GISS (Goddard Institute of Space Studies) Surface Temperature Analysis (GISSTemp) released their monthly global temperature anomaly data for September 2008. Following is the monthly global ∆T from January to September 2008:
Year J F M A M J J A S
2007 85 61 59 64 55 53 53 55 50
2008 14 25 62 36 40 29 53 50 49
Here is a plot of the GISSTemp monthly anomaly since January 1979 (keeping in line with the time period displayed for UAH). I have added a simple 12-month moving average displayed in red.
For those astute readers of this blog, you will note how the addition of September data warmed our summer months:
GISS 2008 J F M A M J J A S
As of 8/08 14 25 60 42 40 28 50 39 ..
As of 9/08 14 25 62 36 40 29 53 50 49
In other words, when GISS closed the books on August, the summer average (JJA) was 0.39 C. Upon closing the books on September, the summer average increased to 0.44 C.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
How on earth can the past temperature averages go up?
How is such a change legitimate?
Reply by John Goetz: Graeme, read Rewriting History, Time and Time Again for an explanation of why the GISStemp algorithm produces such fluid numbers.
[…] http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/08/giss-releases-september-2008-data […]
Nope, doesn’t look like a hockey stick to me.
Umm, August rose from 39 to 50? That’s a 22% increase. How does that work?
Meanwhile, take a look at the Arctic, the ‘refreeze’ this year is spectacular so far. wonder what the deal is there.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
Regarding the jump in August: I’m not a believer in conspiracies or the like, although some of the GISS practices seem to be questionable. I look for simple answers.
I believe GISS might put the data out early in the month, aiming for a specific day of the month. Sometimes that requires them to present incomplete data. If memory serves me well (and at my age that’s a rarity) the following map was missing Antarctic data a month ago, but it’s there now. And considering the magnitude of the Antarctic anomaly present in the following, its inclusion would explain a good portion if not all of that jump.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_nmap.py?year_last=2008&month_last=9&sat=4&sst=1&type=anoms&mean_gen=08&year1=2008&year2=2008&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=1200&pol=reg
Did anyone save a copy of the August 2008 map or zonal mean plot from a month ago?
ROFL, leaves you able to speculate, “I wonder what the average temperature in August, 2008 will in September, 2010.”
Yes, but it only gets hotter in the GISS past when it was actually colder. If it were hotter, then it would become colder, due to global warming.
You have to maintain a coherent story.
Bill Marsh … poor, poor, innocent foolish boy.
the ‘refreeze’ this year is spectacular so far. wonder what the deal is there.
It’s due to global warming. Didn’t you follow the lesson?
I’m confused too, along with the first post.
Where is the data “warehouse that keeps these records as they were released, rather than the revisions and redefintion of the temp record? I would like to see the record pre-and post-adjustment for record purposes. I know GISS adjusts all the time as I also follow the discussions on climate audit….
I guess I’m trying to understand how someone could be so wedded to their position that data corruption becomes common place? What happens when that position fails?
Mongo,
In the same way that economic data like jobless numbers and job creation/loss is revised from month to month. A lot of it is because of additional data that was not available at the time the data is issued plus statistical corrections.
It just strikes me as funny.
Mongo, what is more shocking is that this is NASA.
Why does this branch of NASA put so much faith in bad terrestrial measurements (see surfacestations.org) and not satellite data? Kind of spoils the brand, doesn’t it?
Of course, sat data cannot be manipulated to give the answer one wants. And, of course, I would never use the word “fraud” in a public agora such as this.
” I’m not a believer in conspiracies or the like,”
When it comes to GISS and Hansen, I am a 100% believer. I no longer acknowlege GISTEMP as a legitimate source of temerature data.
I no longer acknowlege GISTEMP as a legitimate source of temerature data.
what he said.
Proud NASA took us to the moon and the planets using slide rules.
Now they can’t keep a mid level bureaucrat under control.
NASA… the world is watching and laughing.
The new world power will not put up with this sort of self deception.
We better learn to speak Chinese soon.
When adding a moving average, the Excel way [and others too, perhaps] is not correct as it introduces a phase shift of half the averaging period [which is clearly seen in the graph]. The correct way is to make a separate column and compute its values using a centered average, e.g. for cell C100: =AVERAGE(B94:B105). This still introduces a phase shift but now only half a month, so much less of a problem. And no moving average should be computed for the first and last six months.
