BLI snowman Posted August 25, 2016 Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 RE: Alaska. That's exactly what I'm talking about. Look at Kotzebue for example. The daily records have been backfilled to 1897, but the monthly extremes table only covers 1949-2012. Look under General Climate Summary Tables on the left side and click on either Temperature or Precipitation. Those tables haven't been updated since 2012 and do not reflect the backfilling of data prior to 1949, nor any of the records set in the last four years. Its lame. Ah, I see what you're saying. I honestly only really ever look at the monthly numbers and the daily summary stats with WRCC, so I hadn't ever noticed the monthly extremes tables phenomena. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted August 25, 2016 Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 Ah, I see what you're saying. I honestly only really ever look at the monthly numbers and the daily summary stats with WRCC, so I hadn't ever noticed the monthly extremes tables phenomena. Its more of an issue for people who don't share a passion for weather like you and I. A real life example is the Haines, AK Wikipedia page. If you look at the WRCC, their period of record is 1911-2016 (albeit with significant gaps). But their extremes table only covers 1973-2012, because that's what was digitized the last time that table was updated in 2012. Then sometime in the past year the WRCC filled in spotty data for 1911-16 and for 1925-56, to complement the 1973-present data that was already digitized. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ak3490 So back to Wikipedia - earlier this month I noticed the Haines monthly extremes table only reflected the 1973-2012 numbers, as if somebody pulled them straight from the WRCC. In the written climate description, the all-time record low was (and still is) presented as -15F on February 20, 1994. Why? Because that's the all-time record low in the 1973-2012 table on the WRCC. I actually think its a bogus number altogether, but that's a different story. If one was to look in the daily summary stats @ WRCC, they would see a -16F on February 2, 1947 and another bogus -18F from January 1998, which to me looks like data that was pulled from a different station altogether and mistakenly placed under Haines (Go WRCC!). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haines,_Alaska Long story short, I edited the written description to show -16F on February 2, 1947 as the all-time record low. That's a very well corroborated reading from a cold wave that brought -81F to Snag, Yukon, -38F to Anchorage, and -24F to nearby Skagway. The next day, somebody changed the climate section back to the way it was. I ended up having a discussion with the person about having to play detective with the WRCC if you want to figure out what the real records are. They did end up changing some of the numbers in the table - as you can see January now reflects the bogus -18F from 1998 and February reflects the -16F from 1947 - which wasn't the case until I stepped in - but they didn't want to change the all-time record low to -16F in the written description because of a lack of "citeable source" or whatever. And the sad thing is, they're right. Thanks to the mess at the WRCC, you can't actually prove that the all-time record low in Haines is -16F in 1947. It can get frustrating for people like me. LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow_wizard Posted August 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 The January 1972 low was snowcover magic mostly, the South Sound had the epic snowstorm with that and OLM had 18" on the ground (On another note that was probably the biggest snowcover gradient between Olympia and Vancouver that I can think of). 1983's -7F stands out more to me because they managed that with essentially bare ground, which makes it probably the lowest westside reading on record with an inch or less of snowcover. Granted, it was an historically cold airmass, but it's still remarkable how much colder they got than somewhere like Centralia with similar ground conditions. The January 1972 snowstorm still stands as my favorite winter event here. I was only 8, but the memories are still vivid. Heavy deep snowfall followed by very cold and clear weather with snowcover that lasted for many days. 1 Quote Death To Warm Anomalies! Winter 2023-24 stats Total Snowfall = 1.0" Day with 1" or more snow depth = 1 Total Hail = 0.0 Total Ice = 0.2 Coldest Low = 13 Lows 32 or below = 45 Highs 32 or below = 3 Lows 20 or below = 3 Highs 40 or below = 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLI snowman Posted August 26, 2016 Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 Its more of an issue for people who don't share a passion for weather like you and I. A real life example is the Haines, AK Wikipedia page. If you look at the WRCC, their period of record is 1911-2016 (albeit with significant gaps). But their extremes table only covers 1973-2012, because that's what was digitized the last time that table was updated in 2012. Then sometime in the past year the WRCC filled in spotty data for 1911-16 and for 1925-56, to complement the 1973-present data that was already digitized. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ak3490 So back to Wikipedia - earlier this month I noticed the Haines monthly extremes table only reflected the 1973-2012 numbers, as if somebody pulled them straight from the WRCC. In the written climate description, the all-time record low was (and still is) presented as -15F on February 20, 1994. Why? Because that's the all-time record low in the 1973-2012 table on the WRCC. I actually think its a bogus number altogether, but that's a different story. If one was to look in the daily summary stats @ WRCC, they would see a -16F on February 2, 1947 and another bogus -18F from January 1998, which to me looks like data that was pulled from a different station altogether and mistakenly placed under Haines (Go WRCC!). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haines,_Alaska Long story short, I edited the written description to show -16F on February 2, 1947 as the all-time record low. That's a very well corroborated reading from a cold wave that brought -81F to Snag, Yukon, -38F to Anchorage, and -24F to nearby Skagway. The next day, somebody changed the climate section back to the way it was. I ended up having a discussion with the person about having to play detective with the WRCC if you want to figure out what the real records are. They did end up changing some of the numbers in the table - as you can see January now reflects the bogus -18F from 1998 and February reflects the -16F from 1947 - which wasn't the case until I stepped in - but they didn't want to change the all-time record low to -16F in the written description because of a lack of "citeable source" or whatever. And the sad thing is, they're right. Thanks to the mess at the WRCC, you can't actually prove that the all-time record low in Haines is -16F in 1947. It can get frustrating for people like me. LOL! Wikipedia is always frustrating for climate geeks, I've edited the Portland and Vancouver climate pages a few times to reflect legitimacy and gotten stern little memos about vandalism. If only their moderators cared as much about upholding the sanctity of accurate weather records! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLI snowman Posted August 26, 2016 Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 The January 1972 snowstorm still stands as my favorite winter event here. I was only 8, but the memories are still vivid. Heavy deep snowfall followed by very cold and clear weather with snowcover that lasted for many days. We got screwed pretty hard with that one down here, we had low 40s on 1/25/1972 while the Centralia to Everett corridor was getting shellacked with a foot or more of snow. Interestingly that trough also produced a historic snow event in northern CA and southern OR on the coast. Crescent City had 6" and Brookings had 5", right on the water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted August 26, 2016 Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 We got screwed pretty hard with that one down here, we had low 40s on 1/25/1972 while the Centralia to Everett corridor was getting shellacked with a foot or more of snow. Interestingly that trough also produced a historic snow event in northern CA and southern OR on the coast. Crescent City had 6" and Brookings had 5", right on the water. Its amazing that they got hit again in December of that year. 1.0" of snow at Brookings and all time record cold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLI snowman Posted August 26, 2016 Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 Its amazing that they got hit again in December of that year. 1.0" of snow at Brookings and all time record cold. That 1967-76 period had some pretty epic events not just for us but especially for those way to the south. December 1967: Historic cold for the desert SW, snow fell on back to back days in Yuma, AZDecember 1968: Fresno's last measurable snow to date and Redding's all time snowstormJanuary 1971: Another impressive desert arctic airmass, produced 35/12 at Las VegasJanuary 1972: Historic snow event from Eureka to Gold BeachDecember 1972: Possibly the GOAT arctic airmass for CA and southern ORJanuary 1973: 1-2" snow fell to Sacramento Valley floor in Sacramento regionJanuary 1974: Again, 1-2" snow fell to Sacramento Valley floor in Sacramento areaFebruary 1976: Last measurable snowfall to date for SF Bay Area, with accumulations as far south as Monterey on the coastMarch 1976: Rare March snow event for lowland northern CA, 8" in Red Bluff, 4" in Orland and 1" in Healdsburg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted August 26, 2016 Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 That 1967-76 period had some pretty epic events not just for us but especially for those way to the south. December 1967: