Sentences with phrase «with land temperature data»

Not exact matches

The average temperature was 57.1 degrees F, up from the old record, in 1998, which landed an average of 54.3 degrees F. «We had our fourth warmest winter (2011/2012) on record, our warmest spring, a very hot summer with the hottest month on record for the nation (July 2012), and a warmer than average autumn,» Jake Crouch, a scientist at the National Climatic Data Center, told NBC News.

In addition, the data density and geographic extent of this study is far greater than most previous studies because over 16,000 stream temperature sites were used with thousands of biological survey locations to provide precise information at scales relevant to land managers and conservationists.

Liming Zhou of the University at Albany, State University of New York, and colleagues studied land - surface temperature data gathered by NASA's Terra and Aqua satellites, which give measurements with a spatial resolution of roughly 1 square kilometre.

In addition to the surface data described above, measurements of temperature above the surface have been made with weather balloons, with reasonable coverage over land since 1958, and from satellite data since 1979.

With annual data, 50 years is short, but the results are very clear With land temperature, the critical value is -7.1 and the DW 1.94.

This conflicts with the Jones et al. (2001) global land instrumental temperature data (Figure 2.1), and the combined hemispheric and global land and marine data (Figure 2.7), where clear warming is not seen until the beginning of the 20th century.

For those not familiar with it, the purpose of Berkeley Earth was to create a new, independent compilation and assessment of global land surface temperature trends using new statistical methods and a wider range of source data.

Global land surface temperature data (green) with linear trends applied to the time frames 1973 to 1980, 1980 to 1988, 1988 to 1995, 1995 to 2001, 1998 to 2005, 2002 to 2010 (blue), and 1973 to 2010 (red).

Our Berkeley Earth team had a similar experience with the thermometer data for the Earth's average land temperature.

Only an amateur with no concept of the material (Stokes) derivative and time - series aliasing would conclude that lack of serial observations, such as provided by land - station data, of diurnally varying temperature at fixed oceanic locations is «not a problem.»

Verify using data collected only over the 1/3 of the planet that is covered with land strikes me as odd, particularly because we expect the land temperatures to rise faster than ocean temperatures.

We can look at the impacts of the GISS infilling method by subtracting the global GISS land - ocean temperature index data with 250 km smoothing from the GISS data with 1200 km smoothing.

It's hard to imagine how Cowtan and Way could determine with any degree of certainty how «the hybrid method works best over land and most importantly sea ice» when there is so little surface air temperature data over sea ice.

They then infill the Arctic and Southern Oceans with land surface air temperature data.

In CRUTEM4: A detailed look, I pointed out the difficulties in providing a comparison of the CRUTEM4 data with the other land - only temperature datasets from NCDC, GISS or BEST due to problems created by different definitions of «land - only», and different averaging and baseline conventions.

So for us people with some engineering experience, that gives us an intuitive feel for why temperatures are hotter over land than what is in the average SST data.

So Australia's BOM data and NZ's NIWA data, both «adjusted» out of their cotton picking minds whether needed or not and generally butchered [and thats being polite,] around with until it bears little relationship with reality accounts for at least one fifth and close to nearly one quarter of the total global land surface temperature data.

There is a major question in my mind of the wisdom of using a «global» surface temperature to begin with and a «global» surface temperature based on a SST which is more related to Tmin averaged with a land based «Surface» temperature that is based on T Ave.. So instead of blindly quoting nonsense, I actually try to verify using all the data that is available.

The tiny, close - knit clique of climate scientists who invented and now drive the «global warming» fraud — for fraud is what we now know it to be — tampered with temperature data so assiduously that, on the recent admission of one of them, land temperatures since 1980 have risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures.

C. warmer than it was with respect to the start of the industrial revolution, I believe that it would be necessary to use actual average global land - ocean surface temperature data (which would be imperfectly known that far back).

This is data linking temperature with pollen count, how do we know that the increase of temperature is not causing the increase in pollen count (increased land available for growth, longer growing seasons, etc)?

Any discussion on that webpage you linked... https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php... regarding their preference for anomalies has to do with land surface, not sea surface, temperatures, which is why their land surface temperature data and consequently their combined land + ocean data are presented as anomalies.

With 1.6 billion measurements, culling land temperature data was a major effort.

Figure 1: BEST land - only surface temperature data (green) with linear trends applied to the timeframes 1973 to 1980, 1980 to 1988, 1988 to 1995, 1995 to 2001, 1998 to 2005, 2002 to 2010 (blue), and 1973 to 2010 (red).

The new ERSST4 temperature series includes an» (i) an increasing amount of ocean data from buoys, which are slightly different than data from ships; (ii) an increasing amount of ship data from engine intake thermometers, which are slightly different than data from bucket sea - water temperatures; and (iii) a large increase in land - station data...» and «More generally, buoy data have been proven to be more accurate and reliable than ship data, with better known instrument characteristics and automated sampling.»

