Thermal Imaging Shows Japan’s Recent Record High Temp An Artefact Of Urban Heat Sinks!

The media like the New York Times here hyperventilated over Japan setting a new all-time record high temperature on Monday.

According to the Times, the temperature hit a high of close to 106 degrees on Monday at a Japanese location outside Tokyo.

Japanese blogger Kirye, who happens to live in Tokyo, informs that temperature reading was recorded at the Kumagaya weather station, some two hours outside of Tokyo.

Photo: Kirye

It turns out there’s a story behind that all-time “record high” and that it likely got a little help.

Thermal imaging shows urban heat sinks

Kirye decided to take the 2-hour commute to Kumagaya. Armed with a SEEK brand thermal imaging attachment for her mobile phone, she made thermal-image photos of the record-setting station.

SEEK thermal imaging attachment for mobile phones.

It turns out that the record temperature that the media like the Times got all excited about has little to do with global warming, but likely a lot more with the urban heat island effect, where nearby asphalt, steel and concrete act as huge summertime heat sinks and so distort the readings of nearby instruments.

What follows is the daytime photo of the entrance to the Kumagaya weather station (All of the following images are the property of Kirye, and may be used only by linking to this post!):

Note in the photo above the tall building to the left and surrounding asphalt street and concrete and steel structures.

Next is a photo Kirye made of the weather station itself:

Then she made a thermal image of the photo and then placed it side by side for comparison:

The white arrows in the images indicate the equipment containing the thermometer. Although the siting of the instruments is not as bad as some we’ve seen documented by Tony Watts, it is far from being optimally sited, located in an urban environment, surrounded by buildings and other heat sinks.

What follows is another view. Note the 55°C hot concrete pad on the ground right near the instruments:

Images by Kirye.

Spider webs choking up the instruments?

Kirye also informed NoTricksZone that an official of Meteorological Office told her that they were cutting the weeds to keep them from growing. They also told her that the device with the thermometer “may have spider webs in its air port” and they “would also check it.”

Influence of urbanization “surely great”

Dr. Kiminori Itoh wrote Kirye: “It seems that the care of the weather station is good, but it certainly seems that there are some influences of neighbors houses” and that “It seems that the population is about 200,000 people, so the influence of urbanization will surely be great.”

Even Dr. Roger Pielke Sr, responded to Kirye’s thermal imaging work, tweeting: ” Thank you for sharing. This is excellent documenting site conditions.”

Yet don’t expect NASA to rush to adjust the temperature downward here, should that station data in fact be used.

By the way, NASA assigned a Brightness Index (BI) of 82 for that station, which is way above the index of 10 or less that is needed to qualify it as a “rural” station. That index shows pretty urban conditions.

It’s the UHI, stupid!

To illustrate the urban heat island (UHI) effect further, Kirye also made thermal images of Tokyo at night. The following was taken 2 days ago at some 28 minutes past midnight:

Note the hot asphalt street surfaces. Kirye tweeted here:

This is a picture I took using my thermography camera in Tokyo’s densely built-up area. This is a known problem that asphalt-paved roads make tropical nights, but alarmists think that is the result of AGW.”

73 responses to “Thermal Imaging Shows Japan’s Recent Record High Temp An Artefact Of Urban Heat Sinks!”

  1. spike55

    Well done Kirye 🙂

    These UHI temps really only apply to a very small are around the urban thermometer, but the gridding and homogenisation smears that UHI effect over vast areas to which it should not be apply.

    The surface station temperature data is basically meaningless except for AGW propaganda purposes.

    1. Yonason

      Another issue (a pet peeve of mine) that I think isn’t given enough press is heat content vs temperature. Tony Heller explains the problem in terms of “latent heat” in this video…
      https://youtu.be/SX41CPu9KmA?t=259

      One must consider heat content, not temperature, because temperature is an intensive variable, wile heat is an extensive one. I.e., you can quantify the amount of heat that’s present, but the resulting temperature depends on the properties and quantity of the material to which that heat has been added. Two objects at the same temperature may have vastly different heat content. It’s basic undergrad thermodynamics, but is ignored by climate “scientists” and activist trolls alike, if they even know about it at all.

      1. SebastianH

        One must consider heat content, not temperature, because temperature is an intensive variable, wile heat is an extensive one.

        Exactly, try to teach that your fellow skeptics buddies when they claim that the planet is cooling because sea surface temperatures are down in some regions lately. Not looking at the heat content they are …

        Two objects at the same temperature may have vastly different heat content. It’s basic undergrad thermodynamics, but is ignored by climate “scientists” and activist trolls alike, if they even know about it at all.

        Thank you for writing something like this as a reply to Spike55 😉 The guy who thinks the OHC increase is tiny and ice melts because of the huge volcanic influence … presumably because lava is hotter than sea water. He is not looking at the heat content. And I have no doubt he will reply something insulting back to this comment. Something about anti-science, anti-math blabla. If I hadn’t replied he might have replied to you instead how correct and insightful your comment was. Not ever noticing that he constantly argues against this “basic undergrad thermodynamics” 😉

        1. Kenneth Richard

          Not looking at the heat content they are …

          Um, when we look at the heat content, we see such a negligible change that we wonder why you and your kind are so worked up. I mean, large regions of the ocean have been cooling and the net change has been just 0.02°C since 1994, with an overall cooling below 3600 m? A total of “only 0.1°C” in the last 50 years? Antarctica contributing just one third of a centimeter in meltwater equivalent to sea level rise since 1958? Greenland contributing just 1.2 cm since 1958? And besides, more land area is above sea level today than there was in the mid-’80s, as coastlines and beaches are expanding all over the world. Why are we supposed to be alarmed by this, SebastianH?