Historic cold for the desert SW, snow fell on back to back days in Yuma, AZDecember 1968: Fresno's last measurable snow to date and Redding's all time snowstormJanuary 1971: Another impressive desert arctic airmass, produced 35/12 at Las VegasJanuary 1972: Historic snow event from Eureka to Gold BeachDecember 1972: Possibly the GOAT arctic airmass for CA and southern ORJanuary 1973: 1-2" snow fell to Sacramento Valley floor in Sacramento regionJanuary 1974: Again, 1-2" snow fell to Sacramento Valley floor in Sacramento areaFebruary 1976: Last measurable snowfall to date for SF Bay Area, with accumulations as far south as Monterey on the coastMarch 1976: Rare March snow event for lowland northern CA, 8" in Red Bluff, 4" in Orland and 1" in Healdsburg That's a very impressive run. The February 1976 event also brought Sacramento its heaviest snowfall in modern times, with 2" at the Executive Airport on the 5th. And I believe December 1967 was the last time a trace of snow was observed in San Diego as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLI snowman Posted August 27, 2016 Report Share Posted August 27, 2016 That's a very impressive run. The February 1976 event also brought Sacramento its heaviest snowfall in modern times, with 2" at the Executive Airport on the 5th. And I believe December 1967 was the last time a trace of snow was observed in San Diego as well. Correct http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/uniontrib/20071213/news_1n13snowday.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luminen Posted August 27, 2016 Report Share Posted August 27, 2016 Wikipedia is always frustrating for climate geeks, I've edited the Portland and Vancouver climate pages a few times to reflect legitimacy and gotten stern little memos about vandalism. If only their moderators cared as much about upholding the sanctity of accurate weather records! A few years ago I was trying to change the climate classification of Honolulu to "hot semi-arid/BSh" from "tropical wet-dry/As" and some dumba** kept changing it back. Lo and behold, it says "hot semi-arid/BSh" now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honolulu#Climate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted August 30, 2016 Report Share Posted August 30, 2016 I got a reply back from the WRCC, regarding the missing daily records at different stations: Hello, I would normally explain that this is due to the major update that NCEI is in the process of completing.NCEI has, and is, updating the database to account for missing data, incorrect data and data that was never included because the forms were sent in late. We do need to update our tables as the General Climate Summaries Table, it hasn’t been updated since 2012.I am investigating this as NCEI has the records available but ACIS, the new database does not. I will let you know - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 12, 2016 Report Share Posted September 12, 2016 So I've been thinking about all the records that have recently gone missing from the WRCC. It seems as though the NCDC has quality controlled some of the more extreme records and flagged those that failed at least one of the QC tests. A good case study is Coquille, Oregon. This station set two remarkable records during the last decade - a 97 degree reading on 10/26/2003 (which was actually assigned to 10/27/2003 due to the 24 hour lag in reporting at COOP's) and 104 degrees on 9/21/2009 (assigned to 9/22/2009). The 10/26/2003 reading represents the highest temperature ever observed in Oregon for so late in the season. Its corroborated by a 95 degree reading at Powers Ranger Station RAWS the same day (the Powers COOP was not reporting that month). It could be seen as a daily record high for Coquille on 10/27 for over a decade until being removed sometime within the past year or so. Not only that, it has also been removed from the monthly data @ the Utah Climate Center. Looking at the NCDC data, the 97 degree reading still appears but has been flagged with an "s" which according to the legend below means that "This data value failed one of NCDC's quality control tests." http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Coquille%20Oct%2027%202003%20NCDC_zpssbobhbqw.jpg I'm guessing that due to the quality control flag, the reading has been removed from the NCEI/ACIS database(s). As such it no longer appears on neither the Utah Climate Center monthly summary for October 2003 nor the WRCC daily summary data: http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Coquille%20Oct%2027%202003%20UTAH_zpssvy8pph5.jpg http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Coquille%20Oct%2027%202003%20WRCC_zpsrcfgfeoq.jpg Here is the corroborating 95 degree reading at Powers Ranger Station RAWS that same day, 10/26/2003: http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Powers%20Oct%2026th_zpscv8rzvcd.jpg The same fate has befallen Coquille's all time record high of 104 from September 2009. This reading still shows up in the