Say Anthony, Marc Morano, put out a recent statement by UN climate head Rajendra Pachauri, regarding the certainty of man made climate change. He repeated that sorry statement, that 11 of the last 12 years, have been the warmest on record; and looking at your new GISS graph you can sort of see that might be true. But it begs the question: Ever notice how higher than usual readings tend to cluster around a maximum ? It’s just a conjecture on my part, but I’ll bet that some of the lowest readings will be found clustered around a minimum.
Pachauri also repeated the well known fact that the 2007 ice retreat was the largest on record (since all the way back to 1979); and then claimed that we almost broke the record last month; which is a cool way of saying there wasn’t as much summer melt this year.
But speaking of the ice retreat and the “spectacular” refreeze; I have a conjecture which I will put here for all you experts to think about.
As you know, abnormal melting of the Greenland ice sheets are supposed to raise the oceans 20 feet and flood New York; and the reduced salinity from all that fresh water, is supposed to shut down the gulf stream; that thermohaline thing. Now here is my thought. The normal ocean is about 3.5% salt content, and freezes at about -2.5 deg C. Unlike fresh water, sea water has no density maximum down to the freezing point; and that is true for anything more than 2.47% salinity.
So all that fresh or diluted surface water layer sloshing around in the Arctic from all that melted Greenland ice, has a much higher freezing temperature than normal sea water; the 2.47% salinity water freezes at -1.33 deg C, and anything less that may not sink, will freeze at an even higher temperature.
I would expect then, that a large melt of the Greenland ice sheet, would lead to an earlier and more intense refreeze of the arctic ocean, and in fact all of that Greenland ice melt might just refreeze in the Artic, since once the ice starts to form, the Arctic temperature should then drop faster due to the increased albedo effect.
So I am not at all convinced that the melting of Greenland ice will actually raise sea levels much at all, but just get transferred to the sea ice pack.
So what do all you experts think of that possibility ?
George
Thank you guys for the chuckle…especially regarding the August 2008 data in Sept 2010…still has me going.
Jim
GISS – Gore Inspired Science Scam
Graeme Rodaughan (16:36:42) :
“How on earth can the past temperature averages go up?
How is such a change legitimate?”
It’s not, it’s totally unphysical. And it’s just an exercise in careful data collection and arithmetic. Yet we’re supposed to believe that the same people can correctly model the earth’s climate one hundred years into the future with a hugely complex computer program that is supposed to solve a very large number of coupled nonlinear partial differential equations.
Speaking of Hansen:
“Hansen says Arctic ice will melt completely during each summer in five to ten years but that it can be reversed if mankind stops burning fossil fuels and phases out coal, the chief cause of manmade greenhouse gasses.”
http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-10-08-voa27.cfm
Five to ten years… I hope Hansen doesn’t get a side job over at CT. That could be really interesting. Although I have noticed that CT has the NH Sea Ice Extent numbers all the way back to 1900. They haven’t adjusted it in a while.
George E. Smith.
I belive the currents in the Arctic would take Greenlands fresh water melt into the Atlantic.
One of the problems I have with what is said about Arctic warming is that they never talk about what happens on an annual basis. It is my opinion that the Arctic looses much more heat from non-multi-year ice than from multi-year ice. The Arctic looses 9-10 million sq. Km of sea ice every year. It melts at about -1.6 C and sinks. All that open water radiates a lot of heat when the sun is down.
Mike Bryant
I checked out that link and Hansen with his “planetary emergencies” and “tipping points” are growing very wearisome. I couldn’t stomach reading all the way through. I wish NASA would reach a tipping point and tip Hansen into retirement.
Hi Mark,
The sea ice numbers could be adjusted as much as any one likes – hiding the Arctic Ice would be a bit difficult… 🙂
Dave,
Of course it doesn’t look like a hockey stick, your using the wrong program.
Here’s how to do it.
You squint your eyes real hard, and think like a hockey puck.
Presto – A hockey stick.
Sorry all, couldn’t help myself…
Mike Bryant (17:54:13)
This is not your father’s NASA. After Challenger I stopped believing. The sorry details go way beyond those O rings.