ADVERTISEMENT

NEED BOARD HELP interpreting a graph (too complex for my African Ape Brain to comprehend)

Post_ShockTherapy_MackDaddy

Post_ShockTherapy_MackDaddy

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2018
2,920
636
1
The Galactic Penal Colony known as Earth
So, what it appears to me is that Temperatures usually PEAK in late July in Greenland. But, there appears to be an (ahem) anomaly this year in June. Is my African Ape Brain playing tricks with me or should I just go and eat another banana?

THX in advance.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/03/96/74/90/808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg&imgrefurl=https://www.euronews.com/2019/06/17/the-viral-image-that-illustrates-the-scale-of-melting-ice-in-greenland&tbnid=YgVw3OUWntZoGM&vet=1&docid=0dpMcAPpOyqkaM&w=808&h=493&source=sh/x/im

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg (808×493)
https://static.euronews.com/article...f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg
 
Last edited:
Post_ShockTherapy_MackDaddy said:
So, what it appears to me is that Temperatures usually PEAK in late July in Greenland. But, there appears to be an (ahem) anomaly this year in June. Is my African Ape Brain playing tricks with me or should I just go and eat another banana?

THX in advance.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/03/96/74/90/808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg&imgrefurl=https://www.euronews.com/2019/06/17/the-viral-image-that-illustrates-the-scale-of-melting-ice-in-greenland&tbnid=YgVw3OUWntZoGM&vet=1&docid=0dpMcAPpOyqkaM&w=808&h=493&source=sh/x/im

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg
Click to expand...

Damn, that's a helluva jump. I'm not sure what the interdecile range is. Are they taking all the years from 1981 to 2010 and ordering them and then saying the 90th percentile is the top of that light gray band? if so then then there are about three years in 1981-2010 whose value was above that light gray band. Are those recent years? if so, then having it be above the top of the light gray band might just be the new normal.

ETA: I think perhaps a moving average of some kind would illustrate this better. Or maybe just an average of chunks of years. One line that is the average of 1981-1990, another the average of 1991-2000, another the average of 2001-2010, and atop that overly values for this year.
 
Op2 said:
Damn, that's a helluva jump. I'm not sure what the interdecile range is. Are they taking all the years from 1981 to 2010 and ordering them and then saying the 90th percentile is the top of that light gray band? if so then then there are about three years in 1981-2010 whose value was above that light gray band. Are those recent years? if so, then having it be above the top of the light gray band might just be the new normal.

ETA: I think perhaps a moving average of some kind would illustrate this better. Or maybe just an average of chunks of years. One line that is the average of 1981-1990, another the average of 1991-2000, another the average of 2001-2010, and atop that overly values for this year.
Click to expand...
https://www.iflscience.com/environment/this-photo-sums-up-just-how-fast-greenland-is-melting/
 
Post_ShockTherapy_MackDaddy said:
So, what it appears to me is that Temperatures usually PEAK in late July in Greenland. But, there appears to be an (ahem) anomaly this year in June. Is my African Ape Brain playing tricks with me or should I just go and eat another banana?

THX in advance.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/03/96/74/90/808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg&imgrefurl=https://www.euronews.com/2019/06/17/the-viral-image-that-illustrates-the-scale-of-melting-ice-in-greenland&tbnid=YgVw3OUWntZoGM&vet=1&docid=0dpMcAPpOyqkaM&w=808&h=493&source=sh/x/im

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg (808×493)
https://static.euronews.com/article...f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg
Click to expand...
Give these folks a call. They should help a desperate colleague.

1821 Jefferson Place, NW
Washington, DC 20036
202-238-9088
800-837-3792 (toll-free)
202-238-9003 (fax)
 
Disturbing to say the least. (Thought I'd get that in before a science thread is removed for being too political).
 
I think a better graph would be to all years superimposed on each other. The interdecile
range is not that tight and these types of "anomalies" may not be that uncommon. It is hard to tell from the graph. Not enough information given.
 
Last edited:
Post_ShockTherapy_MackDaddy said:
Nothing to worry about, though, right?
Click to expand...

That's not a good graph though IMO. There are three years above the top of the light gray band that we're not seeing. What are the years for those three? They are probably recent years and knowing that would show that wow, things are really going up in recent years. But we can't tell from that graph. Someone could say "Yeah, but the three missing years were back in the 80s and 90s so it was high back then and we're having one high year now, so what?"

There are three years above the top of the light gray band and for all we know all three of those years are HIGHER than the one in red. From what I know about climate change they probably aren't higher, or if they are then they're recent years, but the point is, the graph doesn't tell us one way or the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nits74
Op2 said:
That's not a good graph though IMO. There are three years above the top of the light gray band that we're not seeing. What are the years for those three? They are probably recent years and knowing that would show that wow, things are really going up in recent years. But we can't tell from that graph. Someone could say "Yeah, but the three missing years were back in the 80s and 90s so it was high back then and we're having one high year now, so what?"

There are three years above the top of the light gray band and for all we know all three of those years are HIGHER than the one in red. From what I know about climate change they probably aren't higher, or if they are then they're recent years, but the point is, the graph doesn't tell us one way or the other.
Click to expand...
Still indicates an unmistakable trend, does it not?
 
