Getting Hotter? What to do?

[Cow Poke]

Thank you. Very interesting. However, how do scouts that do not live in a region that has natural flint go about it? With what do they practise?

Flint is very transportable.

And there are many ways to make fire, including using a battery and steel wool or even the foil from a gum wrapper, the old "stick and block"....

These are very basic skills that every Boy Scout learns.

[Ronson]

Yep and here in Colorado we had record number of consecutive under 90 Temps all the way from the start of the year until this month. One of our coolest June's on record as well. Also some very needed moisture that pulled the entire state out of a "megadrought" that climatologists were declatingbwould last until at least 2030.

[Mountain Man]

They have been adjusted to remove known biases. I've been over what those biases are. The majority adjustments that are visible in your cut-n-paste from the anti-agw site are:

Time of observation bias
Cutover from LIG or similar to mmts.

Those shifts occurred across the time frame where you see the data converge. They each contribute a little less than half. Other equipment adjustments like change in shelter height make up the difference.

sadly, you chose to believe these are not real, yet there has been ample research to support each. There is no objective leg to stand on for denying the legitimacy or need for the adjustments to get a real picture of what the change has been.

yet climate denialists continue to promote charts like the above as 'evidence' of corruption or malfeasance on those unable to understand why the adjustments are made, or in a small percentage of cases, those that can, but simply won't acknowledge their validity for ideological reasons.

if I can measure the actual difference between two thermometers, the if I want to compare their readings, I must calibrate one to the other (or both to a fixed standard). If I have a weight, to use on a balance, then I need to compare it to a fixed standard if I am going to use it for commerce, or to get results that are accurate.

To get a handle on just how warped the denialist community is, ask yourself what they would be publishing if the situation were reversed and the bias was the opposite and older equipment read 1/2 a degree lower than present day. They'd be DEMANDING the bias adjustments be done, and looking for new ones.

and that is because they are not driven by objective science, but by other things, money, ideology, politics etc.

Except if there were really errors in the readings, then you would see the "adjustments" going both up and down and not just up, up, up.

The fact is, it is simply not possible to be able to accurately second guess what a temperature reading from decades ago "should have been", making it less science and more guesswork, and the "adjustments" are not being made to account for a supposedly known bias but to conform with the preferred narrative.

[oxmixmudd]

Of course, my sampling was a flippant offer and wasn't meant to indicate anything. If I had picked a different day of July it would have looked vastly different.

In reality, the temps for entire month of July this year are above average in my city, as were last year's temps. But the previous eight years were below average. Too small a sampling, time and region, to indicate much of anything. Especially since summer temps rely heavily on storm fronts; More rain equals lower temps.

I think I made that exact point. But MM was not making that point. MM was trying to say his July temperature tracking in his small locality means something wrt global warming, yet it doesn't. Your post provides a different set of temps, and a different trend, and an opportunity to add a little tiny bit of education on the issue using real data.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Flint is very transportable.

It is but in societies for which only foot or possibly animal transportation is available it would take longer to be transported. And what for would it be bartered?

And there are many ways to make fire, including using a battery and steel wool or even the foil from a gum wrapper, the old "stick and block"....

Take away all of those apart from the two sticks approach. That was all early humans had. And of course once that fire was kindled it had to be kept alight.

[Cow Poke]

It is but in societies for which only foot or possibly animal transportation is available it would take longer to be transported. And what for would it be bartered?

I think you way underestimate American ingenuity.

Take away all of those apart from the two sticks approach. That was all early humans had. And of course once that fire was kindled it had to be kept alight.

So, just because it's getting hotter, we forget everything we learned from the past, and lose everything we have created, built, and retained?

[oxmixmudd]

Except if there were really errors in the readings, then you would see the "adjustments" going both up and down and not just up, up, up.

The fact is, it is simply not possible to be able to accurately second guess what a temperature reading from decades ago "should have been", making it less science and more guesswork, and the "adjustments" are not being made to account for a supposedly known bias but to conform with the preferred narrative.

Nobody is second guessing. There are KNOWN biases in older data. All that is being done is those KNOWN biases are being removed.

I'm wandering if you understand what a known bias is. A known bias could be a known difference between the results two pieces of equipment give in the same environment, or it could be a known difference in the environment that will alter the measurement of the device itself.