General Climate Summary - Temperature table @ WRCC (which haven't been updated since 2012): http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Coquille%20104%20Table_zpsojvfe39b.jpg However, its been flagged with an "s" in the NCDC data table and now no longer appears at neither the Utah Climate Center nor the WRCC daily summary data. http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Coquille%20104%20NCDC_zpsauxbscjo.jpghttp://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Coquille%20104%20UTAH_zpsy6nfcgni.jpghttp://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Coquille%20104%20WRCC_zpsssl9txhn.jpg As was the case with the 97 degree reading in October 2003, the 104 degree reading in September 2009 can also be corroborated. It also seems to be a legitimate reading that should not have been removed. It was 93 degrees that day in North Bend, which is extremely difficult to accomplish at that location and obviously reflects significant downslope heating. It was 100 at Agness RAWS that day, and 103 the following day: http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Agness_zpsgkzl2yv6.jpg Even older, established records have been affected as demonstrated by the removal of long-standing all-time record highs at both Aberdeen, WA and Astoria Airport. A check of the WRCC daily summary data reveals that neither 105 degree reading on Aberdeen's' books - 7/23/1891 and 8/10/1981 - appears in the daily records anymore. Likewise, a number of other 100 degree readings have been removed from that station's records. Checking the data for August 1981, and sure enough the triple digit readings at Aberdeen have been flagged as suspicious: http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Aberdeen%20NCDC_zpswddbedls.jpghttp://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Aberdeen%20WRCC_zpscdap2az8.jpg Likewise, the long-standing all-time record high of 100 degrees @ AST from July 11, 1961 has been flagged and removed. This reading was even mentioned by the NWS last month when AST hit 98 degrees. As some here may remember, the Portland NWS office sent out a tweet saying that the 98 degrees represented the highest reading @ AST since 100 degrees on July 11, 1961. Here's the July 1961 data form for AST as it appears @ the NCDC (with the "s" flag for the 100 degree maximum), and the WRCC daily summary data as it appears today @ the WRCC: http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Astoria%20NCDC_zpslwrw56lt.jpghttp://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q363/dmitrik1/Astoria%20WRCC_zpsmy8eq2b1.jpg Both the July 1961 and August 1981 heat waves were major regional events that set numerous other impressive records, especially in the case of August 1981. Personally, I have no reason to doubt either of those readings @ Aberdeen and Astoria. Its unfortunate that the NCDC feels like they're not worthy of inclusion into the record books. Then again, maybe this is temporary? Maybe there's some sort of QC process underway right now, and the readings that are determined to be valid will be reinstated? I wish I knew the answers to those questions. Either way, all of this is very frustrating for a weather geek like me! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Jones Posted September 12, 2016 Report Share Posted September 12, 2016 So I've been thinking about all the records that have recently gone missing from the WRCC. It seems as though the NCDC has quality controlled some of the more extreme records and flagged those that failed at least one of the QC tests. Both the July 1961 and August 1981 heat waves were major regional events that set numerous other impressive records, especially in the case of August 1981. Personally, I have no reason to doubt either of those readings @ Aberdeen and Astoria. Its unfortunate that the NCDC feels like they're not worthy of inclusion into the record books. Then again, maybe this is temporary? Maybe there's some sort of QC process underway right now, and the readings that are determined to be valid will be reinstated? I wish I knew the answers to those questions. Either way, all of this is very frustrating for a weather geek like me!It would be nice if they at least let you know which quality control test these readings failed. In these cases it seems like they've arbitrarily decided that the readings must be suspicious simply because they stand out so much compared to other records at the same time of year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 12, 2016 Report Share Posted September 12, 2016 It would be nice if they at least let you know which quality control test these readings failed. In these cases it seems like they've arbitrarily decided that the readings must be suspicious simply because they stand out so much compared to other records at the same time of year. That's almost what it seems like. But yeah I'd love to know more details. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFallsAndrew Posted September 12, 2016 Report Share Posted September 12, 2016 The same has been done to SLE's all-time record low of -12... https://climate.usurf.usu.edu/reports/e15daily.php?stn=USW00024232&year=1972&month=12&unit=EN&network=direct:ghcn&sidebar=0 Quote Snowfall Precip 2022-23: 95.0" 2022-23: 17.39" 2021-22: 52.6" 2021-22: 91.46" 2020-21: 12.0" 2020-21: 71.59" 2019-20: 23.5" 2019-20: 58.54" 2018-19: 63.5" 2018-19: 66.33" 2017-18: 30.3" 2017-18: 59.83" 2016-17: 49.2" 2016-17: 97.58" 2015-16: 11.75" 2015-16: 68.67" 2014-15: 3.5" 2013-14: 11.75" 2013-14: 62.30 2012-13: 16.75" 2012-13: 78.45 2011-12: 98.5" 2011-12: 92.67" It's always sunny at Winters Hill! Fighting the good fight against weather evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFallsAndrew Posted September 12, 2016 Report Share Posted September 12, 2016 Look at December 1919...This is ridiculous... https://climate.usurf.usu.edu/reports/e15daily.php?stn=USW00024232&year=1919&month=12&unit=EN&network=direct:ghcn&sidebar=0 Quote Snowfall Precip 2022-23: 95.0" 2022-23: 17.39" 2021-22: 52.6" 2021-22: 91.46" 2020-21: 12.0" 2020-21: 71.59" 2019-20: 23.5" 2019-20: 58.54" 2018-19: 63.5" 2018-19: 66.33" 2017-18: 30.3" 2017-18: 59.83" 2016-17: 49.2" 2016-17: 97.58" 2015-16: 11.75" 2015-16: 68.67" 2014-15: 3.5" 2013-14: 11.75" 2013-14: 62.30 2012-13: 16.75" 2012-13: 78.45 2011-12: 98.5" 2011-12: 92.67" It's always sunny at Winters Hill! Fighting the good fight against weather evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Jones Posted September 12, 2016 Report Share Posted September 12, 2016 The same has been done to SLE's all-time record low of -12... https://climate.usurf.usu.edu/reports/e15daily.php?stn=USW00024232&year=1972&month=12&unit=EN&network=direct:ghcn&sidebar=0Eugene's records too. https://climate.usurf.usu.edu/reports/e15daily.php?stn=USW00024221&year=1972&month=12&unit=EN&network=direct:ghcn&sidebar=0 https://climate.usurf.usu.edu/reports/e15daily.php?stn=USW00024221&year=2013&month=12&unit=EN&network=direct:ghcn&sidebar=0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Front Ranger Posted September 12, 2016 Report Share Posted September 12, 2016 Look at December 1919...This is ridiculous... https://climate.usurf.usu.edu/reports/e15daily.php?stn=USW00024232&year=1919&month=12&unit=EN&network=direct:ghcn&sidebar=0 The "missing" data seems unrelated to the temps, though. At least for that month. Quote A forum for the end of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 The same has been done to SLE's all-time record low of -12... https://climate.usurf.usu.edu/reports/e15daily.php?stn=USW00024232&year=1972&month=12&unit=EN&network=direct:ghcn&sidebar=0 Its a sad sight right now. So many records missing, both hot and cold. It seems totally random too. Other records that "stand out" at various stations haven't been removed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 I got a reply back from the WRCC, regarding the missing daily records at different stations: Hello, I would normally explain that this is due to the major update that NCEI is in the process of completing.NCEI has, and is, updating the database to account for missing data, incorrect data and data that was never included because the forms were sent in late. We do need to update our tables as the General Climate Summaries Table, it hasn’t been updated since 2012.I am investigating this as NCEI has the records available but ACIS, the new database does not. I will let you know - An update - I've been communicating with one of the service climatologists @ the WRCC about this issue. They're OK with me re-posting correspondence here. The blame seems to rest on the shoulders of the NCDC/NCEI, as I suspected. The WRCC is not to blame for this one...I just want to make that clear. I sent them a link to my post about Coquille earlier in this thread, and this is the response I received: I have been communicating with NCEI, their GQ programs has flagged so many values it’s sad.THEY don’t understand microclimates here in the West. Although we have communicated this many, many times…I have yet to see them relax on the subject. I am still working on it. You are more than welcome to pass along my responses.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLI snowman Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 An update - I've been communicating with one of the service climatologists @ the WRCC about this issue. They're OK with me re-posting correspondence here. The blame seems to rest on the shoulders of the NCDC/NCEI, as I suspected. The WRCC is not to blame for this one...I just want to make that clear. I sent them a link to my post about Coquille earlier in this thread, and this is the response I received: I have been communicating with NCEI, their GQ programs has flagged so many values it’s sad.THEY don’t understand microclimates here in the West. Although we have communicated this many, many times…I have yet to see them relax on the subject. I am still working on it. You are more than welcome to pass along my responses..Seems pretty