new output 44 lines 43 and 45 indicate the rms amplitude for each trace of 42 and 44 respectively both the conventional noise attenuation method and method 100 were parameterized to remove on average the same amount of energy from the entire ensemble of traces fig4 b shows the error in the results the difference between the result of the conventional method 42 and the pure signal 40 is seen at 46 and the difference between the result of an embodiment of the present invention 44 and the pure signal 40 is at 47 since the conventional method does not vary its suppression in time and space it has removed more signal 46 a than the embodiment of method 100 resulting in 44 the conventional method also shows slightly higher average error than the embodiment of method 100 as shown by line 48 which shows the average rms level of the conventional error 46 and line 49 which shows the average rms level of the error in the result from the present invention the rms amplitude for each trace of the errors is shown as line 48 a for the conventional method error 46 and as line 49 a for the error in the result of present invention 47 fig5 compares the result of method 100 with a conventional noise suppression method on real seismic data the seismic data 50 contains spatially and temporally varying noise and has several events and regions of strong signal.