It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
7. Removed 4-line header from a couple of .glo files and loaded them into Matlab. Reshaped to 360r x 720c and plotted; looks OK for global temp (anomalies) data. Deduce that .glo files, after the header, contain data taken row-by-row starting with the Northernmost, and presented as '8E12.4'. The grid is from -180 to +180 rather than 0 to 360. This should allow us to deduce the meaning of the co-ordinate pairs used to describe each cell in a .grim file (we know the first number is the lon or column, the second the lat or row - but which way up are the latitudes? And where do the longitudes break? There is another problem: the values are anomalies, wheras the 'public' .grim files are actual values. So Tim's explanations (in _READ_ME.txt) are incorrect...
8. Had a hunt and found an identically-named temperature database file which did include normals lines at the start of every station. How handy - naming two different files with exactly the same name and relying on their location to differentiate! Aaarrgghh!! Re-ran anomdtb:
The deduction so far is that the DTR-derived CLD is waaay off. The DTR looks OK, well OK in the sense that it doesn;t have prominent bands! So it's either the factors and offsets from the regression, or the way they've been applied in dtr2cld. Well, dtr2cld is not the world's most complicated program. Wheras cloudreg is, and I immediately found a mistake! Scanning forward to 1951 was done with a loop that, for completely unfathomable reasons, didn't include months! So we read 50 grids instead of 600!!! That may have had something to do with it. I also noticed, as I was correcting THAT, that I reopened the DTR and CLD data files when I should have been opening the bloody station files!! I can only assume that I was being interrupted continually when I was writing this thing. Running with those bits fixed improved matters somewhat, though now there's a problem in that one 5-degree band (10S to 5S) has no stations! This will be due to low station counts in that region, plus removal of duplicate values.
These are very promising. The vast majority in both cases are within 0.5 degrees of the published data. However, there are still plenty of values more than a degree out.
The problem is that the synthetics are incorporated at 2.5-degrees, NO IDEA why, so saying they affect particular 0.5-degree cells is harder than it should be. So we'll just gloss over that entirely ;0)
ARGH. Just went back to check on synthetic production. Apparently - I have no memory of this at all - we're not doing observed rain days! It's all synthetic from 1990 onwards. So I'm going to need conditionals in the update program to handle that. And separate gridding before 1989. And what TF happens to station counts?
OH **** THIS. It's Sunday evening, I've worked all weekend, and just when I thought it was done I'm hitting yet another problem that's based on the hopeless state of our databases. There is no uniform data integrity, it's just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they're found.
Originally posted by GroundZero
Even though proof now exists of manipulation of data to create a certain result, the global warming zombies will still deny it.
Also, I'm sure this news, like most TRUTH will not make the MSM, so most people will never even know.
It's a shame.
Originally posted by WhiteDevil013
reply to post by GroundZero
Im happy people care about the Earth all of the sudden, but come on! This global warming thing has been taken too far. Now, people will literally guilt trip you if you dont watch Planet Green in HD all damn day, and dont use all your trash to make compost!
I know its hard for people(sheeple) to deal with change, but the world has been constantly changing since its inception. It will heat up, then cool down, and so on and so on. Species come and go, some mutate/evolve and eventually dont even look like they once did. Jungles turn to deserts, and vice versa. HOW IN THE HELL DID PEOPLE GET THIS IDEA THAT WE CAN JUST STOP THE PLANETS NORMAL BEHAVIOR AFTER BILLIONS OF YEARS!!??!?
[edit on 25-11-2009 by WhiteDevil013]
Originally posted by WhiteDevil013
HOW IN THE HELL DID PEOPLE GET THIS IDEA THAT WE CAN JUST STOP THE PLANETS NORMAL BEHAVIOR AFTER BILLIONS OF YEARS!!??!?
Originally posted by DiggDugg
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
Well first off, This is about the Earth warming up-which has been said MANY times before as a NATURAL CYCLE-it's not about oil spills. Of course we are to blame for oil spills-we built the oil rigs, duh! Second Where is this PROOF you speak of by these scientists-I certainly have yet (as do others) to see this PROOF of us causing the Earth to warm up. Is this Mr. Gore? who would've thought that you'd be surfing on a conspiracy website, oh wait... of course you would-you must have heard someone talking about global warming being a hoax and had to become "Mr. Green" to save the day. Well done, now go do some real research and quit quoting evryone else's nonsense without real facts. Global warming itself is not a hoax, it's the crap they tell you through MSM about us causing it that is a hoax.