If you lived in Dade City

In the aforetitled FB group, the following pic was posted by Tim B.

All we knew was that it was probably from the 50’s and was from the Dade City area. After scouring several different sites, I came to the conclusion that the picture was of Evans Packing looking east. The following is my reasoning:

Take note of the colors. Each color is consistent over the rest of the pics. Going from bottom to top, here are the features that I was trying to identify: (Green) An industry of some sort – take note of the positioning of the buildings including the water tower, (Red) a divided highway/road, (Purple) A canal shaped in the letter M, fed by a canal from the lake at the lower left, (brown) a canal at an angle from the “M”, (Maroon) something is running from the left-center upwards to the right. Could be a road or a railroad, but it’s definitely something straight. (Blue) houses. (Yellow) something is here – but not sure what. The last piece of information I noticed from the photo was the shadows from the trees.

One other item that I think Tim mentioned in a post: there’s a water tower. Noticing this was key, as while there are other towers in the area, I will always equate Evans Packing with their orange water tower. That put a bug in my ear to check out Evans, if nothing else to eliminate it from the list.

Since I knew we were looking at a pic from the 50s, I went to a great source of info on aerial photographs: http://www.historicaerials.com , and searched around Dade City. I highly recommend the site as a source of not only aerial photographs, but of topographical maps. It is a great place to waste an afternoon. Eventually I found the following topographical map from 1962. unfortunately, there are no aerials from that time period.

Some things to notice: the M (purple), the line (brown) from the M , and a railroad track running alongside Morningside Dr (red). It also has the layout of the buildings as of 1962 (green).

Here’s the topographcial map with all the identified landmarks from the marked-up original photo. Notice the green circle. The next photo zooms in on the topographical map at this point. The layout of the buildings is identical to the photo.

Here is a current Google Map aerial of this area, with markings showing the same features already identified:

So that’s that. The pic has to be of Evans Packing, looking east. Green is Evans Packing, Orange is US-301, Red is Morningside Dr with a newly installed railroad next to it, Purple is the canal, as I brown. maroon is SR-35A, and blue show the houses off of Dixie Dr and Old Sparkman Rd.

What made the identification difficult for me were two things: The shadows cast by the trees, and once I thought it was Evans, the minimal stature of US-301. The length of the shadows had me believing the picture was taken either early morning or late evening, and that the red road was therefore running north south. If it was early morning, the pic was looking south. If it was late evening, the pic was looking north. But then I realized it could be taken around noon, and that the shadow pointed north. that would mean the road went east/west. As for US-301, all I can say is that maybe no one used 301 back then. Was Fort King the primary way to get to Z’hills back then?

WUWT issue

Why is WUWT rendering this way?

Modern Temperatures

In this post, I’m going to look at the modern temperature record (1880-2014) and whether the only cause for the recent warming is CO2.  There are several sources for temperature data, the most common are HadCRU, GISS, BEST, RSS and UAH.  The first 3 are ground-based measurements, which vary in how they calculate global temperature.  The last two are satellite measurements.

Each dataset has its nuances.  For instance, the HadCRU datasets do not cover the poles, as there is no data in those areas.  GISS extrapolates across the poles to get 100% coverage.  Which is right?  Who knows, and it really doesn’t matter as long as you don’t try to compare across the models but look at the trends internal to each.  So we’ll only be looking at trends.

Each of the datasets are available on the internet.  I will be using the HadCRU dataset and the UAH dataset, to compare ground based measurements vs. satellite measurements. Why HadCRU?  Because by limiting the sets to measured data rather than interpolated data at the poles, the likelihood of introduction of biases is reduced.

Here is the plot of the HadCRU dataset:

As you can easily see, there are major trends visible in the HadCRUT4 data.  From 1880 through 1910, temperatures were level or slightly falling.  1910-1940 saw a significant temperature rise.  1940-1975 were level or falling and from 1975-2000 temperatures rose.  After 2000, temperatures remained constant.  We will talk about this apparent plateau in depth later in this article.

According to the AGW theory, CO2 could only have affected the years after 1975.  Before that, CO2 levels were too low to affect temperature in any meaningful way.  Therefore, the warming in the 1910-1940 timeframe was natural.  Here is a plot of that timeframe along with a linear trend of the temperatures:

As you can see, the trend is a rise of .0134°C/year, or 1.34°C/ century.  Now let’s look at the trend from 1979-2001:

The trend over this timeframe is 1.65°C/century.  Note, if you dismiss the current temperature plateau as a plateau, and we include it in the analysis, the trend is 1.58°C/century.  This clearly shows that there is almost no difference in the rate of warming that was seen in the first half of the 20^th century (purely natural) and the warming in the last quarter.  The AGW theory says this warming was solely due to CO2, which I (and others) contend is a mix of CO2 and natural causes.

