ChescoWx

16 minutes ago, chubbs said:

I see why you like the "averaging" method. It shows less warming than the data collected in your own backyard

Of course this actual raw data is way beyond my backyard

3 hours ago, chubbs said:

Your county averaging method doesn't agree with your own Chescowx series and the year-to-year differences are probably even larger; smoothed somewhat by the decade averaging. Not surprising because you aren't controlling for differences in average temperature between stations. Every time you add or subtract a station you change the average.

 

NOAA on-the-other-hand agrees very well with the ERA5 re-analysis developed by EMWCF, both on year-to-year temperature changes and on the overall warming since 1950. NOAA and ERA5 are completely independent using different datasets and methods, so agreement at the County level increases confidence in both series. Bottom-line - scientists have a good handle on Chester County temperature trends. If you aren't matching NOAA or ERA5 you aren't getting an accurate depiction of our local climate.  Below is a link which provides background on ERA5, which has land temperature data back to 1950. Note that I can only get ERA data for a lat/long square that approximates Chesco.

https://climate.copernicus.eu/climate-reanalysis

In reality Charlie quite the opposite....as you add more stations you decrease variability when averaging. There is no need to "control" or change the actual data after the fact.  I have all available possible stations that should be in the NCEI Chester County average. Below is all available actual stations temps vs the post hoc adjusted averages just since 1970. You can as always see the significant cooling adjustments applied to the 1970's-1980's and 1990's....and then of course the gentle warming adjustments to the 2000's and 2010's. No wonder we only like to show the scary red after adjustments on TV and here....it clearly does a much better job supporting the climate alarmists agenda! If we showed the raw data it would not be alarming at all!! So Charlie we discussed earlier why we had to chill the 1920s/1930's/1940's (time of obs etc.) so what was the reason for the continued cooling after the fact adjustments from the 1970's thru 1990's and now the warming adjustments being applied over the last 20 years?? Was it time of obs bias? station siting? bad equipment?? If any of the above can you show us by station which ones were problematic and how the applied adjustments were calculated? 

And again below is all stations with up to 17 actual reporting sites included in the most recent 2 decades. The same pattern of large chilling adjustments for 111 years and now increasing warming adjustments as you can clearly see during the past 2 decades. Why the post observation warming adjustments of 0.3 degrees in the 2010's? Is it time of obs? bad equipment? Do we know the exact answer??

12 hours ago, chubbs said:

As usual you are jumping to the wrong conclusion based on lousy analysis. You aren't controlling for differences in average temperature  between stations. Every time you change the stations included in your County average, you get a different result. To get a cooler result add in some relatively cool stations. I don't see any recent "warming adjustment" for NOAA when I compare to your own Chescowx series. Quite the contrary NOAA and Chescowx are in good agreement on the warming rate over the past 54 years. Good news for your post-1970 data.

 

 

So let's correct your above with the actual raw data analysis below. What you call ChescoWx above let's break it into just the actual 3 stations (not the up to 24 stations we have in the actual data) Coatesville 1E / Coatesville 2W and East Nantmeal averaged together vs. the NCEI adjustments. You can clearly see the warming adjustment - now up to 0.77  degrees in the most recent complete decade!  So they cooled the first 8 decades and warmed the last 4 - voila that gives you the blue warming line vs. the actual data not warming at all and in fact showing cooling.