ontario surface temperature trends, no warming happening

8/14/2019 Ontario Surface Temperature Trends, no Warming happening

1/26

Southern Ontario Temperature Trends,

More Evidence of Yearly Moderation

Not Warming.

By Richard Wakefield

Last Updated Jan 30, 2010

Abstract:Temperature readings from Southern Ontario is very lacking. Moststations have a very short range of years, and only 10 of 76 still gathertemperature data. Thus combining them all to give a whole picture ofthe region is problematic. Careful combining of the data to give aregional view was obtained and the trend is clear. Global warming inthis region is a narrowing of the variability of the range oftemperatures. There is no indication that recent years are any hotterthan any previous years, if anything recent years have coolersummers, warmer and shorter winters. Comparing near by stationshas revealed a lake effect which tends to moderate temperatures, lessswing in the ranges over all months of the year, for stations locatednear the Great Lakes.

Page 1 of 26


2/26

Data:

In short, Canadian temperature records leave very much to be desired. Its pathetic.

Of the 116 stations in Southern Ontario, only 76 had any records at all. Of those 76 only

a small handful has data in those records of any length. Those other 40 stations have nodata in any of the temperature fields (Max, Mean, and Min). Here is how the data breaks

down.

Figure 1 shows the state of the data. The quantity of data peaked in 1985 at 72%, and has

dropped since, with a dramatic drop in 2006. Thus currently, of all stations in SouthernOntario is only 10% have data.

Lets be clear what this means. Of the 116 stations, which should have 38,900 records

each, up until the 1950s there is actually much less than 5% data per year. This is becauseof when the stations came on stream and when they ended (yes, almost all have ended).

What is also bizarre is that Environment Canada has no temperature data in any of its 8

Toronto stations.

Page 2 of 26

Percent of records per year

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Figure 1: Percent of valid records per year for 76 Ontario stations.


3/26

Page 3 of 26

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

ALBION FIELD CENTRE

ALLISTON NELSON

ARNPRI OR GRANDON

BARRIE WPCC

BELLEVILLE

BLOOMFIELD

BLYTH

BOWMANVILLE MOSTERT

BRADFORD MUCK RESEARCH

BROCKVILLE PCC

BURLINGTON TS

CAMBRI DGE GALT MOE

CHATSWORTH

COLDWATER WARMI NSTER

COMBERMERE

COOKSTOWN

COPETOWN

CORNWALL ONT HY DRO

CROMARTY

DALHOUSIE MILLS

DURHAM

ESSA ONT HYDRO

EXETER

FLINT

FOLDENS

FORT E RIE

GEORGET OWN WWTP

GLEN ALLAN

GORMLEY ARDENLEE

GRAND VALLEY WPCP

GUELPH ARBORET UM

HAGERSVILLE

HAMILTON A

HAMILTON MUNICIPAL LAB

HAMILTON PSYCH HOSPIT AL

HAMILTON RBG

HARROW CDA

LONDON INT'L AIRP ORT

LUCKNOW

MADAWASKA

MIDHURST

MIDLAND WATER P OLLUTION CONTROL PLANT

MILLGROVE

MINDEN

MONTICELLO

MUSKOKA A

NIAGARA FALLS

NIAGARA FALLS NPCSH

PAISLEY

PET AWAWA NAT FORESTRY

PETERBOROUGH A

PICTON

POINT PELEE

PORT COLBORNE

PORT DALHOUSIE

PORT HOPE

RAVENSHOE

RENFREW

RIDGEVILLE

ROSEVILLE

Figure 2: Start and end years for 76 stations in Southern Ontario that have data.


4/26

Figure 2 shows when all 76 stations started, and stopped. 66 of them stopped and hence

will not contain data going forward. This means there are just 10 stations in Southern

Ontario still collecting temperature data. Ramifications of this are clear, the smaller thedata set, the less accurate a picture we get of temperature trends.

There are only 4 stations from 1900 that have a long continuous dataset, except they haveended.

This means there is no station with a continuous single dataset from 1900 to 2009. Thismeans it is difficult to give a continuous view of what the temperature has done in this

region. Add to this that in some of the years where there is data, there are still gaps,

missing days, in the data.

There are three ways of dealing with this, each with its own problems.

