Recently I had some of my readers comment that they thought that The Weather Channel and USA Today (which uses TWC graphics) temperature maps seemed to look “hotter”. They suspected that the colors had changed. I tend to watch such things since my own company (IntelliWeather) produces similar maps.
I searched Google images for some saved older TWC maps, but found none. So I can’t be absolutely sure they have or have not changed. But looking at the color scheme, nothing sticks out in my recollection of the temperature map colors.
But I decided that it would be an interesting exercise to compare USA national temperature maps from the commonly used services today. I saved national CURRENT temperature isotherms/gradient maps from around 03Z (11PM Eastern Time) tonight. All were generated within about an hour of each other.
What I found was surprising. Here they are in alphabetical order:
Intellicast: (probably the ugliest national temp map I’ve ever seen)
IntelliWeather:
NOAA-NWS:
Unisys:
Weather Central:
Weather Channel:
WeatherForYou:
Weather Underground:
A couple of notes on the graphics: The Weather Channel does not show their color key, nor does IntelliCast. From experience it appears the with the exception of the IntelliWeather map, all maps have fixed color schemes. The IntelliWeather map uses a sliding scale of color based on the max and min temps presented in the data. Also, I tried to include AccuWeather, but could not locate a current national temperature map from that company. They had everything else but that.
UPDATE: I decided that even though AccuWeather did not have a CURRENT temperature map, the color and color key on their HIGH TEMPERATURE FORECAST map would suffice for this comparison, since it a similar range of temperatures presented, from (50’s to 90’s) so here it is:
Note the color scale and where the perceived “cooler” colors start on the AccuWeather map.
So what do you think?
Is it just me or does there appear to be a warm bias in the color temperature presentation of the majority of providers shown here? Just an FYI, I designed my color scheme for the IntelliWeather Map in 2001, well before I started blogging, so please no suggestions that I skewed this comparison with my own map color scheme.
Along those lines, I’ll point out that the color choices are usually done either by a meteorologist, or a graphic artist/programmer or both. Usually the color scheme is the result of the input from a couple people. In my case, myself and my graphic artist made the choice. In places like TWC or AccuWeather, the choice may be made initially by one or two then approved by a larger group.
The point I’m trying to make is that each map represents the color and temperature perception of the presenting organization, as I don’t know of any “standard” for map colors used for air temperature presentation. Having said that, somebody will probably put one in front of me that I’ve never known about. 😉
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Speaking of cooler and graphs.
Take a look at this. Its pretty stunning – a 2-3 Degree C cooler this year. I do not see any Hurricanes forming at all for at least a month if not longer – if at all this year.
SST in the Carib this year:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2008178casst.png
SST in 2006.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2006178casst.png
I think the NOAA map is the gold standard. It uses a very nice algorithm… enough detail to help those of us in California who might be driving from San Francisco to Sacramento to Lake Tahoe. When I see maps that do not even represent the coast, valley, and mountain range (~200 miles apart), I think “useless.” So…
Good: NOAA, Weather Channel
Fair: Intelliweather, Weather Central, Unisys (though the colors are outlandish)
Poor: Accuweather (does their computer support more than 16 colors?), Weather Underground, WeatherForYou, Intellicast (can anyone actually see where California is on this map?),
As others have suggested, the NOAA colors seem to align well to how comfortable you would feel standing outside in shorts and a t-shirt. About the only thing that could capture comfort more effectively would be a graphic based on heat index rather than temperature.
It’s clear the farther you are along with your support for the global warming hoax, the more red you see. I would say 72-75 degrees F would be about the right pivot point.
Austin,
Right you are. But the Carribean is just about at the normal temperature.
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo&hot.html
My favorite color coded map is at:
http://www.findlocalweather.com/weather_maps/temperature_north_america.html
Austin,
However, I don’t believe SST has much of an effect on Hurricane production. At least there is no link between warming and hurricane frequency or intensity. That dead horse has been beaten over and over.
I think I would almost like to see them in anomaly fashion where “normal” for that time of year is in some neutral color like green and the more above normal moving through yellow into red and colder than normal going through blue to violet.
So in the summer an area in “blue” would be experience cooler than normal temperatures. In other words, you use the average temperature for an area to determine the center. That would require additional resources to generate that map, though. You would need to generate an “average” map, and then overlay that with a “current” map and the “difference” between then gives you the color value.
Wow, just looking at some of them makes me feel hot. Color does affect how you feel about something. One of our football coaches at the Un. of Iowa painted the opponents locker room pink. I do think yours is the most simple to read and pleasant to look at. Good work.
Unisys: “WE’RE MELLLLLLTING!”
Reminds me of this:
http://www.john-daly.com/USGCRP/index.htm
Still, I don’t see anything quite so sinister here. It probably has to do with, as some readings suggested, whether you want to display temperatures relative to one another or to their annual average etc. All methods have their biases and are all somewhat misleading, much as different map projections are.
Pierre,
Temp looks normal, but I am starting to get really annoyed by discussions of temp. We need to be looking at Heat capacities and flux from here on in.
