Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (828557)	1/8/2015 1:00:53 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574098

Since you didn't remember the short version, December 1, 2014 "Hello, This is not one of our graphs and I’m not exactly sure where this data was recorded. The official coop station Yosemite Park Headquarters began collecting temperature data in 1907 and this graph began in 1900. There are several issues with this graph - spelling for starters, we would also reference the WRCC so others could contact us if there was a question and these numbers are off. Looking at the data, these numbers and years are not correct. For example, the average annual max temperature occurred in 1926, not 1930-something as the graph displays.. I’m sorry, I cannot help you. I’ve tried to find this graph but no luck. I can tell you this is not our graph nor is the data correct." ? signed by the Service Climatologist, Western Regional Climate Center Message 29838260 here's the full post mystery temp graph? W.U.W.T.? Tuesday, December 2, 2014 There's a temperature graph going around the blogosphere claiming to represent the temperature trend in Yosemite National Park since 1900. Climate science denialist types love this graph because it seems to indicate no warming in Yosemite, as if that represents the whole state or something. Besides, consider Yosemite National Park, it comprises some 1,169 square miles - (3,027 km2) with an elevation range from 2,127 to 13,114 feet (648 to 3,997 m) on both sides of the Sierra Nevada mountain divide. Vegetation zones start with chaparral oakwoodland, lower montane forest, upper montane forest, subalpine zone, all the way up to alpine. Seemed odd that anyone would claim a single graph from YNP as some definitive statement on the situation within the park, let alone beyond. Yet Mr. Steele claims it, and does so on many occasions. Including this recent video ( *12:10) which I'm in the process of reviewing.* He never tells us where this data came from, nor who compiled the graph, we're supposed to accept the authority of his word on it - I thought they rejected appeals to authority? Unfortunately, I've learned to be skeptical of Mr. Steele's claims and I tried finding its origin. No luck on the internet. Finally I sent an email to the Western Regional Climate Center to see if they could offer any insight and they certainly did. I share their response: {I added paragraph breaks for clarity} WRCC Data < wrcc@dri.edu> December 1, 2014 "Hello, This is not one of our graphs and I’m not exactly sure where this data was recorded. The official coop station Yosemite Park Headquarters began collecting temperature data in 1907 and this graph began in 1900. There are several issues with this graph - spelling for starters, we would also reference the WRCC so others could contact us if there was a question and these numbers are off. Looking at the data, these numbers and years are not correct. For example, the average annual max temperature occurred in 1926, not 1930-something as the graph displays.. I’m sorry, I cannot help you. I’ve tried to find this graph but no luck. I can tell you this is not our graph nor is the data correct." ? signed by the Service Climatologist, Western Regional Climate Center The mystery graph Screen shot from What'sUpWithThat: At Landscapesandcycles blog: And from his recent video series: In the video Steele never offers a source or citation 11:40 Steele says: "Yet, she was blaming global warming. That didn't make any sense to me. She also said this was consistent with the global warming theory. Again she used this top down global average to explain a local event. But if you look at Yosemite data, it's very similar to what I had in Tahoe City. If you look at what the 30s were, they were much warmer than we see now. So how do you blame global warming." In the footnotes of Steele's Landscapesandcycles blog he does cite one temperature related study, but not in relation to the mystery graph: "She (Dr. Parmesan) had blamed “global” warming even though most maximum temperatures in California had not risen significantly.[3]" [3] Cordero, E., et al., (2011) The identification of distinct patterns in California temperature trends. Climate Change" I found the paper and it tells a different story: http://www.met.sjsu.edu/~cordero/research/Papers/2011-Corderoetal-climchange.pdf ~ ~ ~ Jim Steele claimed: "even though most maximum temperatures in California had not risen significantly.[3]" But, here's the tally: California Tmax trend average broken into 11 regionals. 2/11 -0.04° 1/11 +0.02° 1/11 +0.03° 1/11 +0.09° 1/11 +0.10° 1/11 +0.12° 2/11 +0.13° 1/11 +0.16° 1/11 +0.17° And that's from 1918 to 2006, the scary part is 1970 to 2006 . . . and beyond. Check out the study: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ http://www.met.sjsu.edu/~cordero/research/Papers/2011-Corderoetal-climchange.pdf The identification of distinct patterns in California temperature trends Eugene C. Cordero · Wittaya Kessomkiat · John Abatzoglou · Steven A. Mauget Received: 28 August 2009 / Accepted: 4 November 2010 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011 4.2 Comparison of annual trends: 1918–2006 with 1970–2006 It is understood that forcings (i.e., natural and anthropogenic) may interact in a nonlinear fashion, thus affecting temperatures across different time and spatial scales. To evaluate this, we compared annual trends across different regions for two different time periods, 1918–2006 and 1970–2006. The most prominent feature in this comparison (Fig. 5) was accelerated warming trends from 1970–2006. Statewide Tmax trends between 1970–2006 (+0.27?C dec-1) were more than three times as large as the trend between 1918–2006 (+0.07?C dec-1), while Tmin trends between 1970–2006 (+0.31?C dec-1) were almost twice as large as trends between 1918– 2006 (+0.17?C dec-1). (my highlights) The finding that trends for Tmin were larger than Tmax for the entire period, while trends in Tmin were nearly the same as Tmax since 1970 is qualitatively similar to results observed for global temperature (Vose et al. 2005). Although statewide trends in temperature for Tmin and Tmax were about the same since 1970, there were distinct regional differences. …" Department of Meteorology and Climate Science San Jose State University, College of Science met.sjsu.edu whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com