1) Pick the highest and lowest temperatures form all the locations where data exists

on the same day. For the average, one would average the mean temperature forall the data on that day. This would give the highest, lowest and average

temperature as a whole for the region.2) Pick one continuous station and fill in missing data from one station near by. This

seems to be the approach climatologists use.

3) Pick one continuous station and fill in missing data from more than one near by

station by comparing the differences of those stations with the continuous stationbased on common days.

Problems with each are as follows:1) A region like Southern Ontario can have a wide distance between stations, which

have temperature differences by as much as several degrees. Temperature

profiles for any given day vary greatly around the region and appears to follow aflow. Temperature changes in this region vary greatly from day to day due to the

latitude and undulation of the jet stream. Low-pressure systems pull up warm air

from the Gulf of Mexico as well as Arctic cold fronts that move across the regionfrom west to east. This is simple to understand when one sees that heat waves, for

example, will flow over a period of a few days over different parts of the region.

Same with a cold front. In some instances a cold front will pass through only part

of the region, while another part will see much warmer temperatures on the sameday. As a low pressure system moves in the western part of the region would see

the cold air mass while the eastern part experiences the warm air mass, with as

much as a 10C difference. Thus missing data cant just be filled in with near bystations with the same days data.

2) This process suffers the same problem as #1. If the closest near by station is far

and underwent a different temperature regime then filling in missing data instation A with only that data from station B could be error prone and not give the

proper profile. See Appendix I for why this cannot be done.

3) Is the closest one can get to filling in missing data to give a mini region. This

requires comparing station A with data from other near by stations where their

Page 4 of 26


5/26

days exist together, then getting a profile of the differences between those days

and then applying that difference to estimate what the temperature at A should

have been. However, for the reasons explained in Appendix I one has tounderstand the problems with this method too. Thus, using #3 means we cannot

really get a regional view, but back to looking at one location whose missing data

has been augmented by an equation based on the differences in temps withneighboring stations. Fun stuff if someone wishes to try to find that equation, if

one exists (there wont be one if it is chaotic).

Results:

What we can do is look at a few profiles of temperature trends for the region.

Notice Figure 3 seems to have same basic shape of the average of the mean yearly

temperatures we saw in the Belleville example (see Appendix II for more details on thisgraph). But now we have data back to 1900 and up to 2009. This appears to show that

the temperature is increasing. But is it? What is causing that shape? See the Belleville

example for a discussion on what can change the shape of the average of meantemperatures.

As in the Belleville example, we need to see the extreme ranges.

Figure 4 shows the range of each years temperatures. There is no obvious increase in the

upper range, it is actually decreasing. There is a recent warming in the lowest

temperatures in recent years. Thus temperature is narrowing. Which can be seen in thesegraphs:

Page 5 of 26

Average of Yearly Mean Temp

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Figure 3: Average of the mean temperature for 76 stations where data exists for eachyear. Trend line is ten year moving average.


6/26

Page 6 of 26

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Figure 4: Temperature ranges for each year.

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Figure 5A: Yearly Maximum temperatures. Trend line is 10 year moving average.

-50

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Figure 5B: Yearly Minimum temperatures. Trend line is 10 year moving average.


7/26

Figure 5A shows the maximum temperatures for each year since 1900. It has clearly

dropped since the 1920s. The minimum temperature in Figure 5B shows a recent

warming since 1998 even though over that period the maximum temperature hasdropped.

In the Belleville example, the change in the average profile seemed to be highlycorrelated to the number of days in the extreme ends of the temperature range. For all of

southern Ontario is the following:

Figure 6 is the number of days southern Ontario was above 30C. This number is

calculated by using any location that was above 30C. Thus if location A was 29C but

station B was 30C that station was used for the count. Same for the below 20C. Notethe trends. The number of days above 30C has been flat since the 1970s. What is

interesting is the variation in the ranges has increased since the 1970s, with the last few

Page 7 of 26

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Figure 6A: Days above 30C for each year. Trend line is 10 year moving average.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Figure 6B: Days below -20C for each year. Trend line is 10 year moving average.


8/26

years clearly below anything since the early 1900s. Thus we are having as many heat

waves as they did in the 1900s, but far less than we did in the early 1960s.

