EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Sun Dec 21, 2014 9:25 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:51 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:

What? ACRIM I was higher that all but one other source and ACRIM II was lower than all but one other source. That leaves PMOD in the middle with the rest of the sources.


That means absolutely nothing when someone is trying to determine the validity of a dataset. PMOD has uncorrected ERBE data in it during the ACRIM Gap, which gives the dataset its flat line over the last 30 years. I've already shown proof of this here:

http://www.acrim.com/images/earth_obs_ACRIM_Gap_4p.jpg

Note the ERBE/ERBS slope during the ACRIM gap is significantly different than the other measurements, because of its declining accuracy due to the effects from High Solar Magnetic Activity. This needs to be corrected. PMOD did not correct it, giving it its flat line over the last 30 years.

From the ACRIM website:

Quote:
Their published results should always be used unless there are compelling reasons for changing the data and/or results by updating the algorithm and reprocessing. ACRIM uses the Nimbus7/ERB 'gap' ratio to relate ACRIM1 & 2 results because the quality and quantity of ERB data is far superior to the ERBE data.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:35 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

What? ACRIM I was higher that all but one other source and ACRIM II was lower than all but one other source. That leaves PMOD in the middle with the rest of the sources.


That means absolutely nothing when someone is trying to determine the validity of a dataset.


But you were not trying to determine anything of the sort when you stated:

Quote:
The discrepency between PMOD and ACRIM is largely based on which types of satellites they used to make up their data. It looks pretty clear to me that the satellite PMOD used during the ACRIM gap that created a flat TSI line over the last 30 years is not in line with other measurements.


That is not supported by the facts and I pointed that out.

Quote:
PMOD has uncorrected ERBE data in it during the ACRIM Gap, which gives the dataset its flat line over the last 30 years. I've already shown proof of this here:


No, you have not. The ACRIM gap also included the high ACRIM I results and the low ACRIM II results relative to the other datasets.

http://www.acrim.com/images/earth_obs_ACRIM_Gap_4p.jpg

Quote:
Note the ERBE/ERBS slope during the ACRIM gap is significantly different than the other measurements, because of its declining accuracy due to the effects from High Solar Magnetic Activity. This needs to be corrected. PMOD did not correct it, giving it its flat line over the last 30 years.


And the ACRIM diifferences were nothing? You take somethings as gospel and disbelieve everything else regardless of the logic or lack thereof.

Quote:
From the ACRIM website:

Quote:
Their published results should always be used unless there are compelling reasons for changing the data and/or results by updating the algorithm and reprocessing. ACRIM uses the Nimbus7/ERB 'gap' ratio to relate ACRIM1 & 2 results because the quality and quantity of ERB data is far superior to the ERBE data.


Then the rest of the dataset used should match the ACRIM II and not PMOD correct?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:38 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
The huge graphic linked in the post compared sunspot data to ACRIM data in short term. I understood that sunspot data was not accurate for such short term comparisons. Anything on that from any other source than ACRIM?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:43 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:

And the ACRIM diifferences were nothing? You take somethings as gospel and disbelieve everything else regardless of the logic or lack thereof.


You do realize that PMOD used ACRIM II and then it switched to the VIRGO satellite to get the TSI measurements, right? You do also realize that the difference between these datasets was 2 w/m^2, right? Does this mean the PMOD dataset is not accurate, and we should throw that out as well?

http://www.acrim.com/images/earth_obs_fig27.jpg

http://www.acrim.com/images/earth_obs_fig5.jpg

You are trying to create a problem that isn't there.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Last edited by Snowy123 on Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:45 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:
The huge graphic linked in the post compared sunspot data to ACRIM data in short term. I understood that sunspot data was not accurate for such short term comparisons. Anything on that from any other source than ACRIM?


The high quality ERB/NIMBUS7 data agrees with it (the sunspot data), Wayne. ERBE/ERBS is all on its own with the slope of the TSI over the ACRIM Gap.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:02 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

And the ACRIM diifferences were nothing? You take somethings as gospel and disbelieve everything else regardless of the logic or lack thereof.


You do realize that PMOD used ACRIM II and then it switched to the VIRGO satellite to get the TSI measurements, right? You do also realize that the difference between these datasets was 2 w/m^2, right? Does this mean the PMOD dataset is not accurate, and we should throw that out as well?

http://www.acrim.com/images/earth_obs_fig27.jpg

http://www.acrim.com/images/earth_obs_fig5.jpg

You are trying to create a problem that isn't there.


The difference between the ACRIM I and ACRIM II was more than that was it not? You have the issue of the high ACRIM I and low ACRIM II to reconcile other than just using a portion of a model to merge the difference.

If the difference between the PMOD and ACRIM II is not an issue due to the low level of baseline shift between the two, what IS the concern with PMOD at that point?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:05 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
The huge graphic linked in the post compared sunspot data to ACRIM data in short term. I understood that sunspot data was not accurate for such short term comparisons. Anything on that from any other source than ACRIM?


