Occasional Thoughts on Climate Change

[chubbs]

21 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Funny how Charlie picks his starting point as 1970...I wonder why?? Oh wait I see it below - he starts with one of our coldest decades...cyclical climate change FTW!! 

Nope, I was just matching the years when you claimed the Philadelphia Airport was having a big heat island effect. I am happy to go further back. I extended my chart back to 1941, the origin of temperature data collection at the Philadelphia airport. The Philadelphia airport matches Coatesville fairly well until the big Coatesville station moves in 1946 and 1947, whose effect is clearly seen.  Before the station moves, the Coatesville station was located in a built up section of the City of Coatesville. Roughly as warm as the Philadelphia Airport. Not representative of Chester County. The big heat island effect on this chart is in Chester County not Philadelphia. The reverse heat island due to the Coatesville station move to a more rural location. 

The West Chester station experienced a similar move to a cooler, less built-up, location in 1970. The 1970s are cool in your chart because of faulty analysis. If you correct for the station moves and other network siting changes over the years, like NOAA does, the 1970s don't stand out as a cool decade.

Funny that you complain about heat island effects in Philadelphia but ignore them in Chester County.

 

[ChescoWx]

2 hours ago, chubbs said:

 

For a actual view of the real data see the below....can you see the UHI problem clearer now Charlie?

[TheClimateChanger]

 

[chubbs]

10 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

For a actual view of the real data see the below....can you see the UHI problem clearer now Charlie?

You have Chester County as warm as Philadelphia in 1942. That's your UHI problem. Other local data warms in line with Philadelphia. including Coatesville after its 1946+47 station moves. 

Chester County only had 3 stations in the 1930s, 40s and 50s. Two of them, Coatesville in 1946+47 and West Chester in 1970, had station moves from town---> rural that produced roughly 2F cooling. Since you aren't correcting for station moves and network changes you are baking a reverse heat island effect into your calculations. Surprised a heat island expert like yourself, can't understand that.

[TheClimateChanger]

Thoughts for this morning:

 

[ChescoWx]

On 6/9/2025 at 8:35 PM, chubbs said:

You have Chester County as warm as Philadelphia in 1942. That's your UHI problem. Other local data warms in line with Philadelphia. including Coatesville after its 1946+47 station moves. 

Chester County only had 3 stations in the 1930s, 40s and 50s. Two of them, Coatesville in 1946+47 and West Chester in 1970, had station moves from town---> rural that produced roughly 2F cooling. Since you aren't correcting for station moves and network changes you are baking a reverse heat island effect into your calculations. Surprised a heat island expert like yourself, can't understand that.

Only by chilling the past for all stations can you make that trend line work! Man made climate change in action above! LOL!

[chubbs]

Solar by the numbers. The solar age is here.

https://aukehoekstra.substack.com/p/the-coming-solar-era-in-numbers

[chubbs]

New paper analyzing the flowering date of Kyoto Cherries. Warming began to impact cherry flowering around 1890. Per the paper, urbanization and changes in cultivation are unlikely to have had much impact at that time.

https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.70268

[dseagull]

On 5/28/2025 at 12:47 PM, bdgwx said:

Oh...got it...so the requirement is that you must prove it is wrong. That is convenient because even the most trivial analysis would prove some level of wrongness, but if you don't even make the attempt then you can always claim that you never proved it to be wrong. Brilliant!!

"Wrongness?"  I love lurking on this thread for nonsensical crud like this. 

I hope you were highly intoxicated when you posted this.  (And just incase you are mentally retarded, my sincere apologies.  I just assumed you were of sound mind.)

[dseagull]

On 6/7/2025 at 11:46 AM, ChescoWx said:

We will all keep up the good fight by using actual scientific facts and data against what is the true source of perceived warming - man made climate data alterations being made to the factual raw data.

You will never convince cultists of anything, despite providing data and well-rounded and unbiased observations.   I admire your tenacity, in terms of using factual and logical arguments in questioning the absurdities within the climate catastrophe narrative.  

Good luck...  you are debating science with the same folks that decided that there are an untold number of genders.  Good grief...

Geological timescale is something that weak-minded individuals have difficulty with.  "The thirst for answers" will often create delusional mob mentality.