Days below 20 however is clearly an increase until about 1995 when we see a

precipitous drop in the number of very cold days. This means the region was not

warming up in the summers at all while during the winters the number of very cold daysincreased except after 1998 when the number of days below 20 dropped considerably

(nice for the heating bills). Yet, during that time the average of the mean temperature

increased. Something is driving that trend, and it is not that the region is warming up.

Figure 7 graphs the first day in the fall of frost and the last day of frost in the spring. The

area between the two lines is the growing season. We can see that the first frost has been

consistent up until the late 1960s where it started to arrive in early October as opposed tolate October and early November. With a gradual return to the pre 1960s in recent years.

Spring for most of the period until the 1950s was early May with a very narrow

fluctuation. Afterwards spring arrived wildly between late March and late May with anaverage that appears to be earlier. But the variation, especially compared to the first frost

in the fall, is remarkable since the 1950s.

The length of the growing season, however, is generally increasing.

Page 8 of 26

Figure 7: Onset of winter for each year. The top line represents the first frost of the fall,

whereas the bottom line represents the last frost of the spring.


9/26

Figure 8 clearly shows that the length of winter has been decreasing. Some 25 days

shorter on average since 1921. But the swing in variation is large. For example 1993was a very long winter, 232 days long, where as 2003 was a very short winter at only 147

days long second only to 1910 at 134 days.

Next we look to see if the recent time is any different from a previous period.

Page 9 of 26

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

210

220

230

240

Figure 8: Length of winter in days. Derived from the number of days from the first frost to thelast frost. Trend line is 10 year moving average.

Figure 9A: Comparing the maximum temperature range for each month for two periods.Vertical lines are from 1910 to 1997. The blue lines are the range of temperatures for the

months for the period 1998 to 2009.


10/26

Figure 9A compares the maximum temperature range of each month for the period 1910

to 1998 to the recent period 1998 to 2009. The recent period has no change in the first

months of the highest maximum temperature, with a slight decreasing of the highestmaximum temperature for the rest of the months compared to the previous period. Yet

the recent period has a warmer lower maximum temperature for all months. Thus the

recent period has a narrower range in the maximum temperatures for all months.

Figure 9B shows the same narrowing in the range of minimum temperatures comparingrecent (1998-2009) to the previous period (1900-1997). Thus no warming has occurred

recently. What we are seeing is a narrowing in the ranges of temperatures.

The next graphs are very interesting indeed and shows how the shape to the average of

the mean temperatures came to be.

Lets look at the distinct phases in the average mean graph in Figure 10.

So what is causing these changes outlined by the yellow arrows? To determine this, end

points for these lines was compared, month-to-month, to each other. The second upper

standard deviation of the maximum temperature plotted with the second lower standarddeviation of the minimum temperature gives us 95% of the temperature measurements foreach month we compare.

The first comparison was 1910 to 1923, the first decline in the average meantemperatures.

Page 10 of 26

Figure 9B: Comparing the minimum temperature range for each month for two

periods. Vertical lines are from 1910 to 1997. The blue lines are the range of

temperatures for the months for the period 1998 to 2009.


11/26

Figure 11A shows that the summer was warmer in 1923 vs 1910, yet 1923 saw a

significant drop in average mean temperatures compared to 1910. The drop in theminimum temperature was more influential than the increase in the maximum

temperatures that pulled the average temperature down. Years between 1910 and 1923

would have for the most part fallen within the two lines. So the arrows show aprogression as the years went by.

Page 11 of 26

Figure 10: Average mean temperatures with yellow arrows pointing to trends.

Figure 11A: Change in temperature range for each month comparing year 1910 to 1923.


12/26

Figure 11B shows a slight increase in the mid to end of the year in maximum temperaturewith a decrease in the first half of the year comparing 1923 to 1955. This corresponds to

the second arrow in Figure 10, which is a significant increase in average mean

temperature.

The third arrow in Figure 10 is a slight downturn in temperatures. Comparing 1955 to

1970 this appears to be due to a slight drop in the first half of the year with virtually nochange in the summer maximum temperatures.

The last arrow in Figure 10 is a slight increase in average temperature. This came about

due to a slight decrease in summer maximum temperatures comparing 2008 to 1970, witha significant increase in the minimum temperatures for almost all months. Thus this

recent increase in average of the mean temperature is due to a narrowing of the range of

temperatures and not to any increase in the maximum temperatures of any month.