ridiculous. They're essentially flagging a lot of extreme events because they were, in fact, extreme. You'd think that they would rather quickly be able to corroborate a lot of these readings, at least to a point where they consider the data usable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFallsAndrew Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 Seems pretty ridiculous. They're essentially flagging a lot of extreme events because they were, in fact, extreme. You'd think that they would rather quickly be able to corroborate a lot of these readings, at least to a point where they consider the data usable. Yeah, it is insane they are flagging December 8, 1972. It is the all-time record low for multiple stations up and down the I-5 corridor. Quote Snowfall Precip 2022-23: 95.0" 2022-23: 17.39" 2021-22: 52.6" 2021-22: 91.46" 2020-21: 12.0" 2020-21: 71.59" 2019-20: 23.5" 2019-20: 58.54" 2018-19: 63.5" 2018-19: 66.33" 2017-18: 30.3" 2017-18: 59.83" 2016-17: 49.2" 2016-17: 97.58" 2015-16: 11.75" 2015-16: 68.67" 2014-15: 3.5" 2013-14: 11.75" 2013-14: 62.30 2012-13: 16.75" 2012-13: 78.45 2011-12: 98.5" 2011-12: 92.67" It's always sunny at Winters Hill! Fighting the good fight against weather evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLI snowman Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 Yeah, it is insane they are flagging December 8, 1972. It is the all-time record low for multiple stations up and down the I-5 corridor.Moronic. And that one is recent enough to have plenty of evidence to support it. Hell, the observers from then are probably still alive. I can understand why the 19th century stuff may be more difficult to process. Is this related to the NCDC changing to NCEI recently? Some shake-up involved with quality control now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 Seems pretty ridiculous. They're essentially flagging a lot of extreme events because they were, in fact, extreme. You'd think that they would rather quickly be able to corroborate a lot of these readings, at least to a point where they consider the data usable. Its mindboggling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow_wizard Posted September 13, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 Look at December 1919...This is ridiculous... https://climate.usurf.usu.edu/reports/e15daily.php?stn=USW00024232&year=1919&month=12&unit=EN&network=direct:ghcn&sidebar=0 Shows they don't understand the fine points of the climate in certain places. There are reasons the Willamette Valley is capable of extraordinarily low readings when there is heavy snow cover and seepage from the Columbia Gorge. Quote Death To Warm Anomalies! Winter 2023-24 stats Total Snowfall = 1.0" Day with 1" or more snow depth = 1 Total Hail = 0.0 Total Ice = 0.2 Coldest Low = 13 Lows 32 or below = 45 Highs 32 or below = 3 Lows 20 or below = 3 Highs 40 or below = 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 Its mindboggling.I just caught up on reading this thread and it really is. Makes you question global data sets just a bit when even our national stuff is so mishandled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 I just caught up on reading this thread and it really is. Makes you question global data sets just a bit when even our national stuff is so mishandled. From what I understand its worse in a lot of other countries, especially if you're talking about the third world. Most countries don't have what can be considered a reliable, long term record of weather observations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 From what I understand its worse in a lot of other countries, especially if you're talking about the third world. Most countries don't have what can be considered a reliable, long term record of weather observations.That makes sense. With that in mind, I have a lot of trouble wrapping my head around how they've tracked global temps since 1880 with any degree of accuracy. Not trying to start a global warming conspiracy theory debate. I do believe we have been warming. But that is something I have always wondered about. I know they have certain algorithms, etc, but seeing the level of data mishandling even here does have me feeling just a bit skeptical about the validity of global long term data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFallsAndrew Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 I don't trust a lot of older extreme readings. I do not think a lot of times the sensors were always properly placed. Quote Snowfall Precip 2022-23: 95.0" 2022-23: 17.39" 2021-22: 52.6" 2021-22: 91.46" 2020-21: 12.0" 2020-21: 71.59" 2019-20: 23.5" 2019-20: 58.54" 2018-19: 63.5" 2018-19: 66.33" 2017-18: 30.3" 2017-18: 59.83" 2016-17: 49.2" 2016-17: 97.58" 2015-16: 11.75" 2015-16: 68.67" 2014-15: 3.5" 2013-14: 11.75" 2013-14: 62.30 2012-13: 16.75" 2012-13: 78.45 2011-12: 98.5" 2011-12: 92.67" It's always sunny at Winters Hill! Fighting the good fight against weather evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 