Since the UAH dataset is satellite based, the dataset is much shorter.  Here’s the dataset:

As is clear, there are some major characteristics of this dataset.  First, 1980-1995 show mostly constant temperatures.  1995-2001 shows an almost step increase in temperatures.  After 2002 temperatures were once again constant.  If we take a linear trend of this timeframe, the trend is 1.39°C/century

The next plot shows the UAH and HadCRU datasets on the same plot (limiting the years to 1980-2014):

As you can see from this plot, the UAH and HadCRU datasets diverge rather dramatically from 1979-1995. The rapid rise in UAH curve from 1995-2001 closes that gap, but from 2001 on, the temperatures are constant and similar.  The last part reinforces that the current temperatures are in a plateau and are not warming in any significant way.  Let’s now look at these last 12 years in depth:

As can easily be seen, the temperature rise since 2001 has been very minimal.  In fact, the HadCRU dataset shows a rise rate of only 0.2°C/century.  The UAH shows a trend of 0.6°C/century.  Neither of these temperature rises could possibly be considered dangerous.

One last point to make, altho this one isn’t quite as solid as the above.  Recent years have shown the GISS, and HadCRU datasets to have been adjusted.  While the purveyors of this adjusting claim high intentions, what these adjustments have done is raise the current temperature and lower the past temperatures, thus creating a warming due solely to these adjustments.  Here is a plot showing the 199 GISS dataset for the US to the 2012 GISS dataset:

The next plot is the average additions/subtractions made to the raw data across the years.  As you can clearly see, the past has been cooled and the present has been warmed.

Are these adjustments reasonable?  I do not know, but a skeptical person would wonder what people are trying to sell that required such drastic adjustments.  Note that these adjustments are almost 40% of the total temperature rise since 1880!

So in summary, this short analysis has shown the following: 1) temperatures have been rising for the last 150 years, and have risen about 0.8°C. In that time, two separate warming events caused all of this warming:  1910-1940 and 1975-2000.  Since 2000, however, there has been no appreciable warming.  In the current AGW studies, this timeframe is called the “hiatus” and climatologists have no clear explanation for it as all of the climate models say that this hiatus can’t happen with the rising CO2 that we are witnessing.

No Disagreements

In starting a discussion on the dangers of Anthropological Global Warming (AGW), the first thing we must do is see where there’s agreement and where there’s disagreement.  Often those who question the veracity of the dangers are seen as anti-science and this will help separate those who deny science from those who question the accuracy of the dangers of AGW.  So in that vein, here are things to which everyone should agree:

1. CO2 is a greenhouse gas.  Yea, there is no doubt.  There is no scientific discussion.  As a greenhouse gas and absent any secondary effects (positive and negative), increasing the concentration of this gas should increase the temperature. Here is a plot of atmospheric CO2 concentrations taken from Mauna Loa:
2. The worldwide temperature has been increasing since the Little Ice Age.  This period is, according to Wikipedia, commonly accepted to have lasted from 1300 AD through 1850 AD.  The causes of the LIA are not well understood and in this discussion, are going to be caused by the all-encompassing term “natural variability”.  Since the thermometer had yet to be invented, we can only reconstruct the temperatures by indirect methods called proxies.  Here’s a collection of estimates of worldwide temperature based on such proxies during this time frame (we will be discussing the accuracy of these proxies in an upcoming post):
3. As stated above, modern temperatures are rising.  Here’s a plot of the temperatures since the thermometer record began (around 1880):
4. Sea levels are rising.  Accurate measurements of sea level rise is difficult as tidal gauges are the most common and longest records but often they do not account for land subsidence (the lowering of the land).  Satellite measurements are more accurate, but the record is short and no useful in determining changes in trends.  The average rise in sea level for the last 150 years is between 2 and 3 mm/year and is almost perfectly linear.  Here’s a plot of sea level rise taken from Wiki:
5. The final assumption is that all future predictions are based upon climate models. This should be obvious, but it needs to be stated that these are just predictions based upon models.  As such, these models must be shown to be accurate (verified) before the results can be trusted.  Here is what the IPCC showed as the potential future temperatures based upon these models (2007): 

These are the big assumptions.  In future posts I will be going into these areas (and others) more in depth and will include links to all the files I use.