I actually posted some specifics earlier in this thread wrt the introduction of MMTS automated temperature measument devices as the replaced Liquid in Glass thermometers measured with manual observation in Urbana, Illinois. The MM stands for max/min where the max min for the day are recorded automatically by the device. What was found was that especially the MAX recorded from LIG tended to be about .6 degree C HIGHER than what is captured by MMTS. Min was very close to the same. But when looking at average, the older equipment will indeed tend to be about .3 degree C higher. It is simple math and the simple physical differences between the two devices.

So to compare max temperatures measured with MMTS equipment to max temperatures measured withe LIG equipment using MMTS as the reference, you must subtract .6 degree C from LIG measurements. To compare mean temperatures, you must subtract 0.3C.

And this is what is done.

Likewise, it is well documented that when measurements are taken also introduces bias. But this bias is a cumulative bias, not a fixed bias day to day. It is a bias that shows up in the averages of yearly or monthly sets of data, but is not necessarily present in each day's measurement. And that means this bias is going to be very difficult for a layman to understand.

But a similar type of bias arises in computing hardware depending on the type of sign representation used for negative numbers. And that is why floating point processors all use 1's complement in their calculations rather than 2's complement to represent negative values. Early on it was discovered that certain kinds of iterative calculations will become biased when using 2's complement, even though almost all the individual results will look the same.

and again, these are all hard science realities reproducible any time you want to demonstrate them. And so, time of observation bias is also compensated for. It turns out that the particular time changes associated with US measurements bias older temperatures about another .5 degree C. And again, if you want to compare temperature averages from data measured using the old times of measurement to modern data measured according to the current times of measurement, you must subtract out that bias.

Why were these changes made? Mostly because the modern equipment and time of measurement actually give more accurate measurements over time. Nevertheless, to compare the data to understand temperature trends across the transitions, one must make the data, as close as possible, as if all measurements were taken with the same equipment and using the same protocols.

that's all the there is to it. And these biases are taken into account regardless of whether they push temperature averages up or down.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I think you way underestimate American ingenuity.



So, just because it's getting hotter, we forget everything we learned from the past, and lose everything we have created, built, and retained?

Most of us in western society are dependent on a relatively small pool of those who have the skills and the knowledge. None of us could build an auto, or a computer, or a phone.

And most of us could not build a shelter without some tools, assuming we had them. If we did not have them we would have to go back to flint knapping.

[Mountain Man]

Nobody is second guessing. There are KNOWN biases in older data. All that is being done is those KNOWN biases are being removed.

I'm wandering if you understand what a known bias is. A known bias could be a known difference between the results two pieces of equipment give in the same environment, or it could be a known difference in the environment that will alter the measurement of the device itself.

I actually posted some specifics earlier in this thread wrt the introduction of MMTS automated temperature measument devices as the replaced Liquid in Glass thermometers measured with manual observation in Urbana, Illinois. The MM stands for max/min where the max min for the day are recorded automatically by the device. What was found was that especially the MAX recorded from LIG tended to be about .6 degree C HIGHER than what is captured by MMTS. Min was very close to the same. But when looking at average, the older equipment will indeed tend to be about .3 degree C higher. It is simple math and the simple physical differences between the two devices.

So to compare max temperatures measured with MMTS equipment to max temperatures measured withe LIG equipment using MMTS as the reference, you must subtract .6 degree C from LIG measurements. To compare mean temperatures, you must subtract 0.3C.

And this is what is done.

Likewise, it is well documented that when measurements are taken also introduces bias. But this bias is a cumulative bias, not a fixed bias day to day. It is a bias that shows up in the averages of yearly or monthly sets of data, but is not necessarily present in each day's measurement. And that means this bias is going to be very difficult for a layman to understand.

But a similar type of bias arises in computing hardware depending on the type of sign representation used for negative numbers. And that is why floating point processors all use 1's complement in their calculations rather than 2's complement to represent negative values. Early on it was discovered that certain kinds of iterative calculations will become biased when using 2's complement, even though almost all the individual results will look the same.

and again, these are all hard science realities reproducible any time you want to demonstrate them. And so, time of observation bias is also compensated for. It turns out that the particular time changes associated with US measurements bias older temperatures about another .5 degree C. And again, if you want to compare temperature averages from data measured using the old times of measurement to modern data measured according to the current times of measurement, you must subtract out that bias.