          The guy who thinks the OHC increase is tiny and ice melts because of the huge volcanic influence … presumably because lava is hotter than sea water.

          Just curious. When you read conclusions from climate scientists who point to high geothermal heat flux as the reason why ice melts in some parts of West Antarctica (but doesn’t in East Antarctica because there is little to no geothermal heat flux on that side of the continent), do you think they’re wrong? Have you rebutted these scientists with your, uh, knowledge of subglacial volcanism and its negligible effects on ice sheet stability? Do you have scientific backing for your beliefs? If so, please present your data showing why these scientists are wrong.

          http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006GL027345/abstract
          Subglacial volcanism in West Antarctica may play a crucial role in the dynamics and stability of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS)

          http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v361/n6412/abs/361526a0.html
          “Here we present aerogeophysical evidence for active volcanism and associated elevated heat flow beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet near the critical region where ice streaming begins.”

          http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X14005780
          “One major contributor to fast glacial flow is the presence of subglacial water, the production of which is a result of both glaciological shear heating and geothermal heat flux. A zone of thinner crust is also identified near the area’s subaerial volcanoes lending support to a recent interpretation predicting that this part of Marie Byrd Land is a major volcanic dome

          http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n2/full/ngeo106.html
          “Indirect evidence suggests that volcanic activity occurring beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet influences ice flow and sheet stability. Ongoing volcanic heat production may have implications for contemporary ice dynamics in this glacial system.”

          http://www.pnas.org/content/111/25/9070.full.pdf+html
          “Heterogeneous geothermal flux and subglacial volcanism have the potential to modulate ice sheet behavior and stability by providing a large, variable supply of meltwater to the subglacial water system, lubricating and accelerating the overlying ice. … [H]eterogeneous geothermal flux beneath Thwaites Glacier is likely a significant factor in local, regional, and continental-scale ice sheet stability.”

          1. SebastianH

            Um, when we look at the heat content, we see such a negligible change that we wonder why you and your kind are so worked up. I mean, large regions of the ocean have been cooling and the net change has been just 0.02°C since 1994, with an overall cooling below 3600 m?

            1) when you express it as a temperature you aren’t looking at the heat content
            2) express it in Joules and make yourself aware of the amount of energy that accumulates due to the imbalance
            3) how much of the overall increase in OHC does the “cooling below 3600 m” compensate for?

            Why are we supposed to be alarmed by this, SebastianH?

            Why should you be alarmed if the oceans warmed by 1°C? Sounds tiny enough too, right? Until you look at it with Joules as a unit …

            Just curious. When you read conclusions from climate scientists who point to high geothermal heat flux as the reason why ice melts in some parts of West Antarctica (but doesn’t in East Antarctica because there is little to no geothermal heat flux on that side of the continent), do you think they’re wrong?

            Just compare the Joules or W/m² if you must.

            Have you rebutted these scientists with your, uh, knowledge of subglacial volcanism and its negligible effects on ice sheet stability? Do you have scientific backing for your beliefs?

            Hey Kenneth, I am curious. How does this work when you ignore it when I quote your own scientists quotes back to you? Do you believe the scientists you originally quoted is wrong on this one thing, but right for whatever reason you quoted him/her in the first place? 😉

          2. Kenneth Richard

            Why should you be alarmed if the oceans warmed by 1°C?

            Um, they haven’t warmed by 1°C. They’ve warmed by total of “only 0.1°C” in the last 50 years, and just just 0.02°C since 1994.

            when you express it as a temperature you aren’t looking at the heat content

            I assume you realize that heat content is frequently converted to temperature values, as was done here:

            “The heat content of the World Ocean for the 0–2000 m layer increased by 24.0 ± 1.9 × 1022 J (±2S.E.) corresponding to a rate of 0.39 W m−2 (per unit area of the World Ocean) and a volume mean warming of 0.09°C.” (Levitus et al., 2012)

          3. spike55

            “accumulates due to the imbalance”

            The only imbalance is in your mind seb (how could a headless chook have a balanced mind?)

            There is absolutely ZERO real mechanism or evidence whereby enhanced atmospheric CO2 can cause any ocean warming.

            So STOP with the anti-science garbage troll comments !!

          4. SebastianH

            Kenneth, just answer the question. Should we be alarmed when the „volume mean warming“ increases to 1 degree? Still sounds tiny, right? Or do you agree that an average temperature increase of the entire ocean doesn’t say anything about how this heat content increase is distributed. As you said yourself, it actually cooled below a certain depth. And you surely agree that most of the OHC increase is in the upper layers and gets redistributed by ocean currents.

            Do you agree that saying „the oceans warmed by 0.09 degrees“ is not what actually happened?