I missed my chance

This post is about missed opportunities.  I have a Yahoo Widget called Leonardo’s Mind, which is your typical 6 color Mastermind game where you pick colors and are told whether you have the right color in the right place.  Well this game starts with a default red-across-the-board setup as seen here:

Now to minimize the number of guesses, I always switch out the colors and methodically narrow down the places and colors.  Typically I can get the right combination in 8 or less turns.

Here’s the game I played today:

I missed the chance to get it in one try… UGH!

Temperature Sensor Project Completed

Well, the procrastinators in me finally lost, both the “build the temp sensor” procrastinator and the “blog about the build” procrastinator. 🙂

In my last blog on the subject, I had everything prototyped on the Sparkfun Redboard.  The only remaining step was to find a suitable enclosure and transfer the prototype to a PCB.  That involved buying PCBs from a couple different sources and some trial and error in figuring how to best make it fit.  At the time, the plan was to put the sensor in the kitchen, and run it through the window (which would involve drilling a hole in the frame – since they’re new windows, that wasn’t an easy task to convince myself to undertake). 

For an enclosure, I decided that the board could remain open to the air and mounted to a wooden picture frame (3×3).  I would mount the LEDs to one board, and the electronics to another.  I bought a 4×6 board, and cut it into two parts.  The part that the LEDs were going to be mounted to was dimensionally critical (3.25″x3.25″)as I wanted it to fit snugly in the opening of the frame.  The other was not nearly as critical, as it would just be attached to the back of the frame.  By having two separate boards, I was able to complete each separately, checking to make sure things worked before putting it all together.  As it turned out, that was a necessary step, as my soldering skills aren’t the greatest.  The finished product is shown:

The LEDs (from AdaFruit) came together very nicely.  They were easily centered on the board, and longer leads were added to attach to the rest of the unit.  Once inserted, a piece of cork was cut to fit snugly inside the frame to hide the board from sight.  The green LED is the inside temp (in °F), the blue is the outside – yes, we do not use A/C often. 

Once I was sure that was working properly, I started working on the circuitry. I bought a clone Nano for the ‘brains’ of the unit.  The circuit is very simple, so in theory transferring it to the board would be simple.  It was, for the most part.  The most difficult part was getting the soldering right.  I think a big part of the problem was that i failed to wash the board before i started, so oils were coating it.  That caused problems as the solder wouldn’t flow on some connections.  Still, after a little troubleshooting, everything came together.  The board was then mounted to the back of the frame by means of a few small brads (I had to drill some holes in the board for the brads to fit). in attaching the external temp probe, I considered plugs, but ended up using screw terminals.  Everything is powered by an extra USB cable and adaptor.  Here’s the back of the unit:

Running the probe outside was easier than i feared, as the window has a small gap in the upper corner of the inside fo the frame.  All I had to do was drill a hole from the outside and fish the wire through.  It turned out much better than I feared.  Now of only the wire was white instead of black.  Oh well.

So all in all, the project was fun.  I learned a lot through experimenting on how best to lay out these types of boards.  While cost is not competitive with store-bought systems, I have no doubt I could easily troubleshoot any problem I have with the system.  Thanks for hanging around as I finished this and if you have any questions, please feel free to comment!

Science vs. Engineering

With a background in engineering, I’ve often gotten myself into discussions about technical issues and the veracity with which they’re presented.  As an engineer, we’re constantly reminded that we have to be very careful in our work, because if we make a mistake, people die – and often in spectacular ways.The number of cases where this happens is immeasurable, but some examples include skywalks falling in a hotel lobby, bridges collapsing when being repaved and dams failing and washing away towns.

Scientists, however, have a different problem. The current system of funding/supporting scientific research demands the publication of new and important discoveries.  This seems to lead scientists to publish their work without doing the due diligence to make sure they got it right.  The noted physicist Dr. Richard Feynman once stated that the first rule of experimentation is “Don’t fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool”.  A recent example of such a failure is the much touted discovery of gravitational waves by the team led by Dr. John Kovac.  This “discovery” was posted all over the net as proof positive of the big bang and that the theory of inflation was proven right.  Unfortunately, the team forgot a step in the data reduction and when included, the “proof” disappeared.  The harm?  Only professional pride.  No one died.