Post_ShockTherapy_MackDaddy said:
So, what it appears to me is that Temperatures usually PEAK in late July in Greenland. But, there appears to be an (ahem) anomaly this year in June. Is my African Ape Brain playing tricks with me or should I just go and eat another banana?

THX in advance.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/03/96/74/90/808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg&imgrefurl=https://www.euronews.com/2019/06/17/the-viral-image-that-illustrates-the-scale-of-melting-ice-in-greenland&tbnid=YgVw3OUWntZoGM&vet=1&docid=0dpMcAPpOyqkaM&w=808&h=493&source=sh/x/im

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg (808×493)
https://static.euronews.com/article...f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg
Click to expand...

The answer is 1.21 Gigawatts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
nits74 said:
Still indicates an unmistakable trend, does it not?
Click to expand...

I don't think it illustrates a trend because all it does is compare (a) 2019 to (b) the entirety of 1981-2010. That's partly my point, namely the graph is such that if there is a trend over time we can't see it from that graph. All we can conclude is that 2019 is a good bit higher than at least 90% of the years from 1981 to 2010.
 
Op2 said:
I don't think it illustrates a trend because all it does is compare (a) 2019 to (b) the entirety of 1981-2010. That's partly my point, namely the graph is such that if there is a trend over time we can't see it from that graph. All we can conclude is that 2019 is a good bit higher than at least 90% of the years from 1981 to 2010.
Click to expand...

Yep, you are right. This graph in no way indicates a trend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
Op2 said:
I don't think it illustrates a trend because all it does is compare (a) 2019 to (b) the entirety of 1981-2010. That's partly my point, namely the graph is such that if there is a trend over time we can't see it from that graph. All we can conclude is that 2019 is a good bit higher than at least 90% of the years from 1981 to 2010.
Click to expand...
Got ya, but I was referring to the comparative ranges rather than just 2019.

P.S. I was interpreting it incorrectly.
 
Last edited:
I use the Danish site Polar Portal. They've been monitoring Greenland for a good many years. They don't seem to show that size of melt. It is within the bounds, but at the lower end. They also shoe the temps at their weather stations. Current weather at the interior is 10 degrees. Along the coasts, temps range from 34-53 degrees. That area doesn't have ice.

http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
 
ForesterGump said:
I use the Danish site Polar Portal. They've been monitoring Greenland for a good many years. They don't seem to show that size of melt. It is within the bounds, but at the lower end. They also shoe the temps at their weather stations. Current weather at the interior is 10 degrees. Along the coasts, temps range from 34-53 degrees. That area doesn't have ice.

http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
Click to expand...
Looking at this graph, was anyone concerned last November when the mass gain so so far above the norm? Were we slipping into another ice age?
 
wilbury said:
Looking at this graph, was anyone concerned last November when the mass gain so so far above the norm? Were we slipping into another ice age?
Click to expand...
Or that Antarctic Ice Gain is near record highs in recent years.

Yes, climate changes but a span of 40 years is woefully short of telling the story. Additionally, our poles are shifting at a considerably higher rate recently. In the 1990s, the rate at which geomagnetic north moved went from about 9 miles shifted each year to 34 which impacts regional ice totals. We're also losing magnetic field strength at 7% per 100 years which has some implications such as:

1) If B-field decreases enough, it is thought to precipitate a pole reversal whereby north and south poles flip which happens on the average every 450k years. We haven't flipped in 780k years so we've been overdue.

2) Weakening B-field lessens the magnetosphere that protects the Earth like a shield from high energy particles and radiation. Less B-field = less magnetosphere = more energy into the Earth system. Hmmm...so you say it's been getting warmer? Of course lunar cycles also play a role in the amount of radiation and high energy particles emitted from our sun.

https://www.space.com/43173-earth-magnetic-field-flips-when.html
 
Last edited:
Post_ShockTherapy_MackDaddy said:
So, what it appears to me is that Temperatures usually PEAK in late July in Greenland. But, there appears to be an (ahem) anomaly this year in June. Is my African Ape Brain playing tricks with me or should I just go and eat another banana?

THX in advance.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/03/96/74/90/808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg&imgrefurl=https://www.euronews.com/2019/06/17/the-viral-image-that-illustrates-the-scale-of-melting-ice-in-greenland&tbnid=YgVw3OUWntZoGM&vet=1&docid=0dpMcAPpOyqkaM&w=808&h=493&source=sh/x/im

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg (808×493)
https://static.euronews.com/article...f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg

808x493_cmsv2_342f99ab-0e15-598e-b99e-eebd33ba60e5-3967490.jpg
Click to expand...
It's kind of a b.s. chart. It only shows the data from the 10th percentile to the 90th percentile for 30 years. So essentially 20% of the data is missing . The 2019 item was close to the mean until VERY recently and it spiked. Yes, there is a outlier in the data recently, but it doesn't mean it is a trend and it likely doesn't mean that the one or two recent data points are statistically significant. It's another example of someone having a story to tell and making a chart to tell their story, not vice versa as it should be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Song Remains the Same, 91Joe95 and bmw199
Since 1981? Really? I'll bet that you think NFL Championships started with the Super Bowl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back