Page 12 of 26

Figure 11B: Change in temperature range for each month comparing year 1923 to 1955.

Figure 11C: Change in temperature range for each month comparing year 1955 to 1970.


13/26

These four graphs compared the range of temperature between the upper second standarddeviation for the maximum and lower second standard deviation of the minimum to the

average mean temperature. The years selected were years that landed on the ten year

moving average. However, one can see that the average temperature varied considerablyfrom that moving average. Specifically 1971 and 1921 have extreme differences within

the first yellow line. Whats going on to cause 4C difference? (and the IPCC is worried

about a 2C increase.)

So what is causing the increase in average temperature? Seems its more complex than

just a narrowing of the extremes. There is much more going on.

1998 was claimed to be the all time high temperature, hyped up big time by the warmists.

Indeed, for Southern Ontario it stands out as a peak in Figure 3 on the right side. But

what makes it so different than 1997, which is below the ten-year moving average? Is itthe number of days above 30C? 1998 had 62 days of temps above 30C while 1997 has

34. However, 1988 also had 62 and its average temperature is not as high as 1998. So

more must be involved.

1998 had only 44 days below 20C where as 1997 had 66. That would tend to pull the

average up for 1998. 1988 had 73 days below 20C, which is one component that kept1988 average lower than 1998. Thus so far, 1998 has more hot days and less cold days

than 1997. But there is more.

1998 had 12 days where the max temp was below zero, while 1997 had 15. Virtually tied

was the minimum days below zero, 232 for 1998 vs. 235 for 1997. But there is more.

The length of winter was 177 days for 1997 and 173 for 1998. But there is more.

Page 13 of 26

Figure 11D: Change in temperature range for each month comparing year 1970 to 2008.


14/26

The table below summarizes the differences between 1997 and 1998 compared to 1988.

1998 has a warmer average mean temperature, but not hotter than the other years. It evenhas the lowest of the maximum temperature of the three, but certainly the warmest of the

minimum temperature of the three.

Year # Day

>30C

# Days


15/26

Figure 12a shows the difference of daily temperatures subtracting the maximum of 1997

from the maximum of 1998. Positive numbers means that that day in 1998 was warmerthan the same say in 1997. Though day-to-day comparisons is not overly indicative, the

trend of many days is. Notice that the largest number of warmer days was in April and

May in the spring, and October to the beginning of December in the fall. The summerdifference between the two years is virtually the same. Thus the warmer of the maximum

temperatures for 1998 over 1997 is in the spring and fall, with a little warmer in thewinter, but not the summer.

The comparison for the minimum temperatures is even more striking.

Page 15 of 26

Figure 12a: Plot of the difference between 1998 daily maximum temperature with 1997 dailymaximum temperatures. Positive numbers indicate that 1998 was warmer that day than 1997.

Smoothed line is 30 day moving average.


16/26

Figure 12b clearly shows that 1998 was warmer in 1997 of minimum temperatures in late

January and February, and late November and early December only. The rest of the year

shows very little difference in the two years.

So the conclusion that can be drawn is that 1998 was an exceptional year basically only

because the spring was warmer, the fall was warmer, the winter was warmer except at the

ends of the year, but importantly the summer temperatures were little different betweenthe two years. So 1998 was not hotter than any other year, it was just less cold with

warmer spring and fall. Big deal.

Discussion:

Each of these graphs shows definitive deflection points. Examples:

Figure 5B shows a drop in the yearly minimum temperatures starting in 1981, and then it

stopped and started to level off in 1930. Then made a significant increase in

2001.

Figure 6A shows an increase in the number of days above 30C until 1924, which then

leveled off since.

Figure 6B shows a steady increase in the number of days below 20 until about 1995, and

then drops precipitously

Page 16 of 26

Figure 12b: Plot of the difference between 1998 daily minimum temperature with 1997daily minimum temperatures. Positive numbers indicate that 1998 was warmer that day

than 1997. Smoothed line is 30 day moving average.


17/26

Figure 7 shows significant changes in the first day of frost around 1968 and the

last day of frost shows a weird change after 1948.

Figure 10 shows 5 periods in the average of the mean temperature, with inflection

points at 1924, 1957, 1966, and 1984.

