131 replies to this topic

[The Average Joe]

I think GoG is pretty reasonable and not a troll. Just someone with a differing opinion . I feel I have made a much stronger case for my position than he, but then I may be biased....

 

Ape- math and science are great. Until they are manipulated to achieve a political outcome.  If the warming data supported the theory, I would be on the side arguing for it.

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Joe - I stated, "...the sensor and wall haven't been altered since the day they were installed..."  Then you say, "The wall wasn't there."  Gee, that's an alteration.  I'll be more clear.  If a sensor is placed close to a wall that has thermal sink properties and introduces errors in the sensor readings, then those particular errors will remain constant as long as there are no alterations in the sensor and the wall.

 

I should warn you...sensors in my business.  Been in them for 45 years.  Let's discuss sensors and their associated errors. 

 

1)  All sensor outputs contain errors.  They include:

     - Accuracy error

     - Linearity error

     - Thermal error

     - Zero error

     - Span error

     - Hysteresis error

     - Calibration error

     - Dead band error

     - Saturation error

     - Resolution error

     - Compensation error

     - Stability error

     - Johnson noise error

 

When all these errors are combined (use sum of least squares method), you get a composite error called Total Error Band (TEB).  Next, you need a good understanding of the differences between accuracy, precision, and resolution as they relate to sensor errors.  All basic sensing elements are analog.  They will have infinite resolution and crappy accuracy and precision.  The vast majority of sensors are compensated during the manufacturing process to improve accuracy and precision.  With tremendous effort and cost, sensors can achieve TEB in the range of 0.1% - 0.5%.  A few sensor technologies can be made to achieve TEB of 0.01%, but it's not common.  Converting a sensor output from analog to digital will improve resolution (after you do oversampling), but not affect accuracy or precision.

 

So how do people get sensor readings to improve?  High degrees of compensation can help.  There are any number of statistical methods to substantially improve the data.  Oversampling is used to improve resolution by orders of magnitude.  Frequent calibration can help.  NOAA's global CO2 sensor stations are calibrated once an hour using standard gasses with known CO2 concentrations.

 

There are also any number of external error sources that are unpredictable and those have to be dealt with on a case by case basis.  Once understood, they be can factored out of the final answer by applying offsets to the calculation.  This is a technique often used in medical sensors where the sensor output is actually incorrect, but the reasons are know why and corrected in the final calculation.

 

After all this, my point is simple.  Data from sensors that don't quite give you the correct number is often very useful, especially when you are tracking trends and changes, as in climate science.  If your temperature sensor gives you an annual average of 72.1 degrees over the past 12 months, and gave you an annual average of 69.3 degrees over the previous 12 months, that's the information you want.  The idea that the sensor is off by 0.3 degrees doesn't matter, because that offset was true for all the readings.

 

Joe,  You claim that all the air sampled at Mauna Loa comes from China.  Wrong, my friend.  Hawaii experiences Trade Winds for 70% of the year, and these winds come from a NE or ENE direction.  It's why all the good surfing spots are on the north  and east sides of all the Hawaiian Islands.  If Mauna Loa is measuring air from China, it's after an incredibly long trip.

[Carl G]

GoG - I've been wondering for some time how population growth affects the measurement of temperatures.  Common sense tells me that as a city grows and more greenery is replaced with cement and asphalt the area's temperature will climb do to heat being absorbed and re-released as the day cools.  It would be similar to a brick oven radiating heat back in and also out.  In your scenario of the wall with a temperature gauge, while it may have never changed, if its surrounding area has then the readings will be affected.

 

Thanks for another interesting discussion.

 

Carl (not a science) G(uy)

[The Average Joe]

I stand corrected on the trade winds. I didn't check on if there was any difference at 5 kilometer height. I'll just trust they are the same (or close enough).  I guess I was thinking of ocean currents. Funny thing is that the point is moot as Mauna Loa is excluded from the global CO2 network anyway according to NOAA, so the joke is on both of us. If you do look at the CO2 sensor map, you have to notice that the majority of the sensors are in the northern hemisphere (where most of the CO2 is produced). This is supposed to be a global issue right?

 

And yes, there were alterations to that site as well as many others. Encroaching development happens over 50 or 100 years.  Imagine Folsom 100 years ago. If we had a sensor out in some field then, it would have been fine.  But it would be surrounded by city now as well as being near major urban areas. Its temperature readings would have certainly averaged higher over time.Just another error to factor in. While the CO2 sensors may do hourly calibration, the temperature sensors do not. Many also don't use hourly measurements, instead they use a maxT + minT / 2 formula. Far less accurate than 24 samples a day.  And yes, Carl, the Urban Heat Island effect is very real.  http://scied.ucar.ed...an-heat-islands

For our purposes here, we must understand that the "global warming" is not primarily a raising of the hottest temperatures, it's a raising of the minimum temperatures. Now what effect does an UHI have? 