The high quality ERB/NIMBUS7 data agrees with it (the sunspot data), Wayne. ERBE/ERBS is all on its own with the slope of the TSI over the ACRIM Gap.


The gap is not the point as much as the differential between the ACRIM I stopping point and the ACRIM II starting point. The snippets of data over the gap are only important if the two sides are also correlated.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:29 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Image

From Figure 1 of the Scafetta and Willson paper, it is interesting to note that once this ERBE/ERBS error is corrected for in the PMOD dataset during the ACRIM gap, the PMOD dataset looks like the ACRIM dataset and other datasets with the increase in TSI between the minima of SC 21 and 22.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:36 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Image

It should also be noted that another TSI dataset, IRMB, agrees with ACRIM that TSI increased between the minima of SC 21 and 22, though not to the extent of ACRIM.

A is TSI measured by ACRIM, B is TSI measured by IRMB, and C is TSI measured by PMOD.

Image from Scafetta.

Scafetta concludes that over the last 40 years, if the ACRIM dataset were to be used, roughly 65-70% of the warming during this timeframe can be attributed to TSI.

If the IRMB dataset, a little more or less than 50% of the warming due to TSI. If PMOD is to be used, roughly 15% is solar induced. It should also be noted that there is an anomalous spike recently like in the 1940s in the Morberg reconstruction, so additional natural variability can be attributed to the temperature increase since 1970. Minimal contributation from CO2.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:38 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:

The difference between the ACRIM I and ACRIM II was more than that was it not? You have the issue of the high ACRIM I and low ACRIM II to reconcile other than just using a portion of a model to merge the difference.



The difference was not much more, around 3 w/m^2.


The concern rests with the data PMOD used during the ACRIM gap. The TSI measured by the sensors on the ERBE/ERBS had a totally different slope than the higher quality ERB/NIMBUS7 data during the ACRIM Gap. The faulty data from ERBE/ERBS makes PMOD have a flat line in the TSI measurements.

As Scafetta puts it,

Quote:
On the contrary, we noticed a rapid,
but gradual divergence between NIMBUS7 and ERBS that occurred during
October and November 1989. This gradual divergence may also imply a rapid
degradation of ERBS sensors.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:46 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
The huge graphic linked in the post compared sunspot data to ACRIM data in short term. I understood that sunspot data was not accurate for such short term comparisons. Anything on that from any other source than ACRIM?


The high quality ERB/NIMBUS7 data agrees with it (the sunspot data), Wayne. ERBE/ERBS is all on its own with the slope of the TSI over the ACRIM Gap.


The gap is not the point as much as the differential between the ACRIM I stopping point and the ACRIM II starting point. The snippets of data over the gap are only important if the two sides are also correlated.


No, that is not very important. Records can easily be calibrated to match the old preceding data.

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:02 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 7:48 am
Posts: 524
Hey guys, TES is back up, and running. :mrgreen:

_________________
~Snowy123; Amateur Meteorologist and Climatologist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:07 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Image


Notice the slope of IRMB is greater overall than the other two with a minimal drop at the gap.

The slope of the PMOD is ~flat prior to the gap and ~matches the ACRIM after with no drop at the gap.

The slope of ACRIM ~matches PMOD but with a significant drop at the gap.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:10 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Snowy123 wrote:
Image

It should also be noted that another TSI dataset, IRMB, agrees with ACRIM that TSI increased between the minima of SC 21 and 22, though not to the extent of ACRIM.

A is TSI measured by ACRIM, B is TSI measured by IRMB, and C is TSI measured by PMOD.

Image from Scafetta.

Scafetta concludes that over the last 40 years, if the ACRIM dataset were to be used, roughly 65-70% of the warming during this timeframe can be attributed to TSI.

If the IRMB dataset, a little more or less than 50% of the warming due to TSI. If PMOD is to be used, roughly 15% is solar induced. It should also be noted that there is an anomalous spike recently like in the 1940s in the Morberg reconstruction, so additional natural variability can be attributed to the temperature increase since 1970. Minimal contributation from CO2.


I would question his calculations on the warming attribute to TSI since his is the highest of the three composites.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:12 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Snowy123 wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
The huge graphic linked in the post compared sunspot data to ACRIM data in short term. I understood that sunspot data was not accurate for such short term comparisons. Anything on that from any other source than ACRIM?


The high quality ERB/NIMBUS7 data agrees with it (the sunspot data), Wayne. ERBE/ERBS is all on its own with the slope of the TSI over the ACRIM Gap.


The gap is not the point as much as the differential between the ACRIM I stopping point and the ACRIM II starting point. The snippets of data over the gap are only important if the two sides are also correlated.


Snowy123 wrote:
No, that is not very important. Records can easily be calibrated to match the old preceding data.


So calibrate the old records to match the PMOD .... :mrgreen: The question then becomes which is the more accurate and how much calibration to do to each.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group