          5. Kenneth Richard

            Kenneth, just answer the question. Should we be alarmed when the „volume mean warming“ increases to 1 degree?

            Why are you making up hypothetical warming that is 50 times larger than what has occurred in the last 20 years? Again, the Earth’s oceans have not increased by 1 degree. They’ve warmed by total of “only 0.1°C” in the last 50 years, and just just 0.02°C since 1994.

            Instead of concocting your made-up scenarios about what you believe might maybe possibly perhaps perchance happen someday, why not answer my question about why we skeptics should be worried about a tiny two-one-hundredths of a degree of net ocean temperature change since 1994, or since the CO2 concentration increased by 50 ppm? Convince us that that’s something to be alarmed about.

            And you surely agree that most of the OHC increase is in the upper layers and gets redistributed by ocean currents.

            The top 105 meters of the ocean had large regions that cooled during 1994-2013, as shown here. If you believe CO2 caused the warming, what caused the cooling?

            Do you agree that saying „the oceans warmed by 0.09 degrees“ is not what actually happened?

            Yes, it’s likely that that figure is not accurate. Uncertainty in ocean data is much larger than advertised.

          6. Yonason

            @Kenneth

            Anyone who listens to the portion of Tony’s video I linked to above realizes that SebH’s response is a non sequitur. SebH tries to use the very thing that proves his warmist heroes wrong to claim that it proves them correct. Wow! Just wow!

          7. spike55

            “Do you agree that saying „the oceans warmed by 0.09 degrees“ is not what actually happened?”

            NOAA data: Global 0-2000m, seb

            0.08C

            Stop your DENIAL. !

        2. spike55

          Oh dearie me, seb STILL thinks the sum total of the OHC is being directed at the West Antarctic peninsula

          BIZZARE and totally IRRATIONAL,to say the least !!

          The heat content of a 0.08C rise in a very small location is minimal, seb

          Do you REALLY and TRULY think that 0,08C riser in ocean temperature is enough to melt huge glaciers, or are you just mindlessly seeking attention , yet again. ??

          Is your FANTASY world really that ANTI-PHYSICS?

          Sorry if you are too DUMB to realise that.

          1. SebastianH

            Oh dearie me, seb STILL thinks the sum total of the OHC is being directed at the West Antarctic peninsula

            Huh? See below.

            The heat content of a 0.08C rise in a very small location is minimal, seb

            Do you REALLY and TRULY think that 0,08C riser in ocean temperature is enough to melt huge glaciers, or are you just mindlessly seeking attention , yet again. ??

            You are not thinking in terms of heat content. I don’t think you are even able to explain the concept. Or you can, but you nevertheless choose to use a meaningless temperature to troll your opponents … as if the ocean around West Antarctica warmed by 0.08°C degrees.

            Pointless to discuss this with someone like you. And look, you replied exactly as predicted 😉

          2. spike55

            Poor seb,

            STILL the fantasy of the whole ocean warming the West Antarctic

            Amazingly STUPID !!!

            STILL thinks 0.08ºC ocean warming will melt glaciers.

            STILL DENYING that volcanoes are HOT.

            STILL DENYING NOAA data that shows ocean warming in the Southern oceans 0-700m is less that 0.1ºC and the southern ocean SST have BEEN COOLING.

            FIND THE DATA, chicken-little.

            Still waiting for that evidence of CO2 warming from you seb

            YOU HAVE NONE.. AND YOU KNOW IT.

          3. spike55

            “as if the ocean around West Antarctica warmed by 0.08°C degrees”

            Sorry, I was in error…

            NOAA ocean temperature data for Pacific SH shows a trend of 0.0125ºC/decade from 1955 to 2012, So that is 0.07ºC in 57 years.

            Thing is seb, anyone who wants can find that data and check for themselves.

            Even you could IF you wanted to find the facts.

            So unless there is something LOCAL to the West Antarctic that could cause that small area of ocean to warm.. you know, like maybe a local heat source of some sort.. then the actual FACTS and DATA are very much against your mindless headless chook, data-free ranting.

          4. spike55

            Seems seb doesn’t understand the concept of temperature and ice melting

            UNAWARE .. to the very end. !!

          5. SebastianH

            And he continues with that clown act. Bravo 😉

          6. John Brown
          7. spike55

            And seb continues with his ZERO EVIDENCE distractions and attention seeking

            Poor little mindless chicken-little STILL thinks a temperature change of o.o8C will melt huge glaciers

            Weird, anti-science phantasy to say the least.

            I bet he still just “believes” that CO2 causes warming

            WOW .. bizarre behavior.

    2. Yonason

      @spike

      OT – (but maybe not for you?)- weird stuff Down Under

      1. spike55

        Seen probably 30-40 of them.

        Those “big” things can’t be missed as you drive passed, I don’t find them very interesting. Tourist traps, no thanks.

        Been to quite a few of the places that are actually of interest as well.

  2. SebastianH

    So are you saying the structures around that particular station that you call heat-sinks somehow managed to sink more heat this year than in years before and that this is causing the station to record higher temperatures than before?

    I don’t think the effect of nearby structures work this way especially when they look like they’ve been there for some decades. They might increase the temperature at that spot, but they aren’t causing any warming trend. How could they?

