I decided to do my own test to see whether global warming is really occurring. I went to the website http://www.wunderground.com. Once there you can look at temperature records of weather stations. You can see for example in what year the high temperature record was set for say, January 1 at Salt Lake City, Utah. An idea occurred to me that I could use this information to see if it really is getting hotter. So what I did was I took the average of the years that the high temperature record was set for all 365 days at 30 different weather stations. I then compared this average with what the average 'should' be given that the Earth's temperature is remaining the same. For example, for Salt Lake City, Utah the max temperature for January 1 was set in 1997, January 2 was set in 1997, January 3 was set in 1934 and so on... I added up all the years and divided by 365 to get the average. If the Earth's temperature is unchanging, each year in the temperature record has an equal probability of holding the temperature record, so the average should be close to ((n+1)/2) where n is the number of years in the temperature record. A simple way of getting the same thing is ((first year + last year)/2). Nothing says how long they have have been keeping temperature records, so I went with the oldest year I could find that was holding a record. If the average is more recent than what it should be, that indicates some kind of warming trend. Conversely, if the average is further in the past then that indicates some kind of cooling trend. I tried to learn a little bit of statistics in order to see whether my results were significant or not. The years are in a uniform distribution so the standard deviation is equal to ((n^2-1)/12)^0.5. The oldest records from the weather stations in my sample are from 1871. That's 143 years of weather records. The standard deviation is about 41.2. We have from the central limit theorem (41.2/(365)^0.5) or about 2.15. So if the average is more than about 6 years away or about 3 standard deviations from what is expected, that is significant. Anyways, here's a summary of my results, ordered by difference from the expected mean. Station ID, City, Year when records began, expected average, actual average, difference, what it means Code: KSLC Salt Lake City, UT 1875 1944 1967.03 23.03 significant warming KPHX Pheonix, AZ 1895 1954 1975.05 21.05 significant warming KMIA Miami, FL 1895 1954 1973.96 19.96 significant warming KHOU Houston, TX 1889 1951 1969.14 18.14 significant warming KNYC New York, NY 1871 1942 1958.64 16.64 significant warming KMEM Memphis, TN 1875 1944 1960.28 16.28 significant warming KDCA Washington, DC 1872 1942.5 1955.02 12.52 significant warming KSAN San Diego, CA 1874 1943.5 1955.78 12.28 significant warming KSTL St. Louis, MO 1874 1943.5 1955.28 11.78 significant warming KCQT Los Angeles, CA 1878 1945.5 1956.82 11.32 significant warming KTLH Tallahassee, FL 1894 1953.5 1964.54 11.04 significant warming KRDU Raleigh, NC 1887 1950 1960.71 10.71 significant warming KMKE Milwaukee, WI 1871 1942 1952.08 10.08 significant warming KSFO San Francisco, CA 1928 1970.5 1980.57 10.07 significant warming KBOS Boston, MA 1872 1942.5 1951.41 8.91 significant warming KPVD Providence, RI 1904 1958.5 1966.67 8.17 significant warming KIND Indianapolis, IN 1871 1942 1948.55 6.55 significant warming KLBB Lubbock, TX 1911 1962 1968.42 6.42 significant warming KPIH Pocatello, ID 1935 1974 1980 6 warming KOKC Oklahoma City, OK 1891 1952 1957.41 5.41 some warming KCMH Columbus, OH 1879 1946 1950.25 4.25 close to average KPDX Portland, OR 1940 1976.5 1979.5 3 close to average KBHM Birmingham, AL 1895 1954 1954.02 .02 close to average KMSO Missoula, MT 1893 1953 1952.66 -0.34 close to average KMDW Chicago, IL 1928 1970.5 1968.85 -1.65 close to average KCLS Chehalis, WA 1948 1980.5 1978.54 -1.96 close to average KDET Detroit, MI 1948 1980.5 1976.61 -3.89 close to average KLAS Las Vegas, NV 1937 1975 1968.27 -6.73 significant cooling KRVS Tulsa, OK 1905 1959 1950.88 -8.12 significant cooling KGSO Greensboro, NC 1899 1956 1946.66 -9.34 significant cooling So, is it getting warmer? The answer appears to be....YES!
You are using faulty statistics. Yes, the Earth is warming both naturally (I will elaborate) and anthropogenically. However, you're data set does not go back far enough to be statistically sound. First lets address your data set. You are exprapolating from weather logs to prove global temperature. Bad statistical analysis. Luckily, statistical analysis has been done for you: View attachment 6791 from: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/temp20.html View attachment 6792 Now, if you look at an even further into the past... View attachment 6793 From: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/earth-at...-2011/lecture-notes/MIT12_009S11_lec12_16.pdf And if you look even further into the past: View attachment 6794 From: http://www.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/climate/climate_change Now, there are a couple of factors current to the climate debate.... 1. Mpemba Effect http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/hques2.html#c3 2. 10, 100, 1000 year natural climate cycles (im rounding) View attachment 6795 3. Biological Reaction to CO2 It has been proven that CO2 acts as a 'blanket.' It has been proven that CO2 additionally warms the planet. What is being studied currently is how the Earth reacts to additional CO2. Regardless, your data set is irrelevant.
Really? Back to the 1800s isn't far enough? The data set comprises quite a large area over a long period of time. My data set takes into account 3,456 years of temperature records, or 1,261,440 days of temperature records. That's not enough to make some kind of sound statistical conclusions? Although, you may be right. A large number of high temperature records in the U.S. were set in the 1930s. Global warming skeptics often use that to indicate the planet is not warming.
