Gisstemp – Scrap or Bingo?
A chance to show the impact
of naval activities?
nice to consult the land record on the island to see if it can
assist,” while concluding his posting with the sentence: “Maybe,
like Mann’s birstlecones, Honolulu airport is a “sweet spot”
for detecting climate change”.
following comments (
HERE) shall raise interest in reason of Obs data record in the
1940s, hoping that the text together with the figures provide a
reasonable sufficient picture why the matter should investigated and
Obs data either scrapped, or, in case naval activities made an
impact, such a result welcomed a great contribution
to understand the climatic change issue better.
ArndB,Posted Sep 2, 2010 at 12:35 PM
#“Honolulu airport is a “sweet spot” for
detecting climate change”
The matter would become really interesting if
the airport is compared with the nearby „Honolulu Obs Oahu“
station , see WUWT/ 19Jun22009: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/19/more-on-noaas-fubar-honolulu-record-highs-asos-debacle-plus-finding-a-long-lost-giss-station/ ),
___which is close to the entrance of Pearl Harbour,
___is very close to a sea area, where presumably enormous naval
activities during and after WWII took place, that can have changed
the ‘sea-surface structure’ in more than one way, e.g. the sea
of Obs is fairly deep, with much colder water just below the sea
surface, or: the day time warming of the sea surface was quickly
replace by colder (not sun warmed) water.
___the extraordinary drop from 1945 to 1949, coincides with size of
the US Navy at Honolulu.
___It would be to easy to assume a malfunction of the measurements,
although not totally impossible, but that would objectively mean
that the people running the Obs must have been completely ignorant
and incompetent not to recognising it.
___If Obs temperature have been taken correctly (and that seems to
be the case as the station was presumably never moved, but only the
institutions running Obs changed a few times), and also the airport
measurements, than it should be possible to identify a reason for
___which would be particularly helpful in the climatic change debate,
and even more,
___if naval activities caused the air temperature to drop
dramatically „Honolulu Obs Oahu“ from 1945 to 1949.
, Posted Sep 2, 2010 at 8:29 PM
Even if it were true, it would only be a
“sweet spot” for that location, and irrelevant for anywhere else.
,Posted Sep 3, 2010 at 12:14 AM
It would bring naval activities and many other
activities in the marine environment more in focus with regard of
their possible impact on climate change, e.g., what did naval
activities contributed during WWII?: http://climate-ocean.com/
; See here a recent paper about the Western Pacific 1942-1945: http://www.what-is-climate.com/
Posted Sep 5, 2010 at 1:42 AM
I thought he was being ironic, almost mocking. Airports have lots of
special characteristics, and it would depend greatly on WHERE in the
grounds the station was located.
Posted Sep 5, 2010 at 12:22 PM
„Sweet spot“ was presumably meant ironic,
but together with nearby OBS the matter gets serious, that is the
reason why WUWT mentioned the discrepancy repeatedly. But on
preliminary consideration of OBS Oahu station measurements during
and after WWII, see here: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/honolulu-observatory-giss-station-plot.gif?w=510&h=393 it seems a bit to simple to assume faulty equipment without proof, for
which the graphic provides no indication.
Due to the huge presence and activities of the US Navy close to OBS
during the 1940s and 1950s it is presumably one of the rare
opportunities to investigate an human impact with clear parameter,
and it could serve as a unique chance to get GW advocates sweating.