; PLOTS 'ALL' REGION MXD timeseries from age banded and from hugershoff
; standardised datasets.
; Reads Harry's regional timeseries and outputs the 1600-1992 portion
; with missing values set appropriately. Uses mxd, and just the
; "all band" timeseries
;****** APPLIES A VERY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION FOR DECLINE*********
;
yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$
2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ;
fudge factorif n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,'Oooops!'
;
loadct,39
def_1color,20,color='red'
plot,[0,1]
multi_plot,nrow=4,layout='large'
if !d.name eq 'X' then begin
window, ysize=800
!p.font=-1
endif else begin
!p.font=0
device,/helvetica,/bold,font_size=18
endelse
;
; Get regional tree lists and rbar
;
restore,filename='reglists.idlsave'
harryfn=['nwcan','wnam','cecan','nweur','sweur','nsib','csib','tib',$
'esib','allsites']
;
rawdat=fltarr(4,2000)
for i = nreg-1 , nreg-1 do begin
fn='mxd.'+harryfn(i)+'.pa.mean.dat'
print,fn
openr,1,fn
readf,1,rawdat
close,1
;
densadj=reform(rawdat(2:3,*))
ml=where(densadj eq -99.999,nmiss)
densadj(ml)=!values.f_nan
;
x=reform(rawdat(0,*))
kl=where((x ge 1400) and (x le 1992))
x=x(kl)
densall=densadj(1,kl) ; all bands
densadj=densadj(0,kl) ; 2-6 bands
;
; Now normalise w.r.t. 1881-1960
;
mknormal,densadj,x,refperiod=[1881,1960],refmean=refmean,refsd=refsd
mknormal,densall,x,refperiod=[1881,1960],refmean=refmean,refsd=refsd
;
; APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION
;
yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,x)
densall=densall+yearlyadj
;
; Now plot them
;
filter_cru,20,tsin=densall,tslow=tslow,/nan
cpl_barts,x,densall,title='Age-banded MXD from all sites',$
xrange=[1399.5,1994.5],xtitle='Year',/xstyle,$
zeroline=tslow,yrange=[-7,3]
oplot,x,tslow,thick=3
oplot,!x.crange,[0.,0.],linestyle=1
;
endfor
;
; Restore the
Hugershoff NHD1 (see Nature paper 2)
;
===========================================================
Why are these people getting paid to produce this kind of artificial data manipulation ? ..... I was particularly amused that he called the variable that applied the artificial smoothing the fudge factor.... (see link) .....
There are rumours that Professor Phil from the CRU has stood down whilst a full review of his "team" and his "teams" practices get under way..... lets hope it's not a whitewash like his AR4 report/data to the IPCC ??? They've had 20 million of public money to hack up a valid data set, manipulate it to show what they want it to show, throw a few hockey sticks ....and then promptly lose the original data...when somebody asks for it through a freedom of information request..... incompetent doesn't even cover it .....
There is a particularly good article about all of this
here ... it's in pdf format and well worth a read
I went to Carmarthen the other day to have my annual eye check and they found that my prescription needed some minor changes , I'm basically becoming more long sighted in my old age.... which means I can see a car number plate at 7 miles but can't read a book unless it's attached to a broom handle and held out in front of me .... anyway ...... I agreed to have different lenses fitted to my existing frames because despite being practically bullied into buying new frames...... I resisted, because my existing frames are comfortable so why change ?... so far so good you might think ?
There is an anti-science group, there is a flat Earth group, if I may say so, over the scientific evidence for climate change 
.jpg)