    Secondly, didn’t the heat wave hit the whole country or at least its southern parts? Just like most places in the Northern Hemisphere are pretty hot right now? I like how the website https://www.ventusky.com/ visualizes weather. Use the slider at the bottom to see the heat travel around the globe following the Sun. Take a look at how warm it is right now (1 hour past midnight) in the north of Finland: 23°C! Even Alaska is seeing 25°C! The 0°C height for Central Europe is almost as high as in the Sahara desert!

    1. Kenneth Richard

      Take a look at how warm it is right now (1 hour past midnight) in the north of Finland: 23°C! Even Alaska is seeing 25°C! The 0°C height for Central Europe is almost as high as in the Sahara desert!

      And what do you attribute these day-long anomalies to? CO2?

      Which do you think are more climatically relevant, centennial- and millennial-scale trends that show Finland’s and Northern Europe’s temperatures were multiple degrees warmer than now for most of the Holocene — and that there’s been no net warming since the 1940s — or the temperature at sunny midnight on the 1st of August, 2018?

      http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Holocene-Cooling-Finland-Lakes-Luoto-14.jpg

      http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Holocene-Cooling-Finland-Sweden-Matskovsky-and-Helama-2015.jpg

      http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Holocene-Cooling-Northern-Europe-Esper-14.jpg

      http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Holocene-Cooling-Scandinavia-Northern-Esper-2012.jpg

      http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Holocene-Cooling-Finland-Tsuolbmajavri-Birks-Seppa-04.jpg

      1. SebastianH

        And what do you attribute these day-long anomalies to? CO2?

        Huh? Pierre is writing something about hyperventilating media because of the heat wave when he himself hyperventilated about the cold weather earlier this year. He tries to make the point that it’s not really that warm, I reply by pointing out it is really warm and the question how the hell the UHI effect could have caused high temperatures this year, but not in previous years. Were those concrete plates and other structures errected just recently?

        And then you appear out of nowhere with this ridiculous “it was warm before” theme … to do what? Rebuttal an imaginary claim?

        As for warming in Finland in the present:
        https://ilmasto-opas.fi/en/ilmastonmuutos/suomen-muuttuva-ilmasto/-/artikkeli/16266ad3-e5f5-4987-8760-2b74655182d5/suomen-ilmasto-on-lammennyt.html

        https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/land-of-the-midnight-sun-warms-fastest-in-world/

        1. Kenneth Richard

          And what do you attribute these day-long anomalies to? CO2?

          Huh?

          Yes, I can understand why you’re confused. I’ll ask it a different way: What is the mechanism that is causing the hot temperatures at midnight in Finland?

          And then you appear out of nowhere with this ridiculous “it was warm before” theme … to do what? Rebuttal an imaginary claim?

          What’s the “imaginary claim”? I asked you this question: “Which do you think are more climatically relevant, centennial- and millennial-scale trends that show Finland’s and Northern Europe’s temperatures were multiple degrees warmer than now for most of the Holocene — and that there’s been no net warming since the 1940s — or the temperature at sunny midnight on the 1st of August, 2018?”

          Can you answer this question?

          As for warming in Finland in the present:
          https://ilmasto-opas.fi/en/ilmastonmuutos/suomen-muuttuva-ilmasto/-/artikkeli/16266ad3-e5f5-4987-8760-2b74655182d5/suomen-ilmasto-on-lammennyt.html

          Yes, your graph that starts in 1850 shows the same thing as I pointed out: that there has been no net warming in Finland since the 1940s. Notice that the warm anomalies in the 1940s were just as high (or higher) as the anomalies in the 21st century:

          http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Holocene-Cooling-Finland-Sweden-Matskovsky-and-Helama-2015.jpg

          http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Holocene-Cooling-Northern-Europe-Esper-14.jpg

          http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Holocene-Cooling-Scandinavia-Northern-Esper-2012.jpg

          1. SebastianH

            Yes, I can understand why you’re confused. I’ll ask it a different way: What is the mechanism that is causing the hot temperatures at midnight in Finland?

            I explained why I am confused about your CO2 intermission.

            What’s the “imaginary claim”?

            “CO2?”

            Can you answer this question?

            Not playing you game of distract and bury the opponent in irrelevant quotes.

            Yes, your graph that starts in 1850 shows the same thing as I pointed out: that there has been no net warming in Finland since the 1940s. Notice that the warm anomalies in the 1940s were just as high (or higher) as the anomalies in the 21st century:

            You got to be kidding, right? How can you misread a graph like this? Does it work similar to you misreading the Arctic sea ice extent as being stable since 2007? Only looking at the extremes? Do you also believe that temperatures did not increase since 1998 because it happened to be a warm year?

            Hmm, if you perception works like this, shall we take a look at cloud cover data then?

            http://www.climate4you.com/images/CloudCoverTotalObservationsSince1983.gif

            Would you say cloud cover didn’t change or even increased slightly since the last value in this graph is about the same as the first value? 😉

            Work on you perception, Kenneth. Don’t just read things into stuff that aren’t there.

          2. spike55

            Call me AMAZED !!!

            Seb actually got something correct.

            He is now arguing the warming is NOTHING TO DO WITH CO2

            Well done seb. 🙂

            Whole arctic was warmer in the 1940s, seb

            DATA yet again.

