On Apr 9, 4:10*pm, "Clifford" wrote:
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
...

MARCH TIED FOR WARMEST ON NASAs 129-YEAR NORTHERN HEMISPHERE RECORD.

Basic greenhouse gas physics from MIT.
http://www-paoc.mit.edu/labweb/notes/chap2.pdf

Despite fossil fool lies,
global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.

These hemispherically averaged temperature data come from NASA:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/NH.Ts.txt
They represent the results of tens of millions of readings
taken at thousands of stations covering the lands of the Northern
Hemisphere over the last 129 years. *Yes, the data are corrected
for the urban heat island effect.

The Mean March temperature over the last 129 years is 14.047 C.
The Variance is 0.25258.
The Standard Deviation, or SIGMA, is 0.5026.

Rxy 0.762625 * Rxy^2 0.581597
TEMP = 13.378035 + (0.010293 * (YEAR-1879))
Degrees of Freedom = 127 * * * * F = 176.535308
Confidence of nonzero correlation = approximately
0.9999999999999999999999999 (25 nines), which is darn close to 100%!

The month of March in the year 2008,
is linearly projected to be 14.706,
* * * * * * * * yet it was 15.4. -- 1.4 SIGMA above projected.
The sum of the residuals is 32.79756

Exponential least squares fit:
TEMP = 13.390381 * e^(.0007268 * (YEAR-1879))
The sum of the residuals is 32.65656 - Compare with linear!
(Smaller residuals means a better fit.
A two degree of freedom exponential fits better than
a two degree of freedom linear.)

*Rank of the months of March
Year * Temp C * Anomaly * Z score
2008 * 15.40 * * 1.353 * * 2.69 -- !
2002 * 15.40 * * 1.353 * * 2.69
1990 * 15.36 * * 1.313 * * 2.61
2004 * 15.21 * * 1.163 * * 2.31
2007 * 15.16 * * 1.113 * * 2.21
2000 * 15.11 * * 1.063 * * 2.12
2005 * 15.09 * * 1.043 * * 2.08
2001 * 14.98 * * 0.933 * * 1.86
1997 * 14.98 * * 0.933 * * 1.86
2006 * 14.93 * * 0.883 * * 1.76
1981 * 14.90 * * 0.853 * * 1.70
1998 * 14.89 * * 0.843 * * 1.68
2003 * 14.77 * * 0.723 * * 1.44
. . .
MEAN * 14.047 * *0.000 * * 0.00
. . .
1899 * 13.51 * *-0.537 * *-1.07
1897 * 13.49 * *-0.557 * *-1.11
1911 * 13.46 * *-0.587 * *-1.17
1909 * 13.44 * *-0.607 * *-1.21
1887 * 13.41 * *-0.637 * *-1.27
1908 * 13.39 * *-0.657 * *-1.31
1912 * 13.37 * *-0.677 * *-1.35
1884 * 13.36 * *-0.687 * *-1.37
1917 * 13.28 * *-0.767 * *-1.53
1886 * 13.19 * *-0.857 * *-1.71
1888 * 13.16 * *-0.887 * *-1.77
1896 * 13.15 * *-0.897 * *-1.78
1892 * 13.07 * *-0.977 * *-1.94
1898 * 13.01 * *-1.037 * *-2.06

The most recent 172 continuous months, or 14 years and 4 months,
on this NH.Ts.txt data set are all above the 1951-1980
data set norm of 14 C.

In other words, an arbitrary number to start with.
Good try though!

NOPE! It is not an arbitrary number, Clifford.
The temperature 14 C is very close to the data
set mean, which for the Northern Hemisphere
during 1880 to 2007 was 14.022 C. It is good
data handling practice to have norms near the
mean.


There are 1539 months of data on this data set:
*-- 783 of them are at or above the norm.
*-- 756 of them are below the norm.
This run of 172 months above the norm is the result of a warming
world. *It is too large to occur by chance at any reasonable level
of confidence. *A major volcano eruption, thermonuclear war, or
meteor impact could stop this warming trend for a couple of years,
otherwise expect it to continue.