That windchill is vicious, be sure to dress warmly going outside at Key West. Cold kills. Actually the new record low was colder than that shown above. It hit -27F earlier. See the complete NOAA report here (PDF)
OK fun aside, this is obviously another ASOS thermohygrometer malfunction, but one in the opposite direction that we usually see. But, there’s an interesting twist here that will provide a useful test of the integrity of data handling policy within NOAA/NWS. Please read on.
Here is what our offending ASOS in Key West looks like. It was recently surveyed on 6/1/2009 and was the last USHCN station surveyed in Florida to complete the USHCN state survey.
Early in June, there was an incident in Honolulu International Airport where the ASOS station there malfunctioned and it set a string of new high temperature records for Honolulu.
Those records still stand for Honolulu despite protest even though it was clear that fixing the ASOS sensor dropped the temperature dramatically and immediately. I did an analysis at the time comparing PHNL to another COOP station just four miles away. The differences were obvious.
Graph of PHNL and PTWC station data for June 2009 – click for larger image
So now the question is, we have another obvious malfunction, but in the opposite direction.
Will NOAA keep this new “record low” which like the Honolulu record highs a fault of a ASOS equipment failure? Or, will they throw it out?
To be consistent with the Honolulu decision they would naturally keep it, though in both cases, logic dictates the data should be thrown out.
The other question is: How long will it take them to detect and fix this ASOS station? As of midnight on 7/11/2009 it was still reporting -13F
Here is the URL to watch for yourself to see when NOAA fixes the problem:
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/data/obhistory/KEYW.html
A big WUWT hat tip to Corky Boyd for this one.
UPDATE: Either the sensor has started working again on its own, or has been repaired. However there’s something still not quite right as it is now apparently snowing at 9:53 AM in Key West.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Smokey would you say the science is settled? There is no antrho component in climate? And anyone who says otherwise just wants grant money or is somehow involved in a great conspiracy? I mean, you seem pretty certain in your views, and based on the majority of comments about the motives of the “warmists” there seems to be only once explanation of how they could come to these conclusions.
I just want to make sure I have this right.
I take it you are agreeing that there is almost no published science that contradicts the concensus [sic] position.
When you abdicate observation for “published science,” and continued understanding for “consensus,” you’ve abandoned science and embraced politics. There is no amount of ad hom, arm waving, or shouting down that can change this simple fact.
Anthony: Looking at your first illustration, it doesn’t appear NOAA is even able to translate Zulu time on the observations to EDT correctly. I believe the difference to be 5hrs.
The first tabular chart shows the same problem compared to the raw data.
I’m in the CDT Zone and I use 6hrs to convert.
Where did I go wrong?
AH HA! I knew the water temp in the Gulf was lower this morning. I could tell it was in the 84-85 degree range rather than the usual 88-89 degrees for this time of year!
At the risk of being accused of stating the obvious, I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone of 2 things related to the comments up thread about the climate being a chaotic system, and probability statements.
1. The climate is only one of many chaotic systems that interact with each other in ways that we have yet to discover. These include everything from biological, geographical and hydrologic to solar/lunar, financial, and sociological. Climate cannot be treated as a system that is isolated from all others, although that is often what is attempted.
2. Probability statements say far more about the state of our knowledge (or ignorance ) of any given system than they do about the system itself.
Just something to think about.
“Light snow at Key West airport.”
Well, it really is piling on at this point. But Richard should know that statements such as his, that get a complete pass at alarmist sites – won’t do so here. And it’s a wholly fallacious argument to claim an ideological bottleneck on “publishing” comprises the science universe. One of the founding reasons for the internet was to allow scientists from disconnected disciplines to share their data.
The AGW campaign has managed to undermine the good reputation of journal publications. Were they fair or balanced, they would have published many more skeptic studies. Fortunately, total control of one publishing channel in an internet savvy world – provides little strategic advantage.
Your tax dollars at work.
Apparently one could guess how they might correct it, just replace the subzero readings with 100 degree readings and you’ll have a correction worthy for NOAA and proof the world is warming O.o
All joking aside we haven’t had a really cool July so far here in Kansas, because our state sits a few hundred miles north of Texas at most where that state is at the center of the high pressure ridge.
North Korean hackers worming their way into NOAA?