Take a look at the Hurricane Heat Potential maps. Its even more stunning. There is no way to get anything over a weak TS going this year in the Eastern Caribean. Make a movie from 2005 forwards my modding the URL.
Now:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2008178ca.jpg
2006:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2006178ca.jpg
Method:
The tropical cyclone heat potential, is defined here as a measure of the integrated vertical temperature from the sea surface to the depth of the 26.C isotherm. This parameter is computed from the altimeter-derived vertical temperature profiles estimates in the upper ocean. The temperature profiles are estimated using four points: (a) the sea surface temperature obtained from the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission’s (TRMM) Microwave Imager (TMI) fields, (b) the altimeter-estimates of the 20.C isotherm within a two-layer reduced gravity scheme (Goni et al, 1996), (c) the depth of the 26.C isotherm from a climatological relationship between the depths of the 20.C and 26.C isotherm.
My Comment:
Just from looking at the HHPs, there is a HUGE amount of heat “missing” from the Western Central Atlantic as compared to just a few years ago. Its just not getting into the water like it used to. You can see the trend from 2006 as being down. Typically TS form in the moderate HHP water in the Atlantic and then intensify as they move into the higher HHP waters of the W Carib and Gulf and Atlantic Gulf Stream. If the TS cannot form in the traditional grounds for them, then that will cut down if not eliminate the numbers of storms altogether.
Take a look at these maps in succession:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2006178at.jpg
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2007178at.jpg
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dataphod1/work/HHP/NEW/2008178at.jpg
I think crosspatch has a good idea about mapping anomalies. Might indicate more cooling anomalies than warming ones [I know, weather =/= climate, but still would be interesting.]
And I agree with JP (07:52:08). I have weather widgets on my computer screen for three different U.S. cities, and I’ve noticed too that they consistently show warmer temps several days out. The forecasts are so inaccurate that it’s hard to believe it’s not deliberate. Only the current temps are accurate. Maybe they’re just inept forecasters, but like JP, I’ve noticed that they never err on the low side.
Most weather maps use the Roy G Biv spectrum — but the way they use it is skewed. Like other folks, I would prefer that they use green for comfortable temps like 70 – 79 DegF. I’d like to see red used only for temps above 100 DegF, and violet only for temps under 0 DegF. Using several shades of red for temps starting in the 80’s, like some of the maps do, or red, light red and orange in other maps for temps down into the 50’s only serves to misrepresent and sensationalize the weather.
I also believe in havng dynamic maps based on anomolies is preferable to all others. In fact two such types of maps may be better than one. The first based on anomolies germain to a given city/town etc., and a second using the country of origen’s average temperature as the base against which each city’s anomoly is computed.
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com
In answer to Chris Hanley:
The Australian Bureau of Meteorology is not respectable. They have been caught using Hansen’s methods of fraudulent data presentation. They also make statements such as X-part of the country has been subject to record temperatures, when they really mean the 21st century. They keep misrepresenting rainfall data – claiming drought when it clearly it is near or above average.
Herman Dobrowolski
Queensland Australia
[…] Color and Temperature: Perception is everything Recently I had some of my readers comment that they thought that The Weather Channel and USA Today (which uses TWC […] […]
Smokey wrote: ” Only the current temps are accurate. Maybe they’re just inept forecasters, but like JP, I’ve noticed that they never err on the low side.”
I disagree that only the current temps are accurate. I’ve been monitoring O’Hare and Palwaukee fields for several months using the Predator for temp info from those two sources and three electronic thermometers for local measurements. Although the three local readings are in sync, the O’Hare and Palwaukee fields can be so out of whack it’s laughable. I should mention that O’O’Hare is about 30 miles south southwest and Palwaukee is roughly 10 miles south southwest.
Although the UHI effect could be impacting both to some degree, it’s inconceivable they could be so far different than my reading. Another example is the sky condition: although the sky in my area may be cloudy, both Palwaukee and O’Hare (but especially Palwaukee) may report clear skys! Since I’m on a high piece of ground and can see for 50-60 miles or so, I’m at a loss of figuring out how they get such readings!
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate project
http://www.climateclinic.com
yeah accuweather is so accuare they say 94 next tuesday for youngstown ohio even tohugh all other sources so it may hit 80. they are always off the most.
AW,
You NEED to look at Kenneths work on CRN1-5.
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3169#comment-266801
As you know, JohnV, Kenneth and I all went at the analyis is different manners.
Kenneth is very diligent and his approach is impeccable.
Please have a look. It confirms some of the things I found about the CRN5,
but with a different approach.
Yes! Check it out, Rev! Getta load!
I like so definitely think this one merits a thread of its own, Rev!
Yep, looks like some preliminary confirmation, but we need more stations.
Let me be the eleventeenth million to re-congratulate you!
REPLY: Thanks but save it for when it really matters. We only have about 50% of the network surveyed. Everything is preliminary. There are no conclusions yet, only preliminary analysis.
global warming….let’s save our earth with all effort we have..
It may be the fact that TWC recently went HD, and a lot of the maps are based off what is used for television.