            The extreme in the Arctic was the low temps in the late 1970s, coldest period since the LIA, where alarmism has to start.

            https://s19.postimg.cc/vws4z68s3/arctic_temp.png

            In the late 1970s, Arctic sea ice was up there with the extent of the LIA.

            https://s19.postimg.cc/bkgbf2prn/Icelandic_sea_ice_index_2.png

            No wonder there was a scare about a new ice age. !!

    2. Robert Folkerts

      Seb says it is warm at midnight in Finland right now. Would that have anything to do with near 24 hour sunshine this time of year? Arctic circle perhaps??

      1. Kenneth Richard

        Would that have anything to do with near 24 hour sunshine this time of year?

        No, it’s because of CO2. Of course.

      2. SebastianH

        Would that have anything to do with near 24 hour sunshine this time of year?

        Feel free to look up that angle and the temperature of other locations at that latitude.

        1. Robert Folkerts

          Northern Finland has 64 days of 24 hour sun. So only just having some time without sun this week.

        2. Bitter&twisted

          Still getting unemployment benefit?
          It shows.

        3. spike55

          Poor seb.

          NOTHING is going for you is it, little child.

          NH, only 0.4ºC above the average of the rise out of the COLDEST period since the LIA.

          You yell and scream about warming, and the NH anomaly is only 0.04ºC above last month.. oh dearie he.

          Less than 1ºC warming since the COLDEST period in 10,000 years.

          Oceans only warming by 0.08ºC over 60 or so years., and NONE of that can be put down to CO2

          The melting in West Antarctic PROVEN to be volcanic in origin.

          Poor EVIDENCE FREE seb.

          Live your PATHETIC little anti-science FANTASIES, seb

          Its all you have in your life.

        4. SebastianH

          So you two think the midnight Sun keeps Northern Finland warm? Really?

          @B&T … great, going the insult route again. That’s all you guys got?

          1. Robert Folkerts

            Well Seb,
            Three years ago I spent some time in Sortland, Norway, early January. The Temps were well into the minus numbers. The locals assured me it had a lot to do with the sun being absent from their skies for 45 days at that latitude.
            Would it come as a surprise to you that summer Temps, with 24 hour sun, would necessarily, and naturally be somewhat warmer.
            As well, the 24 hour sun is producing phenomenal plant growth rates, just so long as there is adequate co2!

          2. SebastianH

            Again, Robert … go to a service like ventusky.com and compare the temperature of Scandinavia to other places at the same latitude. It’s not warm there because the Sun is up longer … that’s also the case at those other places at the same latitude.

          3. Robert Folkerts

            Now Seb, just what do you think the Temps in those places might be if the sun set, say about 6.00. Any idea why night time temperature in a desert is commonly so different to daytime? I think you will fing the sun has a bit to do with warmth.

    3. spike55

      NH July anomaly is 0.04C above June, seb

      You are reading WAAAAY too many leftist propaganda rags.

      Your ONLY source of un-knowledge.

      Just ignore all the places that are colder than “normal”.

      And you don’t REALLY think this is caused by an increase in atmospheric plant food, do you.

      You KNOW that you have absolutely ZERO scientific evidence to back up that little fantasy.

    4. spike55

      “Just like most places in the Northern Hemisphere are pretty hot right now?”

      WRONG!

      Siberia, Central Canada, Eastern USA are all have negative anomalies compared to 1979-200.

      And 1979 just happened to be the coldest period in the NH since the LIA. !

      Why do you NEVER think about the REALITY of the situation

      The world isn’t even 1C above the coldest period in 10,000 years.

      And that slight warming has been highly beneficial to all life on Earth

      And you KNOW its nothing to do with any human cause..

      You can’t even provide any science to show any CO2 warming.. anywhere, anytime.

      Q1. In what way has the climate changed in the last 40 years, that can be scientifically attributable to human CO2 ?

      Q2. Do you have ANY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE at all that humans have changed the global climate in ANYWAY WHATSOEVER?

      1. SebastianH

        Siberia, Central Canada, Eastern USA are all have negative anomalies compared to 1979-200.

        So cold in those places …

        https://climate.copernicus.eu/resources/data-analysis/average-surface-air-temperature-analysis/monthly-maps/surface-air-10

        Why do you NEVER think about the REALITY of the situation

        The world isn’t even 1C above the coldest period in 10,000 years.

        Why do you write this kind of nonsense when you are trying to “think about the reality of the situation”?

        1. spike55

          FACTS that seb cannot counter

          So he goes on a headless chook rant

          So funny !!!!

          LESS THAN 0.3C above the COLDEST period since the LIA.

          SCARY !! to a headless chicken-little.

          http://www.demokraticni-socializem.si/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/418335main_land-ocean-full.jpg

          Less than 1C since 1880, seb.

          GET OVER IT.

          You got NOTHING.

          Certainly NO EVIDENCE of any warming from CO2

          Bring your Evidence, seb…!!

          Q1. In what way has the climate changed in the last 40 years, that can be scientifically attributable to human CO2 ?

          Q2. Do you have ANY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE at all that humans have changed the global climate in ANYWAY WHATSOEVER?