 

"Urban-rural temperature differences are often largest during calm, clear evenings. This is because rural areas cool off faster at night than cities, which retain much of the heat stored in roads, buildings, and other structures. As a result, the largest urban-rural temperature difference, or maximum heat island effect, is often three to five hours after sunset" 

 

Hmm, exactly the effect we are seeing. How curious. Oddly, only around 130 sensors are rural tier 1 or 2. Could that possibly create a bias?

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Carl,  there is indeed an effect on local temperatures due to urban activity and growth.  It's called the Urban Heat Island effect.  In a rural area that has a high concentration of foliage and flora, the solar radiation is absorbed by the plant life and the energy used to drive the chemistry of photosynthesis which helps the plants grow.  So the solar energy is converted to another form of energy and is not re-radiated as thermal energy.  In an urban setting, solar energy is absorbed by streets, buildings, sidewalks, and automobiles.  These things do not convert the solar energy to another form.  They retain the energy in the form of a temperature rise.  then as the sun goes down, they re-radiate the thermal energy into the local atmosphere and into other objects in close proximity.  The result is the local "climate" is warmed by several degrees until the hotter objects cool to the ambient temperature.  It is an effect that is well known and was first observed early in the 19th century.  Does it contribute to global warming?  Some think so, but I haven't seen any data that shows a link yet.  Common sense makes me think that it does contribute in some small way.  Concrete is nowhere near as efficient at absorbing/radiating heat as water is.  The heat capacity of water is about 4.2 kJ/(kg K).  The heat capacity of concrete is about 0.80 kJ/(kg K).  kJ = kiloJoules  kg = kilograms  K = temperature Kelvin

 

Here is a link to more information about it - https://en/Wikipedia...ban_heat_island

[apeman45]

Chris - I don't live under a bridge but in empire ranch so not sure how that makes me a troll.  I'm proud to say I have never had a Facebook account.  I do have a youtube channel but sorry to say it's not about political agendas or trolling.  My passion for the environment comes from my love of the outdoors. In my walkabouts over my short lifetime I have witnessed huge changes in the Sierra Nevada, especially in the last 20 years.  It's alarming to me and has led me to learn why.  I see it with my own eyes so I know it's real.  Science has given me the answers.  Politicians have given me headaches.  If the politicians would just listen to the scientists then there is hope.  I'm not talking about citizen scientists like us folsom forum members.  I'm talking real scientists with PHD's who make it their life's work to do unbiased research in their field of work.  Those guys and gals are my heroes!

 

Here's my youtube channel.  It's very amateurish but I'm quite proud of the video called "JMT 2014 17 days on the John Muir Trail" because my daughter accompanied me on that journey.  

 

https://www.youtube....YyuE7VTG3ZUgxUQ

[Chris]

Chris - I don't live under a bridge but in empire ranch so not sure how that makes me a troll.  I'm proud to say I have never had a Facebook account.  I do have a youtube channel but sorry to say it's not about political agendas or trolling.  My passion for the environment comes from my love of the outdoors. In my walkabouts over my short lifetime I have witnessed huge changes in the Sierra Nevada, especially in the last 20 years......

Bro, I think you got the wrong "climate denier" here.....?  I don't think I've used "Troll" or "Libtard" here for a very long time....?  Trying to keep it "classy"...so to speak.....

 

Never had a Facebook either....  Like you I'd rather be outside doing stuff.  Not a phone guy either....  Amazes me how many people walk around looking into their phones while avoiding human interaction or not noticing the beautiful blue sky....  Chris

[apeman45]

Oh sorry Chris.  It was 2 Aces that thought I was a troll.  We should all get outside more before the sun gets any hotter!

[2 Aces]

Oh sorry Chris.  It was 2 Aces that thought I was a troll.  We should all get outside more before the sun gets any hotter!

OK, maybe not a troll, but how about an *overly-panic-stricken and alarmist hide under the bed climate change cultist*?

But i do admit that you people are amusing.


 

[Chris]

Chris,  OK.  I will entertain the graph you've posted so many times.  It actually illustrates my point quite well.

 

First, the issue - The phenomenon that has everyone concerned is not the absolute levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.  No one is challenging that data.  The issue that concerns scientists is the rate at which the CO2 level is rising.    I've tried to explain this before to you.