That makes sense. With that in mind, I have a lot of trouble wrapping my head around how they've tracked global temps since 1880 with any degree of accuracy. Not trying to start a global warming conspiracy theory debate. I do believe we have been warming. But that is something I have always wondered about. I know they have certain algorithms, etc, but seeing the level of data mishandling even here does have me feeling just a bit skeptical about the validity of global long term data. Its a problem here in the US too. Look at climate division #9 here in Oregon, which is essentially Malheur County. Its a mess. There isn't a sample of reliable, long term stations with reasonably complete observation histories to draw from. And yet NCDC/NOAA still puts out numbers for that climate zone. I did some research on this issue a few years ago and actually made a post about it (yeah, I took the time to dig it up): And the sad thing is, there doesn't appear to be a single good station to use in the High Desert region of southeastern Oregon. Almost all of those stations have garbage recording histories, so you can't really use them for long term climo purposes. Its weird. Every seemingly reputable station - that's located in an actual town - that I looked at in that region has that problem. And I'm not going to trust data from ranch stations with names like "P Ranch Refuge" or "OO Ranch," so I didn't even bother looking at their periods of record. Maybe they are more complete, but I'm not going to trust them. So for the purposes of this little study, I'll have to ignore ALL of southeastern Oregon. And this begs the question - what exactly is NOAA using to compute their numbers for southeastern OR? The myriad of crappy stations that can't seem to string together more than three decades of consistent observations? How reliable are those NOAA regional numbers then? How many other regions across the country have the same problem, where the averages are pulled from stations that don't have sufficient data to establish long term normals, and should not be used for such purposes? This stuff can make your head spin! Here's the NOAA climate division map for reference: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/maps/us-climate-divisions.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFallsAndrew Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 Its a problem here in the US too. Look at climate division #9 here in Oregon, which is essentially Malheur County. Its a mess. There isn't a sample of reliable, long term stations with reasonably complete observation histories to draw from. And yet NCDC/NOAA still puts out numbers for that climate zone. I did some research on this issue a few years ago and actually made a post about it (yeah, I took the time to dig it up): And the sad thing is, there doesn't appear to be a single good station to use in the High Desert region of southeastern Oregon. Almost all of those stations have garbage recording histories, so you can't really use them for long term climo purposes. Its weird. Every seemingly reputable station - that's located in an actual town - that I looked at in that region has that problem. And I'm not going to trust data from ranch stations with names like "P Ranch Refuge" or "OO Ranch," so I didn't even bother looking at their periods of record. Maybe they are more complete, but I'm not going to trust them. So for the purposes of this little study, I'll have to ignore ALL of southeastern Oregon. And this begs the question - what exactly is NOAA using to compute their numbers for southeastern OR? The myriad of crappy stations that can't seem to string together more than three decades of consistent observations? How reliable are those NOAA regional numbers then? How many other regions across the country have the same problem, where the averages are pulled from stations that don't have sufficient data to establish long term normals, and should not be used for such purposes? This stuff can make your head spin! Here's the NOAA climate division map for reference: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/maps/us-climate-divisions.php I know BNO only goes back to what 1980 or so? Quote Snowfall Precip 2022-23: 95.0" 2022-23: 17.39" 2021-22: 52.6" 2021-22: 91.46" 2020-21: 12.0" 2020-21: 71.59" 2019-20: 23.5" 2019-20: 58.54" 2018-19: 63.5" 2018-19: 66.33" 2017-18: 30.3" 2017-18: 59.83" 2016-17: 49.2" 2016-17: 97.58" 2015-16: 11.75" 2015-16: 68.67" 2014-15: 3.5" 2013-14: 11.75" 2013-14: 62.30 2012-13: 16.75" 2012-13: 78.45 2011-12: 98.5" 2011-12: 92.67" It's always sunny at Winters Hill! Fighting the good fight against weather evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 I know BNO only goes back to what 1980 or so? It used to be 1980, but I see they've uploaded data back to 1973. Looks to be part of the trend of the WRCC back-filling older data that wasn't digitized initially. But yeah, that's not a long term dataset either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted September 