          1. SebastianH

            And he throws around another graph without a source …

            Less than 1C since 1880, seb.

            So 1880 is the “coldest period in 10000 years”? Why not 1890? Or 1600 to 1700? Was it cooler in 1880 than back then?

            You got NOTHING.

            I got you and your hilarious clown acts 😉 Thank you for really nailing the performance that everyone expects from a climate denialist 😉

          2. spike55

            And seb throw NO EVIDENCE from ANY source.

            Throws a massive TANTY, reminiscent of a 5 year old in a supermarket, but

            Remains EVIDENCE-FREE.

            Look at your priest Mickey Mann’s Hockey Stick, seb.

            What was the coldest year?

            GISS shows LESS THAN 1ºC warming since that coldest point on the Hockey stick.

            And no amount of your manic delusional ravings will change that.

            Very odd that you are arguing against GISS data, because that is what the graph I linked to is. How embarrassing for you.

            Another massive faceplant from poor BS seb.

            That is what the “adjusted™” data says, the one that is meant to help prove the AGW scam, and it shows LESS than 1ºC global warming since the Hockey Stick minimum.

            REALITY is probably about 2/3 of that.

            *** It is noted that you, YET AGAIN, take the HEADLESS CHOOK distraction routine in a very juvenile attempt to avoid answering two simple question.

            Q1. In what way has the climate changed in the last 40 years, that can be scientifically attributable to human CO2 ?

            Q2. Do you have ANY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE at all that humans have changed the global climate in ANYWAY WHATSOEVER?

        2. spike55

          “So cold in those places …”

          Funny to see you showing the COOLER period of June in Central Europe and Scandinavia.

          Seems you are pointing out WEATHER changes, and are just very very confused.

          Anomalies of only 0.4C or thereabouts from the rise out of the ice ages scare of the 1970s

          Less than 1ºC warming since the LIA, coldest period in 10,000 years, according to GISS.

          http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/ononelk782/gistemp_landocean.jpg

          Isn’t it GREAT that we had the Grand Solar Maximum during the latter half of last century, to provide all that much needed warmth.

          1. SebastianH

            So the low point of the LIA was in 1880? Is that what you are trying to say?

          2. spike55

            And seb faceplants straight into his own BS.

            Do you “believe” Mann’s hockey stick or not, chicken-little?

          3. SebastianH

            And seb faceplants straight into his own BS.

            You wrote “spike55” wrong and wrote “seb” instead.

            You started with “The world isn’t even 1C above the coldest period in 10,000 years.”

            You continued with a graph from 1880 until now and wrote “Less than 1C since 1880, seb.”

            You again wrote “Less than 1ºC warming since the LIA, coldest period in 10,000 years, according to GISS.”

            You seem to think that 1880 was the low point in temperatures “in the LIA”. If that isn’t “faceplanting”, what is it then? Your usual clown performance?

          4. spike55

            Poor seb, arguing against the “Hockey Stick” now.

            Mickey Mann will be so angry at you. !!

            When does Mickey say was the coldest point?

            Take a look at your priest’s graph, then wipe the egg and BS off your face, yet again.

            I make it around 1910, Just like GISS does.

            Can you read a graph, seb?

            The trap was laid, you tripped and fell, SPLATTTT, a 10-point faceplant into your own AGW BS..

    5. spike55

      Seb , you do know there has been NO WARMING in Japan this century at least.

      https://s19.postimg.cc/s9bwikr0z/Japan_post_1998.png

      And there was NO WARMING from 1950-1990 when Japan was going gang-busters on industrial expansion

      https://s19.postimg.cc/6kzq5cxdf/japan1950-1990.png

      This day or so of warmer weather is related to the wobbly jet stream triggered by the change from warming to cooling

      You do know its just WEATHER, don’t you chicken-little?

      1. SebastianH

        It seems to be difficult to find temperature graphs from Japan (I don’t trust your graphs without any mention of a source or what data I am exactly looking at) … but I found this one:
        http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c016306b422b5970d-popup (it even comes from this very blog trying to imagine away the hockey stick)

        And wow, more than 5°C warming from the LIA low point up to 1990 …

        1. spike55

          DENIAL of data YET AGAIN.

          Sorry you are ALWAYS so INCOMPETENT at finding any data

          No seb, that is one little island.

          Did you know that trees LOVE the rise in atmospheric CO2

          Did you know that trees are NOT a good indicator of temperature ???

          There are so, so many things you are IGNORANT of.

          1. SebastianH

            How about presenting the sources of you graphs instead of trying to come up with creative insults and you tree loving stories?

          2. spike55

            Is that seb asking for EVIDENCE

            ROFLMAO

            Find the DATA, seb

            Draw your graphs yourself, seb

            Thinks that tree don’t use CO2 as their major source of food.

            I KNOW you failed physic and science.

            But BIOLOGY as well ??

            School must have been a very unfortunate time of your life, seb.

            You seem to have basically MISSED several year of basic education.

          3. spike55

            Poor, seb

            The graphs are from data from the Japanese Meteorological Agency.

            You can find the data and process the data all by yourself, if you have the capability.

            I would totally understand if you were INCAPABLE of doing so, though.