With Russia accounting for a large portion of the world's land mass, incorrect data there could affect the analysis of global temperatures.

«Causes of differences in model and satellite tropospheric warming rates» «Comparing tropospheric warming in climate models and satellite data» «Robust comparison of climate models with observations using blended land air and ocean sea surface temperatures» «Coverage bias in the HadCRUT4 temperature series and its impact on recent temperature trends» «Reconciling warming trends» «Natural variability, radiative forcing and climate response in the recent hiatus reconciled» «Reconciling controversies about the «global warming hiatus»»

They also lead to disagreement with the pollen - based land temperature data.

If you go with 17 years you will see 0.36 °C / decade in the recently released BEST land - temperature data from Richard Muller's group at Berkeley.

The modelled air temperatures over land were compared to land station data and the adjusted SST data were found to give a significantly better agreement with the observed land temperatures.

I want to point out that all of the surface data sets over land suffer from i) a systematic warm bias associated with using minimum temperatures in the construction of trends and I) in blending non-spatially representative sites with good sites.

Figure 2: Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) land - only surface temperature data (green) with linear trends applied to the timeframes 1973 to 1980, 1980 to 1988, 1988 to 1995, 1995 to 2001, 1998 to 2005, 2002 to 2010 (blue), and 1973 to Temperature (BEST) land - only surface temperature data (green) with linear trends applied to the timeframes 1973 to 1980, 1980 to 1988, 1988 to 1995, 1995 to 2001, 1998 to 2005, 2002 to 2010 (blue), and 1973 to temperature data (green) with linear trends applied to the timeframes 1973 to 1980, 1980 to 1988, 1988 to 1995, 1995 to 2001, 1998 to 2005, 2002 to 2010 (blue), and 1973 to 2010 (red).

While derived from sea surface temperature data, the PDO index is well correlated with many records of North Pacific and Pacific Northwest climate and ecology, including sea level pressure, winter land — surface temperature and precipitation, and stream flow.

Figure 2.4 (Folland et al., 2001) shows simulations of global land - surface air temperature anomalies in model runs forced with SST, with and without bias adjustments to the SST data before 1942.

Note we're using BEST land area, so actual rates of warming are slightly elevated from global levels including sea surface temperatures, however BEST has enough resolution to allow us to work with 12.5 years of temperature data and not have such abysmal CI as to need to reject the comparisons outright..

Now the NOAA data comes in and confirms the GISS data, and shows the http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2009/jun/global.html Global Highlights: Based on preliminary data, the globally averaged combined land and sea surface temperature was the second warmest on record for June and the January - June year - to - date tied with 2004 as the fifth warmest on record.

aaron, all three datasets start with the same source data: land surface air temperatures and sea surface temperatures.

I don't mean to step on Michael Tobis» toes, but the level of CO2 has always so far as the various ice core and like data strongly suggest (above 99.5 % with consilience) been seasonally variable over land due to interaction of plants and temperature as proven by NH / SH trends, just as it is diurnally variable due to photosynthesis.

If someone can help me see the supposed trend in US land temperature without putting all the data through a huge meat grinder (after 20 years of working with data I don't trust meat grinders), I would be grateful.

In their second approach, the BEST team performed a global land temperature reconstruction with their own methodology, using all the data and the very - rural sites only.

This is likely caused, in part, by GISS masking sea surface temperature data in the polar oceans and replacing it with land surface air temperature data, which is naturally more volatile.

Recently, Philip Jones of CRU (Climatic Research Unit) claimed to have entered into a variety of confidentiality agreements with national meteorological services that prevent him from publicly archiving the land temperature data relied upon by IPCC.

Temperatures are recorded on land and at sea, in part with satellite data.

In no way is this comparable to the manufacture of data where no measurements have been taken or the substitution of one measured variable (daily mean land air temperature) with another (instantaneous SST observations) whose sampling method varies, is exceedingly uneven geographically, and no credible, alias - free time - series can be obtained.

If this is the best such land area surface temperature assessment system on the planet (covering, as well, a broad range of metropolitan, suburban, and rural areas), and the quality of the system is now proven to be demonstrably more prone to error than had been previously assumed — with the preponderance of error shown to produce the impression of warming in excess of real conditions prevailing — what may be reliably inferred about surface temperature monitoring systems data from even less reliable thermometers all over the rest of the world?

There are many problems with using satellite data to estimate air temperatures over land.

Bates takes particular issue with the way Karl handled land temperature data in the Science study which addressed the so - called «climate hiatus.»

With due respect, I consider that it is completely and absolutely inappropriate to present any temperature statistic that combines land and SST data.

This will be the first post in a three - part series examining adjustments in temperature data, with a specific focus on the U.S. land temperatures.

Combining this data with surface air temperature over land would avoid the problem identified by Cowtan and Way.