Benjamin P. (09:55:42) : There are apparently subtleties which it is hard to get warmists to understand. Nobody says there is no anthro effect-that’s a strawman, because the real argument is much harder to deal with. It would matter if there was a “consensus” in that direction anyway.
So here again: THE MERE PRESENCE OF SOME CHANGE AND THAT SOME COMPONENT OF THE CHANGE IS ANTHROPOGENIC DOES NOT JUSTIFY ALARM.
As for conspiracy-how is acting in one’s own self interest-seeking grant money-in anyway a conspiracy? Apparently the Invisible Hand is also one giant conspiracy theory, to. What kook that Smith guy was, eh? Darwin too for that matter!
But the association of dissent with “conspiracy theories” is part of a argument from ridicule-which is right out of Rules for Radicals so I suppose not too surprising. It has been addressed by myself already, however i would note that the real conspiracy theory is on the other side (some clear projection here) where dissent is alleged to result purely from some sort of anti-science cabal of industry and the like. Now who is whacko?
Here are points which are settled science (and I am going to have to disagree strongly with some of Smokey’s references):
There has been some warming.
Human emissions of greenhouse gases have cause the concentrations of such stages to change. In particular, there is a rise in CO2 which must result in some warming, because the physics of such greenhouse gases demand it.
Without knowing how clouds and water vapor respond to small changes in temperature, we cannot know how much warming said increases would actually lead to. So models are used to create some best guesses BUT MODELS ARE WOEFULLY INADEQUATE AT DEALING WITH CLOUDS.
Nevertheless models tend to indicate rather “large” amounts of warming from speculative future changes in CO2 etc.
EVERYONE who is anyone agrees with these basic points. BUT NONE OF THESE STATEMENTS ARE QUANTITATIVE. He who refuses to do mathematics is doomed to talk nonsense, and as long as the “consensus” is on such trivial, non qualitative matters, it is not really worth anything.
IF THE NUMBERS WE GET IN THE END ARE SMALL, ALARM IS BASELESS-can’t be stressed enough. And increasingly it looks like the numbers are indicating a very small impact of GHG’s. There is far from a consensus on that matter (some vehemently insist that the big effects must be right) but it only takes one person looking at the right observations carefully to show where they have all gone wrong. And we have plenty of people who have found exactly where the catastrophists are dead wrong. That they are reluctant to back down is only evidence that they have painted themselves into a corner, or that they are unfortunately not bright enough to understand the best analyses-hardly conspiracy. More like stupidity and basic survival instinct.
It is easy to explain the reason for the snowfall and cold temps in FL in July: the 24th cycle sunspots that poked up their heads to the shrill of clarions and jingle of timbrels have been hauled away in tumbrels to have their heads chopped off.
Benjamin P. (09:55:42) :
We know that GW is a fact, there has been warming (in the past, i am not so sure anymore about recent years).
A in AGW is a factor. We know that it can’t be 1 because that would attribute all warming to a human cause wich is not true and is even admitted by the IPCC for not being true, we also know that the factor A must be larger than 0 because we must have some influence.
The question is how large is this factor A?
The other question is, how good are the models that predict the future based upon the current GW with that component A? My guess is that those models are rather poor and that a lot more needs to be done before we even should thinking about raising taxes and setting up trade-schemes because mother nature needs to be rescued from those nasty humans.
It seems the Peter Sissons article on the British Bucket Company has gone missing. I wonder why.
Robert van der Veeke (12:15:01):
“The question is how large is this factor A?”
Yes, that is the important question. And the main culprit in global warming has been identified by the alarmists: they say it is carbon dioxide. As it turns out, they are wrong.
We now understand that CO2 at current levels is not capable of causing measurable global warming: click [source of graph]
And if the effect of increasing CO2 is too small to measure, then it can be safely disregarded. The alarmists are wrong about CO2’s effect, which is negligible.
The imperfect model of a modern, major modeller.
Polyphemus (Our Enemy, The State) had one eye, until ….. it was blinded by Odysseus.
…-
” Weather models missed massive N.S. storm that jammed highway: report
By Dean Beeby, THE CANADIAN PRESS
OTTAWA – Federal weather forecasters were blind to a vicious snowstorm that stranded 1,500 vehicles in Nova Scotia last fall because every one of their computer models failed to predict it, says an internal report.
Instead, staff at the Atlantic Storm Prediction Centre had to rely on telephone calls and emails from colleagues and friends to find out what was going on.
