameters.

In the third paper this week, Sherwood et al report on an apparent bias in the daytime readings of these radiosondes which, again, appears to have suppressed the trends in the data sets (Steve discusses this more fully in an accompanying piece).

The most popular radiosonde manufacturer worldwide today is the Vaisala corporation, whose strategy for coping with solar heating is to concede that it will happen and try to correct for it: the thermistor is mounted on a «boom» that sticks into the air flow where the sun can shine on it, but the heating error is estimated from the measured ascent rate and solar zenith angle and subtracted from the reported temperature.

What the global change community (through the NRC and CCSP reports) always asserted and then used to discount the radiosonde and UAH satellite trends was that the deep troposphere should not warm less than the surface and in fact based on models globally the troposphere should warm 1.2 more (the amplification factor).

The Sherwood et al. study in Science Express concerns one particular type of long - recognized radiosonde error, that caused by the sun shining on the «thermistor» (basically, a cheap thermometer easily read by an electric circuit).

Further evidence has accumulated of an anthropogenic influence on the temperature of the free atmosphere as measured by radiosondes and satellite - based instruments.

Apparently «comprehensive treatment» involves focusing on anomalous radiosondes and expanding uncertainty claiming that increased uncertainty means they're right.

This is indicated for the last 50 years by radiosondes mounted on weather balloons and for since 1979 (when the first pertinent satellites were launched) by MSU mounted on satellites.

Temperature measurements retrieved from the hundreds of balloon - borne radiosonde instruments that are released each day by the various national weather services provide much more detailed information on the vertical structure of atmospheric temperature changes than is available from satellites.

How, for example, does this incident cast doubt on the findings from satellite data, radiosondes, borehole analysis, glacial melt observations, sea ice melt, sea level rise, proxy reconstructions, permafrost melt and such like, gathered completely independently of the CRU?

What one can really learn from the radiosonde data on the changes in H2O concentration is an interesting issue not answered conclusively by this analysis.

I am talking here about the directly measured radiosonde water vapor data, not about the useless clear - sky transmission calculations on cloudy profiles.

He has been working on the predictability studies using radiosonde observations and data assimilation technique.

The paper discusses four different sets of data on satellite atmospheric monitoring (all producing slightly different end products), two radiosonde data sets (from UK Hadley Centre and University of Vienna, both adjusted for inhomogeneities — and that opens another can of worms), four different surface temperature data sets (based on reconstructed sea surface temperature data sets from Hadley Centre, again, and Climate Research Unit).

- You ignore two radiosonde datasets and rely only on HadAT2, despite expert advice.

If we can't get accurate radiosonde measurements after 50 years and 28 million measurements, then why on Earth would anyone assume that we can create 3D working global climate models that are more accurate?

Ultimately there are uncertainties in the radiosondes, but the satellites don't find the scaling ratios either, and the models fail on most other measures.

independence of both the measurement errors and the uncertainties in satellite, radiosonde, and surface - based temperature records, which lends greater confidence to an assessment based on all three measurement categories than to an assessment based on any one of them in isolation.

Looking further, I found a comment by Dr. Roy Spencer's blog, which echoed my point on inequality, and also notes that the radiosonde data Miskolczi is looking at to argue 60 years of no change is, well, a bit poor.

However, for radiosonde observations, which are irregularly spaced with large gaps over the oceans (Figure 2.6), global - mean temperature is estimated on the basis of those stations operating during the season in question.

«In this work, we evaluate the agreement between MSU and homogenized radiosonde data sets on multiyear (predominantly 5 - year) time scales and find that MSU data sets are often more similar to each other than to radiosonde data sets and vice versa.

Using U.S. Weather Service data on precipitation, radiosonde measurements of CAPE and lightning - strike counts from the National Lightning Detection Network at the University of Albany, State University of New York (UAlbany), they concluded that 77 percent of the variations in lightning strikes could be predicted from knowing just these two parameters.

UAH validates some of the choices they have made on the best way to process satellite data (radiances) by comparing their results to radiosondes.

To date, most large - scale water vapor climatological studies have relied primarily on analysis of radiosonde data, which have good resolution in the lower troposphere in populated regions but are of limited value at high altitude and are lacking over remote oceanic regions.

However, early radiosonde sensors suffered from significant measurement biases, particularly for the upper troposphere, and changes in instrumentation with time often lead to artificial discontinuities in the data record... Consequently, most of the analysis of radiosonde humidity has focused on trends for altitudes below 500 hPa and is restricted to those stations and periods for which stable instrumentation and reliable moisture soundings are available.

Dessler et al. published a paper which used the change in the velocity of radiosonde balloons, instead of the on board instrumentation to show the the tropical troposphere hot spot did exist even though the correlation of the data required some serious creativity.

UAH MSU RSS MSU NCDC GISTEMP Hadley CET Armagh Hadley CRUG Radiosonde balloon SIDC SSN A word on scale Source files

Anyway, our paper concluded by suggesting that, in view of the extreme significance of upper - level humidity to the climate change story, the international radiosonde data on upper - level humidity should not be «written off» without a serious attempt at abstracting the best possible humidity signal from within the noise of instrumental and operational changes at each of the relevant radiosonde stations.

Radiosonde locations are quickly plotted (from ERA - 40 data ingest for January 1, 2001): There are on the order of 700 stations used with the highest density in the Northern Hemisphere especially in Norther America and Central Europe.

Whether it is really missing and the degree to which it is missing in fact depend on which analysis of the satellite data and radiosonde data one believes... and there are good reasons to believe there are problems with the data and that the models are basically correct.

DWT of Feb Mar 07 vs Feb Mar 08 were very similar, in fact 08 Was warmer by 1 K by radiosonde DWT's as per graph on my website.

I have checked up on the diurnal variation in temperature and found this paper: Seidel et al., 2005 Diurnal cycle of upper - air temperature estimated from radiosondes.

Zhang, and J. Wang, 2005: A statistical model of cloud vertical structure based on reconciling cloud layer amounts inferred from satellites and radiosonde humidity profiles.

John Christy, the scientist and interviewee on whose work this latter claim is based, seems to have forgotten that he had written in a US Climate Change Science Program report: «This significant discrepancy [between lower and upper atmosphere warming] no longer exists because errors in the satellite and radiosonde [weather balloon instrument] data have been identified and corrected.

Despite unanimous agreement on the sign of the trends, substantial disagreement exists among available estimates as to the rate of temperature changes, particularly outside the NH extratropical troposphere, which has been well sampled by radiosondes.

The fits with the indiviual radiosonde measurements, look at the plots please on page 10 in the EGU presentation:

The IPCC fifth assessment report concluded:» based on multiple independent analyses of measurements from radiosondes and satellite sensors it is virtually certain that globally the troposphere has warmed and the stratosphere has cooled since the mid-20th century.

I know aspersion have been made about the ERBE data, and the Radiosonde data, but that is what we have and can't be blamed for relying on it.

My «Word matching» throws up the issue that the paper is only useful for «clear sky» applications, when M's calculation is based on «real sky» radiosonde observations and «real sky» observations from a high tower.

He doesn't mention that the radiosonde datasets are regarded as questionable for climatological purposes at higher altitude due to radiative heating / cooling effects on the instrument packages.

They don't realize this is a huge step forward in atmospheric physics, mainly because all of the equations and relations that he has coerced out of the radiosonde data are applicable at almost any point on the Earth and at any season, averaged over time and within tight error bars.

The partition of the outgoing long wave radiation into upward atmospheric emittance and surface transmitted radiation components is based on the accurate computation of the true greenhouse - gas optical thickness for the radiosonde data.