cc: Ian Harris <i.harris@uea.ac.uk>
date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:45:56 +0100
from: philip.brohan@metoffice.gov.uk
subject: Re: [Fwd: CRU Station Lists]
to: P.Jones@uea.ac.uk

Phil, Harry.

 I'm sorry to admit that I can't find the 4349 list, or the program I
used to find that number. Attempting to reproduce it now, I get the same
count as you: 4138 stations provide at least 1 observation to CRUTEM3. 
 I can't think of any set of 4349 stations that I might have got by
mistake, so I suspect that it's a typo - It's certainly an error, and
(unless you object) I'll write to Steve McIntyre to say so (and add a
note to the CRUTEM3 web page).

 On McIntyre's other points: He can get all the near-real-time updates
from the CRUTEM3 web page
( http://hadobs.metoffice.com/crutem3/data/station_updates ) 
 We could also put the source code online - I've copied the internal
software and documentation to a temporary site so you can see it
( http://brohan.org/philip/job/crutem3/docs/ - please keep this URL
secret) - this could be added to http://hadobs.metoffice.com/crutem3 if
that would help to damp the conspiracy theories. What do you think?

Regards,

 Philip

On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 18:15 +0100, P.Jones@uea.ac.uk wrote:
>  Harry,
>    Thanks. Hopefully Philip has the 4349 list.
> 
>  Just looked at Climate Audit. There is a thread on this.
>  McIntyre not so nice....
> 
>  Cheers
>  Phil
> 
> 
> > Hi
> >
> >  From my project notes:
> >
> > <QUOTE>
> > Summary of Station Changes
> > This was effected with the program 'findchanges.for', which
> > identifies three
> > categories of station - those added, those changed, and those
> > deleted. Testing
> > the entire process (ie comparing the original station file with the
> > rev10 one)
> > yielded the following counts:
> >
> >          28 orig_vs_rev10.add.dat
> >         483 orig_vs_rev10.chg.dat
> >          53 orig_vs_rev10.del.dat
> >
> > This agrees with the operations performed.
> > </QUOTE>
> >
> > I'm attaching the first and third of these.
> >
> > I think the 55 (rather than 53) comes from two stations having their
> > normals zeroed? Again, from my notes:
> >
> > <QUOTE>
> > newbigfile90x.rev10.dat  ** this version locked and sent to Philip
> > Brohan **
> > This revision incorporates the changes made as a result of gridding, and
> > attempting to get the 1961-1990 mean normalised data to nudge 0. The
> > following
> > stations were deleted in the sense that their normals were set to
> > missing:
> > 606070 292   -2 -999 TIMIMOUN             ALGERIA       19691974  101969
> > 814010  55  540    4 SAINT LAURENT MARONI FRENCH GUIANA 19611990  101961
> > ..this was because the first only has a few values, with high
> > variability, and
> > the second consists of two decades of temperatures with one of missing
> > values in between, and the earlier decade is significantly warmer
> > than the
> > second.
> > </QUOTE>
> >
> > Sorry - I don't even remember WRITING this never mind the context! I
> > would note that the final sentence could easily be misinterpreted;
> > what I should have said is that it indicated that the data was from
> > two disparate stations.
> >
> > I can't locate a 4349 list..
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Harry
> >
> > On 2 Oct 2007, at 17:43, P.Jones@uea.ac.uk wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>  Harry, Philip,
> >>    Well the arch skeptic McIntyre has found the page Mike put
> >>  up and it wasn't enough! I expected that, but not his use of
> >>  nice language in this email!
> >>    Anyway, I've said I would try and do something in when
> >>  back from Australia - not next week (as that is busy as well),
> >>  but the week after that.
> >>    In the meantime, can you Harry send me a list of the 4349
> >>  stations and the 55? I've emailed Philip in case Harry
> >>  doesn't have the 4349 list. I know Harry has the 55.
> >>    When I get back, I can then check the 4349 and 4138 and
> >>  find what additional stations were extracted in the 2006
> >>  paper. I know that I took out about 35 US sites as these
> >>  had crept back despite being deemed 'urban' in work in
> >>  the 1980s.
> >>    I think the rest relate to changes in Australia, Canada
> >>  and NZ wrt station number changing and newer series.
> >>
> >>    No rush on this.
> >>
> >>  It is warm and sunny in Sydney. Woke at 2am, but did get 12hrs
> >>  sleep, now have to co-ordinate this with the night-time here!
> >>
> >>  Cheers
> >>  Phil
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------- Original Message
> >> ----------------------------
> >> Subject: CRU Station Lists
> >> From:    "Steve McIntyre" <stephen.mcintyre@utoronto.ca>
> >> Date:    Tue, October 2, 2007 5:05 pm
> >> To:      "'Phil Jones'" <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ----
> >>
> >>  Dear Phil, thank you for placing the list of CRU stations online. In
> >> the webpage, I think that you will find that this is a good idea and
> >> will go some way to removing a pointless cause of criticism.
> >>
> >> You refer to "a look-up Table which associates some current WMO
> >> station
> >> numbers with the earlier values we are using."  This is necessary for
> >> the use of the list and I would appreciate it if you would either send
> >> me a copy of it or place this online. The online listing shows 4138
> >> stations (as you observe),  while Brohan et al listed 4349 stations
> >> (as
> >> you also observe.) Brohan et al 2006 refers to 55 stations being
> >> remove
> >> for duplication while the current list shows a larger number.  I would
> >> appreciate a list of the 4349 stations referred to in Brohan as
> >> well as
> >> the 55 stations then removed.
> >>
> >> The webpage also states: "Additional updates in near-real time (either
> >> monthly or annually) come directly from Australia, Canada, New
> >> Zealand,
> >> Austria, the Nordic countries and a few others." It would be
> >> helpful if
> >> the "few others" were specifically listed or alternately could you
> >> email
> >> me the names of these few others.
> >>
> >> Concurrent with the information on stations,  I think that you should
> >> provide as complete a documentation as possible for your calculations,
> >> including the provision of source code, as otherwiie you will
> >> undoubtedly continue to have piecemeal inquiries resulting from the
> >> presently incomplete documentation.
> >>
> >> Regards, Steve McIntyre
> >>
> >> <untitled-2>
> >
> > Ian "Harry" Harris
> > Climatic Research Unit
> > School of Environmental Sciences
> > University of East Anglia
> > Norwich NR4 7TJ
> > United Kingdom
> >
> >
> >
> 
-- 
Philip Brohan,  Palaeoclimate Scientist
Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research      
Tel: +44 (0)1392 884574    Fax: +44 (0)1392 885681