This of course begs the question, what is forcing these inflection years? Certainly

something else is influencing, either man-made or natural, that counters any influences

from CO2 (which has had a steady increase). Or is this nothing more than random shiftsin the chaotic nature of global climate? Most likely.

The fact that the temperature recently is more moderated, and not at all hotter, than

previous means that the premise that increasing CO2 should be increasing thetemperature cannot be true. The climate is not just that simple.

Conclusion

Records of temperatures for Southern Ontario are not complete, in fact far from it.

Station numbers increased to a peak in the mid 1980s, and a substantial drop off to a

small handful by 2009. Few stations have complete data, some are missing sections.

Combining this data into a regional view was problematic, and different combining were

done to obtain a view depending on the type of view. This did give a reasonable picture

of what is happening in the region since 1900.

Maximum temperatures have dropped dramatically since 1920 from a high of the 10 day

moving average of 37C in 1936 to a low of 33 in the moving average in 2009.Minimum temperatures have increased from a low of -41 of the moving average in 1927

to a high of 35C in the moving average in 2009. In fact, since 1998 there has been a

dramatic shift upwards in the winter minimum temperature with a drop in summermaximum temperatures.

The number of hot days above 30C have dropped from 50 per year in 1955 to 35 days in

2009. The number of days below 20C has increased from 12 days in 1915 to 75 days in1996, but then a dramatic drop back to just 8 days in 2008. Thus over this time frame

Ontario got colder in the winters just when the warmists were claming the planet was

heating up.

Comparing extreme years with each other the trend is for warming spring and fall, and

some warming of winters, with little change in summers, to if anything, cooler summers.

Thus the conclusion here is the same as that arrived at from the Belleville example. Over

time the range of variation in extreme temperatures is narrowing giving an increase theaverage mean yearly temperature. We are not heating up, our temperatures are getting

more moderated.

Page 17 of 26


18/26

Appendix I

Variation in close proximity temperature records is very evident. Those stations close tothe Great Lakes show a clear lake effect of the temperature. This lake effect tends to

moderate the temperatures at those locations. This has serious implications if the current

selection of stations kept open are near the Great Lakes. It will tend to make the entirearea warmer just by keeping those stations and closing more rural stations away from the

lakes.

Two comparisons were made to confirm this. Port Hope vs Bellevelle and Peterbough vs

Belleville.

As you can see from the map these cities are a mere hour or two drive from each other,

yet the differences in the temperatures on the very same day is profound.

Page 18 of 26

Map of Southern Ontario showing the close proximity of Port Hope, Bellevelle and

Peterbough.


19/26

Appendix Figure 1a is the maximum temperature of Belleville subtracted from Port Hope

for all matching days. Notice the clear heart beat pattern between these two locations.

Page 19 of 26

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

Appendix Figure 1a: Difference in maximum temperature between Belleville and Port Hope.

Appendix Figure 1b: Difference in maximum temperature between Belleville and Port Hope

for 1963-1965 only.


20/26

Notice on both the maximum temperature differences and the minimum temperature

differences, that Belleville has more swing, larger variation, compared to Port Hope that

is directly on the lake. The difference is profound. In the summer Belleville can be asmuch as 8C warmer than Port Hope and in the winter as much as 6C colder.

To make sure that Port Hope is experiencing something different, Belleville wascompared to Peterbough, which is just an hours drive north of Port Hope.

Page 20 of 26

Appendix Figure 1c: Difference in minimum temperature between Belleville and Port Hope

for 1963-1965 only.


21/26

Appendix Figure 1d shows that there is still considerable differences between these two

locations, but the heart beat is not there. What is discernable is that there is a

significant degree of back and forth difference between these two locations, whichappears to be dependant upon the season.

Appendix Figure 1e is a plot of the difference in maximum temperature vs. the month ofeach of the years of all days that match between the two stations. Interesting that they

vary just as wildly between each other, some days Peterbough is warmer than Belleville

by 10C (negative on this plot) others, Belleville is warmer. Yet the variation between thetwo is more pronounced in the winter months. Compare that plot of the same for

Belleville vs Port Hope below.

The range of temperature differences each month is about the same, just it dips in the

summer months. Thus shows that the lake effect is more moderating in the summer thanin the winter.