The “models did not predict anything resembling the north-south oriented band of heavy precipitation over the affected areas,” says the report, obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act.
“There was no indication … that such an event was going to occur.” ”
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/07/12/10107876-cp.html
“And anyone who says otherwise just wants grant money or is somehow involved in a great conspiracy?”
It’s more like a fad. Academia is full of them, due to its high proportion of academia nuts.
Now it seems that NOAA has interpreted FZRANO in METAR reports from KEYW as Light Snow. I believe it means Freezing Rain, not light snow. Maybe they need to do some work on their METAR decoders!
Tax $$ at work!
Rod Smith:
You are comparing the wrong lines. The newest report is on top.
111953Z is the date and time of the report, the 11th at 19:53 hrs UTC.
There are 2 reports for that time of which one is the COR.
I thought I felt a lurch last night. I guess it was just the earth heeling over. No cause for alarm.
I wonder if the Catlin Expedition to map the ice around Key West is all good to go for next year.
Again, the snow is alos in a (manual) METAR, again corrected but not for the snow.
KEYW 121353Z COR 07010KT 1 3/4SM -SN FEW026 A3013 RMK AO2 SNB48 SLP204 P0000 $=
KEYW 121353Z 07010KT 1 3/4SM -SN FEW026 A3013 RMK AO2 SNB48 SLP204 P0000 $=
Translated this METAR reads (http://heras-gilsanz.com/manuel/METAR-Decoder.html):
Location: KEYW
Day of month: 12
Time: 13:53 UTC
Wind: True direction = 070 degrees, Speed: 10 knots
Visibility: 3/4 Statute Miles
Weather: Light Snow
Clouds: A few , at 2600 feet above aerodrome level
QNH: 30.13 inHg
So the snow comes probably not from clouds (few is > 2/8).
The visibility in the decoding should be 1 3/4 Status Miles.
Uh… I forgot. Obviously the Catlin Expedition to Key West will only be mapping first year ice.
Very interesting stuff
Yeah… must be all the global warming
Jan F (14:02:39) :
“Again, the snow is alos in a (manual) METAR, again corrected but not for the snow.”
You are exactly right — I must be getting cross-eyed in my old age and was looking somewhere else. And I have been reading METAR code for probably as long as METAR has been around.
Thanks for keeping me straight. I’ve been telling my wife that my mind used to be like a a steel trap but now it is more like an old coffee filter, and all the good stuff just runs on through.
Benjamin P. (09:55:42) :
Of course the science is not settled. Climate science is very new.
The only thing I am relatively certain of is that the alarmists have attributed a huge influence — almost total influence — to the putative warming effect of CO2. In fact, they have staked their entire argument on CO2; “carbon.” Now they’re stuck. Because it was always the alarmists who stated that “the science is settled.” Skeptics have simply questioned their arrogant certainty that CO2 is almost entirely at fault.
But at current levels, the warming effect of CO2 is so small that it is not empirically measurable in the real world. All the “evidence” comes from GCMs.
That is my straight answer. No equivocation: CO2 is not to blame. Global warming and global cooling are overwhelmingly natural events.
And of course, the anthropogenic portion of CO2 is only a very small part of the total CO2 emitted: click.
That is all that I’m sure of. But the climate alarmists, including the UN/IPCC, Al Gore, James Hansen, Michael Mann, RealClimate, climateprogress, Tamino, etc., etc., appear to be certain that an increase in CO2 will trigger a “tipping point” leading to runaway global warming and climate catastrophe. That is the hypothesis [which they are afraid to argue in public].
We will eventually see who is right.
And as usual, the goal posts are being moved by the alarmist contingent even as we discuss this. Recently we have seen some quiet backing away from the original conjecture that carbon dioxide is the main culprit — no doubt because the planet is proving the alarmists wrong.
Time to take a stand yourself, Ben. Is CO2 the villain in the plot? Step up and be counted. No wishy-washy answer: will CO2 cause runaway global warming? Or not?
If the snow were real, would that be the first time it snowed in Florida since “The day it snowed in Miami”? That’s a part of our weather lore of sorts down here, but I’m just curious how rare such a thing actually is. In my short life time and geographic experience, it has never happened-but obviously there is at least one case in history.
Where does one find the bloody data on these things!?!?!
And more to the point, if one can find the data, just how corrupted by hijinks like these might they be…?