28, 2016 Report Share Posted September 28, 2016 An update - I've been communicating with one of the service climatologists @ the WRCC about this issue. They're OK with me re-posting correspondence here. The blame seems to rest on the shoulders of the NCDC/NCEI, as I suspected. The WRCC is not to blame for this one...I just want to make that clear. I sent them a link to my post about Coquille earlier in this thread, and this is the response I received: I have been communicating with NCEI, their GQ programs has flagged so many values it’s sad.THEY don’t understand microclimates here in the West. Although we have communicated this many, many times…I have yet to see them relax on the subject. I am still working on it. You are more than welcome to pass along my responses.. Some good news regarding this issue, from the WRCC: After some deliberation and research, the high temps are going back into the database!SUCCESS! Might not show up for a while but I got word that the values will be added back in soon.Nice work! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLI snowman Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 Just recently came across an old station at St. Helens, OR that has data from the 1889-90 winter. Pretty good approximation for my current location. Too bad they only have one winter of data. December 1889: 37.5 degree mean, 8.3" of snowJanuary 1890: 29.6 monthly mean, 60.1" of snowFebruary 1890: 37.8 monthly mean, 0.9" of snow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wx_statman Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 Just recently came across an old station at St. Helens, OR that has data from the 1889-90 winter. Pretty good approximation for my current location. Too bad they only have one winter of data. December 1889: 37.5 degree mean, 8.3" of snowJanuary 1890: 29.6 monthly mean, 60.1" of snowFebruary 1890: 37.8 monthly mean, 0.9" of snow Great find! 60.1" in January 1890 is pretty unreal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow_wizard Posted November 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2016 Just recently came across an old station at St. Helens, OR that has data from the 1889-90 winter. Pretty good approximation for my current location. Too bad they only have one winter of data. December 1889: 37.5 degree mean, 8.3" of snowJanuary 1890: 29.6 monthly mean, 60.1" of snowFebruary 1890: 37.8 monthly mean, 0.9" of snow If there was only one thank goodness it wasn't 1888-89! 1889-90 had to be one of the most well rounded winters on record for cold snaps throughout the winter. Quote Death To Warm Anomalies! Winter 2023-24 stats Total Snowfall = 1.0" Day with 1" or more snow depth = 1 Total Hail = 0.0 Total Ice = 0.2 Coldest Low = 13 Lows 32 or below = 45 Highs 32 or below = 3 Lows 20 or below = 3 Highs 40 or below = 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doinko Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 On 11/4/2016 at 4:29 PM, BLI snowman said: Just recently came across an old station at St. Helens, OR that has data from the 1889-90 winter. Pretty good approximation for my current location. Too bad they only have one winter of data. December 1889: 37.5 degree mean, 8.3" of snow January 1890: 29.6 monthly mean, 60.1" of snow February 1890: 37.8 monthly mean, 0.9" of snow Sorry to talk in such an old thread, but I found all of this discussion really interesting and was wondering, how do you search for stations like that? I was reading through some of these threads on old historical events and thought that it would be interesting to go through different stations around the area seeing temps/snow totals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLI snowman Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 9 minutes ago, Doiinko said: Sorry to talk in such an old thread, but I found all of this discussion really interesting and was wondering, how do you search for stations like that? I was reading through some of these threads on old historical events and thought that it would be interesting to go through different stations around the area seeing temps/snow totals. If you want to search the old original observation forms, a lot of them (not all) are available still on here https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/coop/coop.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doinko Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 34 minutes ago, BLI snowman said: If you want to search the old original observation forms, a lot of them (not all) are available still on here https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/coop/coop.html Thank you for this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doinko Posted June 29, 2022 Report Share Posted June 29, 2022 1 hour ago, Doiinko said: Thank you for this! From a weather station in Bethany in Dec 1968, crazy!: For some reason it reported the 30th as 15/7 instead of 11/7? Do they report days at different times? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.