On Dec 11, 11:14*pm, "Yokel"
wrote:
"Will Hand" wrote in message

...
|
| "David Buttery" wrote in message
...
| On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:24:28 -0800, Dawlish wrote:
|
| http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporat...20091210b.html
| snip
|
| I can't say I'm too fond of the phrasing of this bit, dealing with 2009:
|
| "Recently released figures confirm that 2009 is expected to be the
fifth-
| warmest year in the instrumental record that dates back to 1850."
|
| I seem to remember saying this last year, but I really do wish the Met
| Office would wait until 1 Jan 2010 before telling us how warm 2009 was!
|
|
| I wonder if the very cold conditions over a lot of Europe/Russia expected
in
| the next half of the month will make a difference or do the El Nino SSTs
| dominate? I would prefer to see land figures only when talking about
| warmest/coldest as that's where humans live - on land. Are there any
| datasets available for land only?
|

Remember your spherical geometry. *Half of the earth's surface is within 30
degrees north and south of the Equator and a substantial part of that is in
the Pacific Ocean (where El Nino lives). *Only 15% of the earth's surface is
north of 45 degrees north and how much of that is Europe and west Russia?

This is why the tropics often dominate in such matters. *There is just so
much more surface area there.
--
* * * * * * * * - Yokel -

"Yokel" posts via a spam-trap account which is not read.


I think that you will find that the Met Office/Hadlet centre
temperature records that have been released as being "the real raw
data" are actually flawed by systematic error.
If you look at the map of distribution of the recording stations, you
will quite clearly see that of the 1500 locations, most of them are in
the USA and other traditionally industrialised areas, and based near
to either big cities, or airports near to cities. And that has been
happenning for the last 100 years or so? Modern day urbanisation/
development, which has led to massive urban heat island effects such
as the generation of "country breezes".

So as you can imagine, systematic error has been drawn into the mix,
such that the temperatures recored do not show a typical spatial
"unbiased" recored of events...in other words they are showing warming
where there isn't any.
The night time minima willalso be biased on the warm side, as the
cities do not cool overnight as the surrounding areas do.

Make no mistake, the only way to stop the promugation of such crap
data sets is to start again, this time totally ignoring any stations
globally which are within a certain radius of modern day urbanisation.

If any other climate scientists are reading this,please re-run your
models without the cities bias, then post here what you observe!

Astra