Either way congratulations to both Dr. Tans and Anthony for providing a clear and balanced resolution of this problem.

Regarding “the raw data is avaliable” …in the past I’ve seen it posted that the files are too large to download on a normal PC.
I think I’ll go ask if the links now to the raw data are any better / different..
Unless anyone here knows better of course.

Stan, I think you’re on to something. When a scientist starts mentioning “carbon markets” a red flag should go up immediately. Where is the grant money coming from and going to?

REPLY: Sorry you had to read so much, try this one -

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/08/07/mauna-loa-to-improve-the-co2-data/

Perhaps someone could start a campaign to gather donations so that Dr Tan can purchase some better equipment so this doesn’t happen again. We’re not talking about millions of dollars here.

Yeah, but a single lawsuit involving a large power plant and the CO2 market will be millions, and any doubt cast upon a questionable data source could make for some interesting times.

Jim Hansen seems to have congress’ ear, he’d be a good one to help free up federal (i.e. our) money for upgrades and duplication.

Working at a federal govt. scientific facility (wxsat operations), we are funded from a federal budget and we have to submit a budget request prior to new bugets being approved. He may not be allowed to ‘lobby’ for additional support, but I would think they could request the funds for up-to-date systems (especially computers, as cheap as they are today) with any annual budget request. You don’t get it if you don’t request it. I wouldn’t think a facility like that would be funded through annual grants from the NSF (National Science Foundation) or the like. Seems odd…

Jeff K

Boulder by way of Berkeley. Bio:

http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap2-2/sap2-2prospectus-final-tans.htm

This is BS and we are letting them off way too easy. Dr Tan states “There are three independent backups of the MLO record: We also take
flask samples at MLO analyzed here in Boulder, and at Scripps Ralph
Keeling is continuing the record his father started with both continuous
analyzer measurements as well as flask samples taken at MLO and analyzed
at Scripps.”

If this is true then why would they ever have missed data. Simply take the flasks and rerun them for the CO2 reading and keep the record whole and intact, period. No more questionable algorithms and smoothings, no more BS, just the data. If it causes more work for them too bad so sad, if equipment I work on goes down I know I’ll have some long days and nights ahead.

This should be insisted on.

Hum

” See “where to measure”on my pages:
http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/co2_measurements.html ”

I had a quick look at that site – a valuable contribution to these discussions, especially using the various isotope ratios to establish origin.

Will study it more carefully

Harsh, B.C., really harsh! LOL.

Is this the same Pieter Tans from Boulder who associates himself with the 9/11Truth movement?

Steve, according to WhitePages.com, there is only one Pieter Tans in Boulder, CO.

Recently I inadvertently double formated the wrong hard drive, all my AGW files were on that drive, I ran a recovery program on my second drive and recovered every single file on the formated drive. The program used was just a bog standard recovery program.

3000 Argo buoys are biased. EXpendable BathyThermograph (XBT) data is biased. The satellite temperatures are biased. The historic land based temperatures apparently need adjusting downwards periodically and the current termperature records get adjusted upwards because they are biased. CO2 data discs crash so the reports are biased.

You can only sympathise with climate scientists when they work with such error prone equipment.

Max

I have had a lot of discussion with Ernst Beck about his historical data.

My conclusions:
Some historical measurements were made with equipment accurate to +/- 150 ppmv, most were within +/- 10 ppmv. Mauna Loa measurements are accurate to about +/- 0.1 ppmv.

Further, NEVER use measurements in the middle of forests or towns or anywhere near huge sources/sinks, except if you are interested in biological uptake/release of CO2 or car exhausts. That is the main problem with the historical data, only a few were taken at places without huge local sources/sinks in the neighbourhood.
See “where to measure”on my pages:
http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/co2_measurements.html

The South Pole is the best place to measure (more or less) global CO2 levels, followed by other places, including Mauna Loa. But as Mauna Loa has the longest continuous historical record, these data are used as the reference.