Answer: Don’t put radios near low level sensors.

“Notice all those funny looking things mounted all around the weather station? Those are radio and TV transmitting antennas.”

Are you sure about that? The high power antennae I’ve seen are more like those at http://www.chrisbazil.com/broadcast.htm . What I see in the photos are microwave links (the round dish reflectors), directional UHF antennas (the bar with the vertical elements) which are likely for communication with the building, and maybe a lowish power omnidirectional antenna like those used for police and fire radios in the USA.

The transmitting antennae likely aren’t putting out much power, the receiving ones aren’t putting out much of anything.

There’s a fire tower a few miles from my home with a bigger cluster of antennae that are used by public radio to link to remote transmitters, transmit seismic data from a nearby seismometer, relay telephone traffic, etc. There’s enough to significantly interfere with the view from just below the lookout cabin on top.

Obviously, the more remote a place is, the less influence we will have on the findings. But isn’t weather global. Meaning, although major metropolitan areas can be thousands of miles away, they still must have some minute influence on that region.

I’m serious, can somebody explain this to me. What effect if any, do we have on these remote areas.

Thank you
Alan

After nearly 150 years of the wrong way gone, the quaternian algebra is preferred again (since about 1990)

From Wikipedia: ( when it’s about math, wikipedia is OK so far)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_quaternions

(Quote)
Quaternions are often used in computer graphics (and associated geometric analysis) to represent rotations (see quaternions and spatial rotation) and orientations of objects in three-dimensional space. Certain fractals can plot in quaternion coordinates. They are smaller than other representations such as matrices, and operations on them such as composition can be computed more efficiently. Quaternions also see use in control theory, signal processing, attitude control, physics, bioinformatics (see: Root mean square deviation (bioinformatics)), and orbital mechanics, mainly for representing rotations/orientations in three dimensions. For example, it is common for spacecraft attitude-control systems to be commanded in terms of quaternions, which are also used to telemeter their current attitude. The rationale is that combining many quaternion transformations is more numerically stable than combining many matrix transformations. There is also less overhead in using quaternions compared to using rotation matrices, because a quaternion has only four components instead of nine, so the multiplication algorithms to combine successive rotations are faster, and the result is much easier to renormalize afterwards.
(Unquote)

How can they keep their job? And they would not have put any real confidence in the date of minimum.

The maximum count is what all the predictions are about. So the abyss of their embarassment waits until, say early 2013 when that peak is reached.

The Russians and Clilverd, perhaps an continental Indian or two, not all of whom are recognized as making ‘scientifically verifiable’ predictions, are the only potential winners left standing.

Notice all those funny looking things mounted all around the weather station? Those are radio and TV transmitting antennas. So now we have two more issues.

First. How accurate are the weather station instruments in a high Radio Frequency environment? Have they even been tested for an RF environment?

Second. If this was the United States and I as a site manager allowed the general public this close to transmitting antennas I would get a severe reprimand from the FCC. Reprimand as in, fine and loss of license.

I have read a couple of Stephen Wilde’s articles and this one is singularly clear. I posted a couple of days ago asking for comments from the scientific community on his article suggesting that with a negative PDO and weak TSI we may expect to see the AGW theory put to bed and it would be great to hear what people think about this latest article “Greenhouse Confusion Resolved”. Perhaps a grand title given the complexity of the climate but certainly one of the most lucid articles I have read. Moreover it seemed to fit with much of what I have read on this blog and over at CA.

Re, FatBigot’s (Wonderful name, Sir) query about the errors in measurements. Basically there are two types of error, random and systematic…

Thank you kindly, Mr Jerry. I knew I was right to don the dunce’s cap. It will remain atop my balding pate for the foreseeable future. But fear not, my ignorance will be no handicap to my bigotry.

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/SOLAR_HATHAWAY.jpg

Is this how anyone can keep on saying their forecast is accurate?

ecos are complaining bout this continually. Of course, this varies from area to area almost on a yearly basis. In general, the growing season HAS lengthened in the last 30 years. Of course, more CO2 helps plants grow better in harsher conditions, so, all that lengthened season is not necessarily temp based.

A better idea is altitude (which is also affected by co2) and areas of historic farming. Areas like Greenland, Alps, and others around the world show that, while we have currently warmed, the Medieval Optimum and Roman Optimum were both warmer.

This site references a load of geo and bio type current and paleo studies:

http://www.co2science.org/

http://www.policynd.org/Blog.asp?ID=39

Seems ethanol may not be economically viable at yesterday’s corn prices. Who da thunk.