    6. MrZ

      Seb,
      In Stockholm we have had more or less 12 weeks with clear skies and high pressure. When moisture was low and the soil was colder we had hot days but chilly nights. Now soil is warm (as are the lakes) and moisture is much higher and we begin to see tropical nights.

      It looks as if sun and water decides the average temp.

      Can you please speculate a little how much lower the average temp would have been here if the same weather situation happened 20 years ago?

      1. SebastianH

        Well, I am sure there are detailed temperature and weather records for your location. You could look up how similar situations played out in the past yourself.

        If it is the Sun (“midnight Sun” *g*), how does this work in such a weak period in a especially weak cycle?

        1. spike55

          Poor seb, little headless chook still thinks the oceans respond immediately to solar input.

          Seems he knows NOTHING about ocean heat energy.

          Got any EVIDENCE that CO2 causes warming yet, seb?

          Or are you still ducking and weaving in manic evasion.

  3. Scientific Way to Discredit Use of Ground Measurements – CO2 is Life

    […] More on this topic (Source) […]

  4. esalil

    SebastianH: Where did you get the night temperature of north Finland being 24C. I checked the three most known Finnish Lapland wheather station data, Kilpisjärvi, Utsjoki and Sodankylä and in none of them the night temerature exceeded 20C in any night of July. There were qute a few temåeratures of 18-19C. In Kilpisjärvi the night temperature stayed mostly below 10C. As for warming in Finland your link clearly shows that there was at least as warm as now in the fourties. Helsinki area has grown more than double since that, The graph considers UHI in Helsinki as well. Funny thing is that according to the graph UHI was larger in the fifties than now. It is unbelievable to me. Another funny thing in the graph is that the decadal temperatures do not fall although the yearly red spots are clearly declining after the fourties. Anyway, it is clear that the warming in Finland happened prior to fourties and the Scientific American story is more or less BS.

    1. SebastianH

      Ventusky.com … at 1 am August 2nd it clearly shows those temperatures.

      My link shows what? It clearly shows that the warming was recent. How do you (and Kennth) get the impression that there was no warming since the 1940 from those graphs? Very weird …

      What is clear is that you have a pretty destorted view of reality.

      1. Kenneth Richard
        1. SebastianH
  5. Yonason

    FLASHBACK

    “‘1997 has been the warmest year on record’ – NOAA January 1998”

    Sound familiar?

    Well, they were lying then, just like they are lying now.
    https://www.john-daly.com/surftemp.htm

    U.H.I. was one of the most important tools in their climate hacking kit.

    And as Kirye documents in Japan, they are still at it.

    (See other links provided in that article for more information that debunked warmist claims of their day. Still applies today.)

  6. esalil

    SebastianH: Ventusky is a forecast. The real measured data for August 2nd at 1 am at Ivalo (the region where Ventusky forecasted 24C) was 20C. Maybe you have a pretty destorted view of reality, since if you look carefully at the graph you linked (it is the graph of Finnish Meteorological Institute, the official governement organ) you notice that it obeys the dogma “hide the decline”. The red dots are probably real monthly mean temperatures. But the solid black line which gives you the impression of a steady warming, is clearly erroneous. In the thirties only one spot is markedly below the decadal mean while there are 5 spots markedly above it. So the real decadal mean of the thirties should be nearly the same as that of the last decade. Moreover, the mean of the eighties seems to be much too high. So, if you want to be honest you will state that Finland got warmer prior to the fourties, then cooled again till the nineties and warmed back to the level of the thirties during the last 3 decades. No net warming since the thirties especially when UHI is taken in account.

    1. SebastianH

      SebastianH: Ventusky is a forecast.

      Nope. It includes a forecast too, but it’s mainly historical weather data starting in May 2016.

      This is a Netatmo station in the region:
      https://weathermap.netatmo.com//?zoom=8&type=temp&param=Filter&stationid=70%3Aee%3A50%3A2c%3A84%3Aa0&maplayer=Map&lat=68.66754831794084&lng=28.649597167968754&lang=de-DE
      Here is another one:
      https://weathermap.netatmo.com//?zoom=8&type=temp&param=Filter&stationid=70%3Aee%3A50%3A27%3A3e%3A5a&maplayer=Map&lat=69.53547793246362&lng=29.665832519531254&lang=de-DE

      Both show 22 to 23 degrees around midnight between August 1st and 2nd.

      Maybe you have a pretty destorted view of reality, since if you look carefully at the graph you linked (it is the graph of Finnish Meteorological Institute, the official governement organ) you notice that it obeys the dogma “hide the decline”.

      You mean this graph?
      https://ilmasto-opas.fi/ilocms-portlet/article/16266ad3-e5f5-4987-8760-2b74655182d5/r/ad8df9fc-1a75-4b93-9f84-642b1c4dc4d1/kuva1-suomen-vuosikeskilampotila-1847alkaen-en-iso.png

      The red dots are probably real monthly mean temperatures. But the solid black line which gives you the impression of a steady warming, is clearly erroneous. In the thirties only one spot is markedly below the decadal mean while there are 5 spots markedly above it.