The implication of these two sets of comparison is clear. Stations that are just a hours

drive from each other have a vary wide variance of the temperatures on the same day.

Its likely this is caused from cold and warm fronts that migrate across the region. Butwhat it means is that you cannot use another station to fill in the gaps of missing days in a

station.

Page 21 of 26

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

2/13/1969

2/13/1971

2/13/1973

2/13/1975

2/13/1977

2/13/1979

2/13/1981

2/13/1983

2/13/1985

2/13/1987

2/13/1989

2/13/1991

2/13/1993

2/13/1995

2/13/1997

2/13/1999

2/13/2001

2/13/2003

2/13/2005

Appendix Figure 1d: Difference in maximum temperature between Belleville and Peterbough

for all matching days.


22/26

Climate is complex and variant even on very small local levels due to influences other

than CO2 emissions.

Page 22 of 26

Appendix Figure 1e: Plot of maximum temperature difference vs. month of the year for alldays matching Belleville and Peterborough. Vertical lines represent the full range of

temperatures, the blue line is the standard deviations.

Plot of minimum temperature difference vs. month of the year for all days matching

Belleville and Peterborough. Vertical lines represent the full range of temperatures; the blue

line is the standard deviations.


23/26

Page 23 of 26

Appendix Figure 1f: Plot of maximum temperature difference vs. month of the year for all days

matching Belleville and Port Hope. Vertical lines represent the full range of temperatures; the blue

line is the standard deviations.

Plot of minimum temperature difference vs. month of the year for all days matching Belleville and

Port Hope. Vertical lines represent the full range of temperatures; the blue line is the standard

deviations.


24/26

Appendix II

Figure 7 is a graph of the average of the mean yearly temperature. Problem is with this

graph is that it has no context. The average of the mean yearly temperature is not ameasrument, its a calculation. Its the average of the mean daily temperatures. The

mean daily temperature is itself not a measurement but a calculation. Its calculated by

adding up all the hourly temperature divided by 24.

Of course, the mean temperature will change with the seasons. This means the mean

temperature will be highest in the summer and lowest in the winter.

Here is what those range of mean temperatures looks like on a year-by-year basis.

The average mean yearly temperature in Figure 7 is the middle line. Not so significant

now when it is shown with the highest mean and the lowest mean of each year. And thisis not the highest or lowest temperature range for each year. Notice the variation in the

lowest (winter) mean temperatures swings much more than the summer temperatures,which is essentially flat. Thus the average of the mean temperature is highly influencedby the higher variation in the winter mean temperature calculations.

Include the actual maximum and minimum temperature measurements and we have

Figure 8 above. Include the standard deviations of those measurements and we have thisgraph.

Page 24 of 26

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Average Mean Max of Mean Min of Mean

Appendix II Figure 1: Highest, average and lowest of the yearly mean temperatures.


25/26

With the actual yearly temperatures included the average of the mean of the yearly

temperatures has even less significance. 65% of all the years temperature records fall

within the upper and lower standard deviations. The upper standard deviation shows no

warming, no change over the years. The lower standard deviation however shows adefinite increase in temperatures. The lowest of the minimum shows wild deviations year

to year compared to the highest maximum temperature readings. This means the winters

have varied in their range of temperatures far more than the summer does. The gapbetween the lower standard deviation and the lowest of the minimum temperatures is

much wider than the upper standard deviation and the highest maximum readings.

Again, this shows a wild swing in winter temperatures.

The impression given by the temperature anomaly graphs presented by the warmists

gives the impression that the flat line of their graphs is what the temperature should be.

That is, what the ideal temperature the planet should be. But this is flat wrong.

The optimum temperature is what the summer tropical temperature is - 25-35C. This is

what the planet has been in the summers for more than 500 million years. Cold winterswe see in the temperate regions today is the anomaly, not the summers.

Page 25 of 26

Appendix II Figure 2: Average of the mean yearly temperatures compared to the highest

maximum, upper standard deviation, lowest minimum and lower minimum standard

deviation.


26/26

The fact that these graphs show little change in the summer temperatures, with little

variation compared to the winter temperatures provides evidence that the planet has a

warm threshold it does not break through. There is a negative feedback that stops theplanet from getting too hot; regardless what the climate models will tell you.

ontario surface temperature trends, no warming happening

Documents