Recent studies have shown that anywhere from 70 to 90 percent of all scientific discoveries are disproven over time.  This, along with my own experiences with failing more often than not, has led me to doubt almost every scientific announcement made.  I call this skepticism and see it as a critical part of science.  Unfortunately, in political arenas and internet blogs, this necessary step in the scientific process is commonly labeled as anti-science and purveyors of skepticism are derided as idiots.   A recent BBC radio show discussed this and I highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in discussions of this nature:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04f9r4k

So whenever you hear some politician or a blog-post bloviating about a skeptic as actually being anti-science, you’ll remember this…

Prototyping the Temperature Gauge

In the post I made a couple days ago – and didn’t publicize in the Yahoo group (sorry about that), I mentioned that I ordered two 4 digit, 7 segment LEDs from Adafruit.  These came in (along with the ‘backpacks’) on Friday.  And today I took some time to put the two displays together.

The soldering of the backpack onto the LED display was easy.  The most difficult part was in setting the address for one of the displays.  Both use I2C, so i had to solder a jumper pad to change the address. The first attempt didn’t work too well, and some solder dripped over onto another pad.  When i tried removing it, it ripped off the pad.  UGH.  Luckily, it didn’t damage the second pad and I was able to solder across that jumper.

I tested the two displays and was easily able to drive them both.

I then took the temperature circuit I had created a week ago and incorporate it into the display file. The code used a function to write the temperatures to the serial port, so i had to bring it back to the main loop to get it to the displays.  I simply changed the void function() to a float function() and returned the temperature.  Two floats were defined in the setup for the inside and outside temperatures, and then I printed those to the displays.  You can see the weather proof sensor to the left of the board.  The standard sensor is on the red solderless breadboard.  To get the differential in temperatures, I held the waterproof sensor for a minute or so.  Temperatures are in °C

I do wonder how to limit the precision to 1 decimal point. Any thoughts?

A Learning Experience

Part of what is so much fun when dealing with the Arduino is the learning experience. I am making mistakes, and am learning all kinds of stuff from these mistakes. I guarantee I’ll make more and there’s no way the gadget I’m building (digital indoor/outdoor thermometer) will come in cheaper than what one could get from a store. So what? This isn’t about cost effective, this is about learning.

With that in mind, if you look at my last post you saw that I bought a TFT that most likely I won’t be able to use with my Uno. Also, the Nokia 5110 is just too small to be read across the room as I want. So my solution was to order more stuff. And I complain about my wife going to Kohls?

So what did I get? I bought two 4 digit, 7-segment LEDs – one blue, one green. The vendor of choice is Adafruit, as they have these for about $10 & $12 a piece, including ‘backpack’. And this is where my learning kicked in. You can buy the individual 4 segment LEDs without the backpacks, but then you’d have to drive each segment individually. Learning from my mistake on the TFT – that is, look very carefully at what the interfaces are before purchasing – I realized the backpack was definitely worth the added few bucks.

And best yet, I ordered them yesterday and they should be here tomorrow 🙂

First steps to a Temp Gauge

The package of parts from ICStation came late last week.  While not a complete list, I got the following:

DS18B20 sensor, waterproof temp sensor (DS18B20), Nokia 5110 LCD, 2.8″ TFT, arduino nano.

Today I took a spare arduino board and created a 2-temp circuit using the two 1-wire temperature sensors.  To do this, I first had to download a program to determine the serial numbers of each sensor.  I used a routine from Hacktronics website:

http://www.hacktronics.com/Tutorials/arduino-1-wire-address-finder.html

After following those directions, i was able to get the address of both sensors.  Then I used the 1-wire example from Hacktronics “Arduino ds18b20 Temperature Sensor Sketch”, input in the proper addresses found above, then ran.  The hardware setup was very simple, each sensor has 3 wires: wire 1 goes to GND, wire 3 goes to 5V, wire 2 goes to Data (in my case, run through pin 3 of the Arduino.  A single 4.7k Ohm resistor between 2 & 3 is necessary.  Each additional sensor is wired in parallel and is accessed by referencing the appropriate serial number. The following pic is the setup with the single DS18B20 sensor.

The second effort today was to get the TFT working.  This wasn’t nearly as successful, as I didn’t buy an arduino-ready TFT shield, but instead bought the 2.8″ TFT panel ( http://www.icstation.com/product_info.php?products_id=2288#.U8xj7_ldVv9 ). This panel has a 40 pin (in two rows) connector, but unfortunately I don’t have female jumpers to connect it.  I also bought a Nokia LCD and was able to connect it up and run it using the libraries from AdaFruit.

 

While the pics are a bit blurry, it’s still easy to see the simplicity of each of the setups.

So the next steps are to put the two sketches together, so that the temperature is displayed on the LCD.  That shouldn’t be too big a problem.  What may be is getting the TFT working.  I will have to figure something out – a temporary setup for prototyping and a more permanent setup.  

Thanks for reading and any/all comments are appreciated. 

Till next time…