Why were these changes made? Mostly because the modern equipment and time of measurement actually give more accurate measurements over time. Nevertheless, to compare the data to understand temperature trends across the transitions, one must make the data, as close as possible, as if all measurements were taken with the same equipment and using the same protocols.

that's all the there is to it. And these biases are taken into account regardless of whether they push temperature averages up or down.

No, they are not adjusting for "known biases in older data" because they have no way of knowing what the temperature "should have been" for readings taken decades ago. It is simply not possible. The only bias at work here is deceptively corrupting the historical temperature record to conform with a political agenda, and when that bias is accounted for and we look at the "unadjusted" data, we see the truth that there has been no warming for at least a century.

[rogue06]

On a personal note...

My upstairs consists of two bedrooms with their own bathrooms and the laundry area between them at the top of the stairs.

About fifteen years ago the HOA took it upon themselves to remove the tree that provided shade to the front -- causing cooling costs to increase afterwards.

Now, I don't know why I didn't think of this before, but given the front bedroom is warmer (why I sleep there in the winter and in the back room in summer), I wondered what would happen if I simply closed the door to it and closed the bathroom door inside as well.

Basically the room is an oven by 3:00. But the bathroom still stays cool^[1]. And that heat is trapped and no longer spreads through the place. My AC doesn't even come on until about 3 now even in upper 90s temperatures. Used to come on shortly after noon in those conditions.

So that's three hours less during the day.

Moreover, despite the high heat, my AC hasn't been running at night (after 11 PM).

More time that it doesn't run any more.

The result is that I'm using the AC much less so I'm using less energy and spending "less." Well, given the sharp jump in energy prices under old Joe, I'm probably spending as much if not a bit more, but it's a lot less than if I wasn't closing off that bedroom




1. the vent in that bedroom never worked well and all of the heating/cooling came from the bathroom. But with the bathroom door shut even with the bedroom over 90 degrees that bathroom might be the coolest room in the whole place now.

[oxmixmudd]

No, they are not adjusting for "known biases in older data" because they have no way of knowing what the temperature "should have been" for readings taken decades ago. It is simply not possible. The only bias at work here is deceptively corrupting the historical temperature record to conform with a political agenda, and when that bias is accounted for and we look at the "unadjusted" data, we see the truth that there has been no warming for at least a century.

I am sorry you were not able to understand the points I made.

Let's try a simple question and answer format. Suppose For the last 10 years you are using a particular thermometer. And you now buy a new thermometer that is guaranteed to be accuracte to 0.05 degree. Using it, you discover your old thermometer reads 1 degree higher than it should for all temperatures. Now - your lowest recorded temperature with the old thermometer at your house was three years ago and was 13F.

Now, your old thermometer is a simple mercury in glass thermometer, it is in perfect shape, there is nothing that has changed or been damaged that could posibly have affected its function over time

What was the actual low temperature at your house?

[Gondwanaland]

That's a skill they taught us in Boy Scouts! A Country Boy Will Survive!

My parents never let me go into Boy Scouts, but my wife learned knapping from her tribe and taught me. It's really satisfying actually

[Gondwanaland]

Most of us in western society are dependent on a relatively small pool of those who have the skills and the knowledge. None of us could build an auto, or a computer, or a phone.

And most of us could not build a shelter without some tools, assuming we had them. If we did not have them we would have to go back to flint knapping.

Also those people will magically poof out of existence if the temperature goes up a couple degrees?

[rogue06]

Flint is very transportable.

And there are many ways to make fire, including using a battery and steel wool or even the foil from a gum wrapper, the old "stick and block"....

These are very basic skills that every Boy Scout learns.

And of course, using a magnifying glass, lens from a pair of eyeglasses, or even a glass (or clear plastic) container full of water, can all be used to focus light to start a fire.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Also those people will magically poof out of existence if the temperature goes up a couple degrees?

"if the temperature goes up a couple of degrees"



No it is all going be perfectly all right. After all you have told us it will be.