Comments on: Tucson Then and Now

By: Detectives in Tucson « Climate Audit

Detectives in Tucson « Climate Audit — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:21:03 +0000

[...] Atmoz in his continuing effort to argue that the above post contained a scandalous error, as I reported here, Atmoz then fabricated a variation of my original graphic in which he inserted a green arrow that [...]

By: Detectives in Tucson « Climate Audit

Detectives in Tucson « Climate Audit — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:20:55 +0000

[...] the frame of the Google Earth image shown above, which I responded to in a separate post on Aug 22 here, from which the comments below are [...]

By: Texas Junk Yards

Texas Junk Yards — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 01:16:17 +0000

We need to quantify a UHI trend effect, not just a UHI effect. So a potential important data requirement for all airport locations, beyond the standard microsite influences, is growth in take-offs and landings. This should also be done on a daily basis to see now interday and intraday variations influence the temperature record. It would make a pretty good thesis topic for a graduate student.

By: steven mosher

steven mosher — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:42:49 +0000

re 45.

No problem with that Virgil.

By: VirgilM

VirgilM — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:39:43 +0000

I was in Tucson last week and visited the Univerisity of Arizona. Let’s put ourselves in the shoes of the NWS. Where should they move the station where it would be free of UHI and local micro climate effects? Keep in mind that the station has to be within 5 miles of the original location and about the same elevation.

My opinion is that moving the station would be impossible given the requirements. There are not many places in Tucson where WMO requirements could be met. The electric companies like where it is currently sited because it represents Tucson very well. This station should be dropped from climate change determinations.

By: steven mosher

steven mosher — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:14:07 +0000

RE 43.

There is a VERY instructive test that one can do.

Collect Giss raw for UNIV Tuscon. 1880s to present
Collect GISS RAw for Tuscon Int Airport 1948 to present.
Collect GISS RAw for Tombstone Az about 1904 to present ( when you junk missing years)

If a global trend is present at Univ T. the same trend should be at the airport
and it should be at tombstone only 100KM away.

Another thing to look for is differential heating or cooling. Jumps.

So, you look at Univ T – Airport. and you look at Univ T – Tombstone…

You will find some interesting discontinuities… in 1955 and 1998.

By: MarkW

MarkW — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:47:31 +0000

I’m going to guess that TCO’s next response will be, that until someone can determine, to his satisfaction, what affect a runway will have on temperature readings, out to a thousandth of a degree, we must assume that it has no affect.

By: Steve McIntyre

Steve McIntyre — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:10:55 +0000

B. It is RIGHT that he is INCORRECT, in ascribing a green arrow to you as locating the ASOS. He should say that this is where your plan view was, to be precise. He did not fabricate an image. He put an incorrect green arrow up.

I did not have a green arrow in any of my images. He inserted a green arrow into an image that I had used and then said that I had located the ASOS station where the green arrow was, specifically discussing the green arrow. Sorry, TCO, attributing the image with the green arrow to me was a fabrication.

His original post also omitted an important caveat where I explicitly said that I was uncertain of the ASOS location, pretending that I had purported to say something that I didn’t.

In this particular case, I remain unconvinced that my original point was incorrect – the ASOS station at Tucson International Airport is not in a pristine rural station. Yes, it’s not located in a parking lot, but it’s located fairly close to large asphalt runways at a large urban airport. Yes, if you dial back up, you can see desert to the south of the airport, but you see urban developments in other directions and immediately around the airport in most directions.

If I had actually said without qualification that ASOS station was in a spot where it wasn’t, I would have edited the various descriptions based on further information without a second’s thought. I don’t claim to be omniscient about details of Tucson geography or anything else. Even if I made such an error, it wouldn’t prove that auditing studies like Mann’s or Hansen’s is a stupid thing to do; it simply shows that people make mistakes and that articles should be checked – my articles as well. I try to be careful but, quite frankly, given the amount of material I’ve posted here, I’m surprised that I’ve made as few mistakes as I have.

By: Michael Jankowski

Michael Jankowski — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 12:54:08 +0000

Not sure about google earth, but the green arrow is standard in google maps when one searches for a location. I would never ascribe the green arrow to indicate a manual identification unless it were explicitly stated, just that it identifies where google locates the information searched for.

By: TCO

TCO — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:56:26 +0000

A. He put that image up in response to me, because I asked for it. I was Google Earthing to make sure that you and he were at the same airport. Your and his earlier pland views did not overlap at all (they are about a frame away). I was able to find a view on the net that showed both together but unable to cut and paste it. I asked him to paste one that showed both the terminal and the ASOS (in otherwords, both the plan views).

B. It is RIGHT that he is “INCORRECT”, in ascribing a green arrow to you as locating the ASOS. He should say that this is where your plan view was, to be precise. He did not fabricate an image. He put an incorrect green arrow up.

C. It’s outrageous (misleading…and I would say it to your face, sailor) that you posted the terminal image as indicating the condition of the ASOS when you had not even confirmed the ASOS as in screen and when the airport OBVIOUSLY has lots more open land than shown. It’s also dishonest (Clintonian failure to respond) that you did not answer my queery on where the ASOS was (even supposed to be) within your image, and that you did not correct the commenter who said that it was in the lower right.

D. You STILL have not addressed this issue on the original thread, and instead have an MSM-style rowback slipped into a post with a different subject (and after it was originally posted). Very passive aggressive, Steve.