Karl et al 1993, "A New Perspective on
Recent Global Warming:
Asymmetric Trends of Daily Maximum and Minimum Temperature", Thomas R.
Karl,
Philip D. Jones, Richard W. Knight, George Kukla,
Neil Plummer,
Vyacheslav Razuvayev, Kevin P. Gallo, Janette
Lindseay, Robert J.
Charlson, and Thomas C. Peterson.
Free ownload as pdf at BAMS
Karl et al 1993 has a Fig 7 which has caught my eye for
years because it is strong evidence against their basic premise that
the global closure of daily temperature range (DTR = max minus
min, their term in Range RNG) is due to factors such as changing cloud
cover etc. and not increasing urbanisation. Karl et al make a
big
point that the PRC An range bars, just under where I have
inserted Karl Err, are not perfect evidence that a decreasing Range
RNG is related to degrees of urbanisation. Completely
skimming over the fact that ALL the PRC stations are very urban,
NONE are even faintly rural. and there are likely homogeniety problems
in PRC data. I think it is quite possible too that PRC
air quality that could be a factor in the "negative UHI" in Su
(Summer). This obviously flows through and impacts on the
RNG number (= Max minus Min) . Anyone who has analysed datasets
from mixed population groups for DTR knows how sensitive the DTR number
is to confounding factors.
Karl et al then in their conclusions
ignore the copybook evidence of
UHI contamination shouted at them by the vast majority of the
results portrayed in Fig 7, where I have added PE for Perfect Evidence.
This reminds me
of Lord Nelson at the naval Battle of Copenhagen
in 1801 who on being told that there was a flag signal ordering him to
disengage, put his telescope to his blind eye, declared he could not
see any signal and famously carried on the action.
I wonder at the justification for using widely
different population thresholds in Fig 7.
Karl et al High, Medium and Low population groups equate to.
plus 1 million, between 1 million and 160,000 and under 160,000 for the
PRC and,
plus 500,00, between 500,000 and 50,000 and under 50,000 for Japan.
Reviewers should have insisted that Karl et al extend their Fig 7
analysis by graded population groups to ALL their various global
regions, which would have been a more scientific approach than just
presenting data from PRC and Japan.
I know of results from two of the Karl et al regions which would have
supported the case that increasing UHI effect increases the closure of
DTR.
[1] The 1996 paper by
Warwick S. Hughes and Robert C. Balling, Jr. "Urban Influences on South
African
Temperature Trends." International Journal of Climatology, Vol. 16, No.
8,
pp. 935-940. Online at http://www.john-daly.com/s-africa.htm
demonstrates clearly in Fig's 3 and 4 that DTR is closing at a
greater rate in Large urban stations than in small towns and the Karl
stations.
[2] The mid 1990's Previously unpublished
paper by Hughes and Balling , "Eastern
Australia temperature variations 1930-1992"
has their page 19 Fig 4 which
demonstrates with crystal clarity how the UHI effect increases Mean T
and closes the DTR with increasing population. The Plummer series
of 49 stations in Fig 4 is very near to the East Australian series of
44 stations in Karl et al.
Note how in the Abstract below Karl et al can not bring themselves to
mention the UHI effect.
Karl et al ABSTRACT
Monthly mean maximum and minimum temperatures for over 50% (10%) of the
Northern (Southern) Hemisphere landmass, accounting for 37% of the
global landmass, indicate that the rise of the minimum temperature has
occurred at a rate three times that of the maximum temperature during
the period 1951–90 (0.84°C versus 0.28°C). The decrease of the
diurnal temperature range is approximately equal to the increase of
mean temperature. The asymmetry is detectable in all seasons and in
most of the regions studied.
The decrease in the daily temperature range is partially related to
increases in cloud cover. Furthermore, a large number of atmospheric
and surface boundary conditions are shown to differentially affect the
maximum and minimum temperature. Linkages of the observed changes in
the diurnal temperature range to large-scale climate forcings, such as
anthropogenic increases in sulfate aerosols, greenhouse gases, or
biomass burning (smoke), remain tentative. Nonetheless, the observed
decrease of the diurnal temperature range is clearly important, both
scientifically and practically.
Back to Review comments
on climate
papers
by key "IPCC Supportive" scientists main page
End for now.