I missed this post at ClimateAudit a few weeks ago. Another UFA sighted in Arizona. It’s about the surface station in tiny Miami, Arizona. Truth be told, I didn’t even know there was a Miami in Arizona. Next I suppose they’re going to try to tell me there’s a South Beach. The crux of the ClimateAudit post is that the surface station moved, and it introduces a positive bias in the trend. In this post, I will show that the main conclusion reached by Anthony Watts is true, but that it was not the documented move that causes a bias. Instead, it is an undocumented move.

Parking Lot = Warm Bias

First, let’s have a looksee at where the station is to see if there is/are potential source/s of bias. This has already been discussed at length in the thread at ClimateAudit. The short answer: yes.
Continue Reading »

Watts Up With That has A look at temperature anomalies for all 4 global metrics. However, for the analysis, the temperature anomalies have different base periods. I quickly plotted the temperatures using the same base period. I also show the histogram of the temperature anomalies. I chose the base period to be the time from 1979 through January 2008. This makes things really easy because all I have to do is subtract out the mean of all the time series.

The four global temperature anomaly metrics look a lot more similar when they are plotted using the same base period.

The sun crowd is back at it again. I guess because we’ve had a cold January and we’re currently at a minimum in the solar cycle that must mean the two are related. That’s bullocks of course. A few months ago it was the sun that was causing the warming. The sun has approximately 11 year cycles, so it can’t be both. So has the sun caused the recent warming, or the recent cooling? Neither or both? This post attempts to find out the answer.
Continue Reading »

In a previous post, I looked at how the array of surface stations in the USHCN over-samples the United States with respect to yearly averaged temperatures. I did this by looking at three surface station records in Minnesota. The analysis looked at one “bad” station and a couple “good” stations. Bad in this case means that the station might be influenced by microclimate effects.
Continue Reading »