Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Options

Blog - exploring climate data (part 3, old version)

edited February 2015

I put a version of Nadja's blog post on "the deterioration of climate data" on the wiki:

I edited her English, added links, and added a short section of links to discussions of the effects of missing data on HadCRUT4. Everyone - especially Nad - should take a look and see if they like this post.

Note: this version has been superseded and will not be posted to the blog. For a discussion of the new version, go here.

• Options
1.

Here's one possible explanation of the "increase of missing data": when new weather stations appear, they just appear. But when old stations disappear (or stop producing data) there's a mark for "missing data".

This could be wrong, but it would explain the appearance of an increase in missing data without an actual decline in the number of stations.

Comment Source:Here's one possible explanation of the &quot;increase of missing data&quot;: when new weather stations appear, they just appear. But when old stations disappear (or stop producing data) there's a mark for &quot;missing data&quot;. This could be wrong, but it would explain the appearance of an increase in missing data without an actual decline in the number of stations.
• Options
2.

I put a version of Nadja’s blog post on “the deterioration of climate data” on the wiki:

Blog - exploring climate data (part 3)

Sorry John but I had already edited another thread at http://forum.azimuthproject.org/discussion/1501/how-good-is-climate-science-temperature-data/?Focus=12881#Comment_12881 Your copy of an older blog post is outdated. In particular as I wrote long time before the visualization can in principle be seen at: http://nad0815.github.io/climate/tempGlobe/. I write in principle since unfortunately the company Klokan technologies seems to change once in a while the underlying files of webgl earth, which may induce a nonworking of the visualization. I wrote to them already a couple of times and asked them kindly to stop that.

Furthermore I had asked you in the comment to store the images at Azimuth. We are at the quota limit with our blog, so I prefer not to lure too much Azimuth readers to our blog.

Please feel free to correct the english.

In fact the CRUTEM 4 data looks to me worse than bad. I am currently looking at the averages (which tells also something about the whole dataset and it seems since around 2005 the dataset as it is offered online is - I would say - not usable. I would have liked to show you the averages, but Klokan technologies changed today again their files, which also killed the average visualization, since I had written that into the same file. So either they come to terms again or I need to restructure fist.

Comment Source:>I put a version of Nadja’s blog post on “the deterioration of climate data” on the wiki: > Blog - exploring climate data (part 3) Sorry John but I had already edited another thread at [http://forum.azimuthproject.org/discussion/1501/how-good-is-climate-science-temperature-data/?Focus=12881#Comment_12881](http://forum.azimuthproject.org/discussion/1501/how-good-is-climate-science-temperature-data/?Focus=12881#Comment_12881) Your copy of an older blog post is outdated. In particular as I wrote long time before the visualization can in principle be seen at: [http://nad0815.github.io/climate/tempGlobe/](http://nad0815.github.io/climate/tempGlobe/). I write in principle since unfortunately the company Klokan technologies seems to change once in a while the underlying files of webgl earth, which may induce a nonworking of the visualization. I wrote to them already a couple of times and asked them kindly to stop that. Furthermore I had asked you in the comment to store the images at Azimuth. We are at the quota limit with our blog, so I prefer not to lure too much Azimuth readers to our blog. Please feel free to correct the english. I supplemented this post with your additions about the missing data. In fact the CRUTEM 4 data looks to me worse than bad. I am currently looking at the averages (which tells also something about the whole dataset and it seems since around 2005 the dataset as it is offered online is - I would say - not usable. I would have liked to show you the averages, but Klokan technologies changed today again their files, which also killed the average visualization, since I had written that into the same file. So either they come to terms again or I need to restructure fist.
• Options
3.

Comment Source:>I supplemented this post with your additions about the missing data. I missed though some comments on why they stopped posting their temperatures in 2011.
Comment Source:>around 2005 the dataset as it is offered online is - I would say - not usable. I meanwhile restructured and to be more precise: starting at 2008 the average temperatures look as if they are enormously shooting up and the anomalies start oscillating largely.