      The red dots are yearly averages. The black “step” lines are 10 year averages. If you don’t trust the data or methods I can’t help you. The data comes from this paper, which uses a smooths 21-point binominal filter (figure 7) which is more what you seem to expect the mean to look like:
      https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/joc.2046

      Table 1 in that paper shows you the warming trends for different periods in the available data (unfortunately only until 2008).

      So, if you want to be honest you will state that Finland got warmer prior to the fourties, then cooled again till the nineties […]

      True

      […] and warmed back to the level of the thirties during the last 3 decades. No net warming since the thirties especially when UHI is taken in account.

      Nope, that is not what happened. As can be seen by this graph:
      https://ilmasto-opas.fi/ilocms-portlet/article/16266ad3-e5f5-4987-8760-2b74655182d5/r/38df5655-349a-4c86-8faf-3a2ea74409de/kuva2-vuosikeskilampotilat-asemat-en-iso.png

      Anyway, I don’t know why you try to imagine that Finland didn’t warm. I just used it as an example for the current heat in the Northern Hemisphere. Not as an example for a place affected by global warming.

      The main point was that for the UHI to have an effect it would have to increase around that Japanese station. And since the author pointed at the structures surrounding the weather station, those must have recently changed to have a greater effect. Was that the case? Or have these structures existed for a few decades already? So a high (measured) temperature today is indeed higher than a lower one 10 or 20 years ago. Do you agree or disagree?

      1. spike55

        Warming in Japan this century seb

        https://s19.postimg.cc/s9bwikr0z/Japan_post_1998.png

        REAL DATA.

        Go and find it !!

        Seems as always, you have great difficulty telling the difference between an isolated WEATHER event, and actual Solar warming.

        Less than 1ºC above the coldest period in the last 10,000 years seb

        Why are you in so much of a TOTALLY IRRATIONAL MANIC PANIC?

        As you are well aware..

        .. There is NO EVIDENCE for any CO2 forced warming.

  7. Scientific Way to Discredit Ground Temperature Measurements | PSI Intl

    […] More on this topic (Source) […]

  8. esalil

    SebatianH: Where is the historical measured temperature data of Ventusky? I checked the temperatures backwards but found only forecasted data. Are you kidding with netatmo data? The gear can be purchased by anybody and placed whereever you want, e.g. your balcony, without no quality control of the temperature data. The first netatmo station you linked happens to be near Ivalo official station which, as I earlier stated, showed 20C. The second one is near Inari Raja-Jooseppi official weather station which showed at that time only 10,5C, 12C less than your netatmo station. So far for the reliability of netatmo stations.
    Speaking about graphs: The red dots are indeed yearly values based on monthly means of the whole Finland. The figure legend tells that the decadal average temperatures are shown as mean (solid black line). What else can it mean than the mean of ten yearly values? The quoted paper does not show this kind of decadal averages at all. Then you say “Nope, that is not what happened. As can be seen by this graph:” We were talking about warming/cooling of the whole Finland and dishonestly you suddenly go to a second graph showing only 3 stations. There are about 400 official stations of Finnish Meteorological Institute more or less covered in the data presented in the first graph. You say “Anyway, I don’t know why you try to imagine that Finland didn’t warm.” It did not as shown by the first graph. Why do you try to imagine that Finland warmed?
    I have no competence to comment the Japanese structures for UHI. But considering the UHI graph of Helsinki shown in your second graph I am pretty sure that UHI in the fifties cannot be higher than now like the graph shows. Do you agree or disagree?

    1. Kenneth Richard

      The red dots are indeed yearly values based on monthly means of the whole Finland.

      And when the drawn-in trend line is removed from Finland’s annual mean temperature values (see link below), it shows that the 1930s had anomalies that were similar in magnitude to the last 10 years, with cooling during the 1940s to 1980s. In other words, there’s been an oscillation in temperatures during the last 100 years or so, which is not in line with the trajectory of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

      http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Finland-Instrumental-Temps.jpg

      1. spike55

        Basically everywhere in the Arctic region has a temperature peak around 1940 which is essentially the same or even slightly higher than current day temperatures.

        All with a much cooler period in the late 1970s.

        Here are several place around the Arctic in one graph.

        https://s19.postimg.cc/vws4z68s3/arctic_temp.png

        Even Ireland, Portugal etc, basically anywhere on the Northern Atlantic, has the same pattern as well.

        https://s19.postimg.cc/5if59yngz/Ireland_AMO_article.jpg

        https://s19.postimg.cc/guvpice2r/Portugal_grapes.jpg

        Even the USA once you use raw data, and ignore the deliberate data tampering

        https://s19.postimg.cc/o1d61lfoz/Ncdc_measured.jpg

        I’m sure K has many more examples.

  9. M E

    It was an interesting report with illustrations of the effect of the surroundings on the meters measuring the air temperature in their vicinity.
    The heat from road surfaces which is also shown is also of interest to those who live in urban areas.
    In the past (1950) there were very high temperatures in central London because of the lead sheeting used on older buildings as roofing material.It was definitely warm to the touch.I was there.
    Will Sebastian refute these observations ,too , I wonder. Just teasing ,Sebastian.

  10. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #324 | Watts Up With That?
  11. kramer

    I’ve looked for aerial thermal images of the earth’s cities and suburbs/rural areas to compare them but haven’t found any.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close