 

Wow, you finally addressed it...!  And no one is challenging the data, heck you never even acknowledged it until now....!  Your argument turns to dust when you see that CO2 ppm has been at 7000, 4000, and as recently as 100 million years ago at 1800 ppm.  Yes, historically it's pretty evident that CO2 has been very,very high and a bit lower than it is now.  Most of it before man ever existed.  Your "rate of change" argument is total BS.  For one it is based on data collected for a very, very, very short period of time (what, since the 1880's at best....?).  And with very inaccurate and varied collection methods, operators, instruments, and no traceable calibration data on those instruments.  You're an instrument guy, you should know that only until recent times that instruments used for this type of study have been really good, accurate, tested, and their calibrations verified.  And your Keeling Curve....  Dude, that's only since 1958.  Not saying it's bad science but get back to me in a few million years when you have a real long term data set.  Your "rate of change" argument is just silly and is yet another diversionary tactic used by the "climate clowns" on the left to push your political agenda disguised as a science problem.  Funny how you "climate clowns" never even talk about the Sun.  Climate change is not mans fault, look to the Sun, your answer lies there.  But of course there's no way for you lefties to tax and regulate the Sun....!  At least not yet I hope....!      Chris

 

p.s.  If you guys can call people like me a "climate denier" I reserve the right to call you all "climate clowns"...!  I think it fits....  

 

50 million years ago, CO2 at about 500 ppm...
               100 million years ago, CO2 at about 1800 ppm....
                                  200 million years ago, CO2 at about 1500 ppm....
                                                                           300 million years ago, CO2 at about 300 ppm....
                                                                                                             400 million years ago, CO2 at about 3500 ppm...
                                                                                                                                                      500 million years ago, CO2 at about 4800 ppm....

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Chris, sadly, you are a member of the "If I don't understand it, it must not be true" club. Technology is moving forward, making new discoveries daily. If you aren't able to understand these advancements, then you can choose one of two paths:

1) You can accept the science as true and factual because it's been developed by experts.

2) You can stomp your feet and leave the room because it's filled with brainwashed lairs that are trying to get you to accept ideas beyond your ability to comprehend.

As advised in an Indiana Jones movie, "Choose wisely".

One other comment - your attempt to lecture me on "instrument" technology is laughable.

[Chris]

Chris, sadly, you are a member of the "If I don't understand it, it must not be true" club. Technology is moving forward, making new discoveries daily. If you aren't able to understand these advancements, then you can choose one of two paths:

1) You can accept the science as true and factual because it's been developed by experts.

2) You can stomp your feet and leave the room because it's filled with brainwashed lairs that are trying to get you to accept ideas beyond your ability to comprehend.

As advised in an Indiana Jones movie, "Choose wisely".

One other comment - your attempt to lecture me on "instrument" technology is laughable.

Must be hard to be the smartest guy on the internet...........? 

 

Oh, and funny that I work in Pharma but yet you seem to know more than I on that subject............?

 

And funny that my undergraduate degree is in Geology but yet you know more than I in that area, climatology, ecology, etc...........?

 

And funny, that every day, I calibrate, standardize, span, check oxygen sensors, pH sensors, rebuild them, use a multi meter, check the 4-20 mA output, program a PLC, interact with a DCS system 10 hours a day.....   I do this before I can even start my job.........!  And I have to document every step...  Sign for it, make it part of the record.  More instruments than you can imagine, more instruments in one place, one plant, than you have ever seen in your life, I guarantee it, in the biggest plant that does what it does on the planet, in this world,  but yet I know nothing about instruments............?

 

I think you and Charlie Brown need to check your big heads.............     

 

Chris

 

 

 

 

 

I guess you know all Charlie Brown, me thinks that big head is 

[Carl G]

GoG - Call me a sceptic too.  I do believe the earth is warming, but my skepticism comes around it being manmade.  I believe that the climate, like many things in life, functions as a cycle or pendulum.  

 

I also believe that mankind's over inflated sense of self worth makes us want to believe that we are the cause of all that is good and bad.  Instead we are along for the ride just like the rest of nature.

 

I also believe we have done harm to this earth by not taking better care of it in how we live our lives.  Plastic in the ocean.  Loss of mountains because we seek gold and coal.  The list goes on and on.

[2 Aces]

North America is 7% of the world's population. If there is a man-made "problem" (which is unproven) then you 'climate change panic guys' are barking up the wrong tree. Go to the Asian countries and whine since they have close to 5 billion people. Keep trying to sell the panic if it excites you.

[Chris]

GoG - Call me a sceptic too.  I do believe the earth is warming, but my skepticism comes around it being manmade.  I believe that the climate, like many things in life, functions as a cycle or pendulum.  

 

I also believe that mankind's over inflated sense of self worth makes us want to believe that we are the cause of all that is good and bad.  Instead we are along for the ride just like the rest of nature.

 

I also believe we have done harm to this earth by not taking better care of it in how we live our lives.  Plastic in the ocean.  Loss of mountains because we seek gold and coal.  The list goes on and on.

Carl, I like your take on things.   Chris