tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post9142800403511449494..comments2024-03-16T02:27:38.423+11:00Comments on moyhu: Interactive JS climate plotter (update)Nick Stokeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-28515296139915746242012-04-01T09:34:02.882+10:002012-04-01T09:34:02.882+10:00sidd,
It is Precipitable Water. Ctrl-click on the ...sidd,<br />It is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precipitable_water" rel="nofollow">Precipitable Water</a>. Ctrl-click on the button next to the label brings up some info. Or it should - I'd like to hear if there are problems. In this case, the message is:<br /><br />'Precipitable Water<br><a href="http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/timeseries/" rel="nofollow">Source</a><br><a href="http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/timeseries/" rel="nofollow">More Information</a><br><br /><br />The More Info link is just to the NOAA page with the NCEP data - I couldn't find a good summary page there on PW. NCEP just means that it is a data post-processed with some modelling. PW is basically a measure of whole-atmosphere humidity.Nick Stokeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-86556358832804041912012-04-01T08:16:14.045+10:002012-04-01T08:16:14.045+10:00what is NCEP Prep Water ?
siddwhat is NCEP Prep Water ?<br /><br />siddAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-16154746287877752422012-03-31T22:19:33.140+11:002012-03-31T22:19:33.140+11:00Thanks, Paul, I think you're probably right. I...Thanks, Paul, I think you're probably right. I didn't see how the ratio could be negative.<br /><br />If you can locate the right numbers I'd be very grateful<br />Regards,<br />NickNick Stokeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-12317388350518398692012-03-31T21:57:57.347+11:002012-03-31T21:57:57.347+11:00Nick
Thanks for that information. I need to look...Nick<br /><br />Thanks for that information. I need to look into it in a bit more detail, but I've got a feeling reading the description that that they are tabulating something they call "the<br />global stable carbon isotopic signature for fossil fuel consumption." They derive that from "time series of Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions" multiplied by "by stable carbon isotopic signature (del 13C) as described in Andres et al. (2000)"<br /><br />I'm not sure that is the same thing as the atmospheric 13C/12C ratio, which is what I'd expect your plot to show.<br /><br />If I can find out any more, I'll get back to you <br /><br />Best wishes<br /><br />PaulPaul Butlernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-58973745234401984172012-03-31T10:46:18.663+11:002012-03-31T10:46:18.663+11:00Paul,
I'm not sure about Ctrl-click on a Mac -...Paul,<br />I'm not sure about Ctrl-click on a Mac - I'd like to know if anyone finds differences there.<br /><br />Generally if you Ctrl-click on any of the buttons that you use to select the data set to plot, it should show in the bottom right info window. The message for C13/12 should be:<br />Global Stable Carbon Isotopic Signature<br><a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/db1013_v2011/db1013.global.dat" rel="nofollow">Source</a><br><a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/db1013_v2011/readme.db1013_v2011.global.txt" rel="nofollow">More Information</a><br>Nick Stokeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-28981405438899959502012-03-31T10:23:51.501+11:002012-03-31T10:23:51.501+11:00Nick
Thanks. I'm not sure where to ctrl-clic...Nick<br /><br />Thanks. I'm not sure where to ctrl-click to get the source though (I'm using a Mac - will that make a difference?)<br /><br />That data still seems anomalous - both because it looks like an unprecedented switch in a well-explained 150-year trend and because it doesn't match the Mauna Loa atmospheric record<br /><br />Cheers<br /><br />PaulPaul Butlernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-71366806971649556442012-03-31T09:06:57.473+11:002012-03-31T09:06:57.473+11:00Paul,
There is something wrong with the curve - it...Paul,<br />There is something wrong with the curve - it has been anomalized to the 1979-2000 range, but shouldn't have been. I try to do that only for temperature. I'll look into that. You can prevent it doing this by setting the anomaly years to 0 or blank before clicking the C/13 button, but this shouldn't be necessary.<br /><br />However, the uptick is in the data. The way to check is first to click the output button. That shows the numerical data, and there is a minimum around 2000. Then you can ctrl-click the button next to the C13/C12 entry. That brings up links to source and description, and the numbers do match the source.Nick Stokeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-4137489458470401632012-03-31T08:46:02.630+11:002012-03-31T08:46:02.630+11:00Nick
Can you check the C13/C12 plot. It has an un...Nick<br /><br />Can you check the C13/C12 plot. It has an unlikely uptick after 2000, whereas the Mauna Loa data show (as expected) a continued trend to lighter carbon.<br /><br />Excellent resource, by the way<br /><br />Best wishes<br /><br />PaulPaul Butlernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-64398118709051947942012-03-24T10:55:05.219+11:002012-03-24T10:55:05.219+11:00Thanks, Kevin,
wretched IE :(. Still, I guess I sh...Thanks, Kevin,<br />wretched IE :(. Still, I guess I should link it in. I don't think I'd want to include the text - it's longer than my program.<br /><br />But you're right - it doesn't even work with IE9. I had checked with firefox and chrome, but not ie. I'll try to find out if excanvas is the answer.Nick Stokeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-84585792191343450062012-03-23T23:59:31.438+11:002012-03-23T23:59:31.438+11:00One other thing which might be useful: Have you tr...One other thing which might be useful: Have you tried google's excanvas for backward compatibility to IE <9?<br />All you do is add an IE-conditional element at the top of the page which pulls in excanvas.js, and the rest just works.<br />The only gotcha is that you have to use the version from the version control - the version on the download page doesn't include text.<br />http://code.google.com/p/explorercanvas/source/browse/trunk/excanvas.js<br />Kevin CAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-57942732166389598112012-03-23T19:09:30.981+11:002012-03-23T19:09:30.981+11:00Thanks, kevin - that looks interesting. I've b...Thanks, kevin - that looks interesting. I've been having thoughts on autocorrelation. Mainly a direct implementation of AR1 (without the Quenouille approx) but I note Tamino's suggestion that AR1 mightn't be enough. But I'd use AR2 rather than his conservative approx. I don't think there is any point in going beyond AR1 and still using the OLS trend.Nick Stokeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-81818300238658078732012-03-23T17:38:47.493+11:002012-03-23T17:38:47.493+11:00Should appear on Skeptical Science in the next few...Should appear on Skeptical Science in the next few days (or if you look carefully, Dana leaked it in his latest post). I haven't really done any of the general purpose comparison features - I just focussed on calculating uncertainties with autocorrelation correction using the method from Foster and Rahmstorf 2011. Feel free to loot the code (it's CC share alike with attribution).<br /><br />I've added a plug for your tool. I've got some other stuff coming up which may also be of interest :)<br /><br />Kevin CAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-33690895219136200982012-03-23T09:02:45.979+11:002012-03-23T09:02:45.979+11:00Thanks Kevin,
Do you have a link to where yours wi...Thanks Kevin,<br />Do you have a link to where yours will be? I'll look out for it.Nick Stokeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7729093380675162051.post-63897644837627009712012-03-23T07:48:47.874+11:002012-03-23T07:48:47.874+11:00Ha! Very nice. Better than mine (or it will be onc...Ha! Very nice. Better than mine (or it will be once you've done autocorrelation), as you will see shortly.<br />Kevin CAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com