To: Brumar89 who wrote (828557)	1/8/2015 1:50:18 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574098

"As an ecologist, I never trusted homogenized USHCN data " Does he trust Yosemite's wildlife? Refining Past Research New studies add nuance to our understanding of the effect of climate change on species migration. By Nathanael Johnson When Toni Lyn Morelli went looking for Belding’s ground squirrels two summers ago, she didn’t think she would have much trouble. Anyone who has ever driven through Yosemite has seen the narrow-tailed, dun coated rodents standing sentinel above their holes and dashing about. “At first I thought I must be going blind and deaf,” she said when she couldn’t find them in expected spots. Morelli was looking in the places Joseph Grinnell and his researchers had noted a century earlier. These sites had once had so many Belding’s that the rodents scarcely seemed worth mentioning. The notebooks of Grinnell’s students and colleagues now line a wall 30 feet long in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Biology. Using recently developed statistical methods to quantify their observations, scientists—co-led by the Museum’s Steve Beissinger, a professor in the Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management—are trying to see how California is changing over the centuries. These changes are often so gradual that they’re undetectable. They become visible only when scientists create a sort of time-lapse image by comparing past and present. As more information comes in, that picture is growing sharper and more nuanced. “With climate warming, species are supposed to move up to cooler elevations. Our goal was to test that hypothesis,” Beissinger said. “We decided to retrace the footsteps of the people who had filled those notebooks, to walk where they walked and to compare what they had seen with what we see today.” The initial findings generally confirmed the hypothesis, and in 2008 Beissinger and his team published a paper concluding that, in Yosemite, many of the mammals were marching uphill. On the other hand, there were plenty of exceptions to be found once researchers started digging in a few years later. Take the Belding’s ground squirrel: At 42 percent of the sites where Grinnell’s team had found ground squirrels, Morelli found none. The changing climate seemed a likely suspect, and yet there wasn’t an obvious correlation. Some populations had persisted—thrived even—in the hottest locations. Overall, the outer limits of the Belding’s range hasn’t shifted. The mystery deepened with the work of Morgan Tingley, one of Beissinger’s graduate students at the time. To his surprise, Tingley found the range of the white-headed woodpecker had risen in elevation in one region, dropped in another, and stayed the same in a third. What could be going on? “We just scratched our heads,” Beissinger said of the bird data. “We wrestled with it for, gosh, a good year and a half.” For Morelli, a breakthrough came while surveying around Mono Lake. At first her team found no trace of Belding’s amid the sagebrush and parched grasses. But then, they visited one more site: “Everything is dry and hot, and then we take this little side road and come to bright green Kentucky bluegrass—the Mono County Park—and the Belding’s are just everywhere. The students are running around getting drenched by the sprinklers and at that moment it was clear: There’s something about these human-modifications that are allowing the Belding’s to survive in these places where they’ve otherwise disappeared.” If you don’t count the parks and alfalfa fields and all the human landscapes where the ground squirrels have taken refuge, the picture becomes clear: Their range has retreated up into the mountains by 250 meters. Similarly, the bird data started to make sense when Tingley sharpened the focus, but for a different reason. Instead of only looking at the general temperature rise across the state, he looked at local changes at each site. Tracking not just temperature but also precipitation showed that 82 percent of the species had moved with the changing climate. Some have followed temperatures, others followed rainfall. These findings suggest that the choices conservationists make about protecting habitat should be guided not just by global temperature change, but by local conditions—especially precipitation, for which future projections are much more uncertain than temperature. The studies also raise philosophical questions of what we value about wildlife and biodiversity: In 50-75 years Belding’s ground squirrels could be gone from many of California’s natural areas due to global warming, but thriving in farms and parks. Should we install sprinklers in Yosemite’s meadows to keep Belding’s—and all the predators that rely on them—around? To help answer those questions, the scientists still have plenty of work to do to clear up the picture of what has happened since Grinnell’s time. But they’re always looking forward. “We do this with an eye to the future as well as the past,” Beissinger said. “In 20 or 30 years when climate change has really set in, we expect people to be retracing our steps, just as we retraced Grinnell’s.” alumni.berkeley.edu