backtop


Print 119 comment(s) - last by Andy35W.. on Nov 27 at 6:30 AM


GISS's October Data. The large reddish-brown area in Russia is actually September readings.
Amateur team finds NASA error similar to one they discovered a year ago.

NASA'S Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) is one of the world's primary sources for climate data. GISS issues regular updates on world temperatures based on their analysis of temperature readings from thousands of monitoring stations over the globe.

GISS’ most recent data release originally reported last October as being extraordinarily warm-- a full 0.78C above normal. This would have made it the warmest October on record; a huge increase over the previous month's data.

Those results set off alarm bells with Steve McIntyre and his gang of Baker Street irregulars at Climateaudit.org. They noted that NASA's data didn't agree at all with the satellite temperature record, which showed October to be very mild, continuing the same trend of slight cooling that has persisted since 1998. So they dug a little deeper.

McIntyre, the same man who found errors last year in GISS's US temperature record, quickly noted that most of the temperature increase was coming from Russia. A chart of world temperatures showed that in October, most of Russia, the largest nation on Earth, was not only registering hot, but literally off the scale. Yet anecdotal reports were suggesting that worldwide, October was actually slightly colder than normal. Could there be another error in GISS's data?

An alert reader on McIntyre's blog revealed that there was a very large problem. Looking at the actual readings from individual stations in Russia showed a curious anomaly. The locations had all been assigned the exact temperatures from a month earlier-- the much warmer month of September. Russia cools very rapidly in the fall months, so recycling the data from the earlier month had led to a massive temperature increase.

A few locations in Ireland were also found to be using September data.

Steve McIntyre informed GISS of the error by email. According to McIntyre, there was no response, but within "about an hour", GISS pulled down the erroneous data, citing a "mishap" and pointing the finger of blame upstream to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration (NOAA).

NOAA's Deputy Director of Communications, Scott Smullens, tells DailyTech that NOAA is responsible only for temperature readings in the US, not those in other nations.

The error not only affected October data, but due to the complex algorithm GISS uses to convert actual temperature readings into their output results, altered the previously published values for several other months as well. The values for August 2008, for instance, changed by 0.11C and the global anomaly as far back as 2005 increased by a hundredth of a degree.

GISS is run by Dr. James Hansen, a strident global warming advocate who has accused oil companies of "crimes against humanity".  Hansen recently made headlines when he travelled to London to testify on behalf of a group of environmentalists who had damaged a coal plant in protest against global warming. Hansen also serves as science advisor to Al Gore.

Dr. Hansen could not be reached for comment.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Climateaudit.org
By SoCalBoomer on 11/11/2008 6:48:32 PM , Rating: 3
Hmmm - strange, your references point to a few things:

First is a blog entry (with comments STRONGLY criticizing the authors, including von Storch) actually validating McIntyre's point that von Storch's Hockey Stick is incorrect. I like the following summation:
quote:
I am somewhat astonished at your May 11 comment. You dismiss Steve McIntyre's contributions to the Hockystick debate not on the basis that his critisisms lack substance, rigor, or validity, but because his work has not published in journals to which you ascribe authority. This is a neat, if disingenuous, evasion of the issue. The issue regarding McIntyre's work is whether or not his conclusions are accurate, not whether some journal approves of his work. Both of you are aware of McIntyre's substantial body of work as documented on Climate Audit. McIntyre provides both the data and computer code which underlies his work on his website. It should be a simple matter for scientists of your standing to determine the merit of McIntyre's work independently (i.e. do your own peer review) without relying on "journals" to tell you what to think.


The third further shows how von Storch's analysis (the Hockey Stick) is wrong and von Storch screwed up.

The second. . .well, I didn't read the entire actual article and your link only led to the abstract anyway.

But your "examples" of McIntyre's not disproving a "single word" seem to actually show that he did bring to light a serious fault and actually did disprove (or led to the disproval of) von Storch's Hockey Stick (which is what the mainstream seems to use to prove the exponential increase in temps)

Hmmmm. . . . did you READ your examples?


RE: Climateaudit.org
By kbehrens on 11/11/2008 10:17:13 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Hmmmm. . . . did you READ your examples?
Don't confuse him with the facts. In debating a global warming fanatic, using your brain is an unfair tactic.


"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher

Related Articles
















botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki