Both Lucia and Steve McIntyre beat me on this story, so I’ll defer to them. That’s what I get for going to dinner with relatives last night and sleeping in.
Below is a plot from McIntyre showing the RSS data compared to UAH MSU. Both are down significantly in June 2009 with UAH MSU at .001°C
RSS is down from 0.090C in May 2009 to 0.075C in June 2009
Steve McIntyre writes a little parody of the issue: RSS June – “Worse Than We Thought”
Lucia actually expected RSS to climb and has an analysis here
Even NCDC’s director Tom Karl has something to say about satellite data, read on.
Both of the datasets are available in raw form if you want t plot for yourself.
RSS (Remote Sensing Systems, Santa Rosa)
RSS data here (RSS Data Version 3.2)
UAH (University of Alabama, Huntsville)
Reference: UAH lower troposphere data
There had been some comments in the UAH thread earlier that May and June seem to have cycled lower in the UAH data set in recent years. It seems that RSS is following also.
I expect we’ll hear an announcement from NOAA/NCDC soon about it being the nth warmest June on record. They will of course cite surface data from stations like this one at the Atmospheric Sciences Department, University of Arizona at Tucson:
Here is a testimony in March 2009 before congress from NCDC’s director Tom Karl, where he complains about satellite data and the “adjustments” required:
It is important to note raw satellite data and rapidly produced weather products derived from satellite sensors are rarely useful for climate change studies. Rather, an ordered series of sophisticated technical processes, developed through decades of scientific achievement, are required to convert raw satellite sensor data into Climate Data Records (CDRs).
You mean “sophisticated technical processes” like these performed on raw surface temperature data at NCDC?
larger image
larger image
Source: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/epubs/ndp/ushcn/ndp019.html
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Sorry, I’m getting a bit confused here . . . isn’t Global Warm meant to mean the planet gets warmer . . or have I arse about face ?
It’s “climate change”. Did you not get the memo?
“It is important to note raw satellite data and rapidly produced weather products derived from satellite sensors are rarely useful for climate change studies. Rather, an ordered series of sophisticated technical processes, developed through decades of scientific achievement, are required to convert raw satellite sensor data into Climate Data Records (CDRs).”
He is being so ridiculously disingenuous it is hard to believe-either that or breathtakingly ignorant. As far as the temperature products go, many such processes have already been implemented-is he actually suggesting, or trying to suggest, that the data is not yet up to climate analysis quality? Someone is seriously behind the times.
I think he means “it’s bloody difficult to jigger the results to what we want them to be when there is only one or two inputs rather than many hundreds of inputs to hide our jiggery-pokery in”.
It’s a pleasure to read your comments. You give it to them time after time.
Thanks Anthony.
You have to love the “Difference Between Raw and Final USHCN Data Sets” Graph.
Is this what they meant by “Hockey Stick”?
I know nothing about this subject. So this comment is pure conjecture. I assume that the satellite sensors have to be calibrated against a different measurement scheme from time to time to correct for “drift” in the instrumentation. I assume the different measurement scheme is temperature data from weather balloons of some sort. So the graph labelled “Difference between RAW and final USHCN Data sets – is this comparing before and after some type of calibration adjustment applied, or are we talking about some GISS level monkeying with the values?
Kafka-esque!!
Always the same analysis of small wiggles… Don’t you see that the very fact that a zero anomaly is hailed t like that (for one month only) is a proof that it has become increasingly rare? How many times in the last 10 years (that is last 120 months) did we get close to, or equal to zero? Now compare that to the 90ies…
All the warmers talk about how temps have gone up .8C due to CO2 warming.
Looking at that graph without drawing any lines for slope where’s the .8C?
It looks more like .1C-.4c to me.
Found this story about the current Global Cooling
http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/44463
There’s also an interesting bit in the story, not the stuff about the alarmists, but it seems to say some trees in parts of New England are starting to show a little fall color in July, am I even reading that right?
Also, here in Wichita it looks like the temps. will fall well short of the forecast again today, possibly short of 100. Intellicast said 105 and the hourly forecast for 1:00 showed the actual 1:00 temp. fell short of that by 6 degrees.
Plus it seems like the TAO site is showing NOAA’s dream for a good El Nino is starting to fall apart, some of the signs compared to last year even does not look good for even a moderate El Nino.
I’ve posted on this before, but I don’t suppose it’ll hurt to do it one more time.
The satellite measurements are behind the curve, i.e. they are reflecting the low SST that were present a few months back. The surface readings are now on the rise. The satellite readings are just now “bottoming out” and will follow the surface readings upwards in the next month or so.
HadSST2 has just released it’s June anomaly. It is +0.5 which is the highest anomaly since 1998. It is considerably higher than anything seen in the past 4 years. If anomalies of this magnitude persist then we can safely assume that the recent “global cooling” trend has had it’s day.
We’re at about where we were in 1980.
Wow! Such warming!
*Sigh* Can we NOT get a rebuttal in regards to the UPWARD adjustments!
Not to sound confrontational or anything (scoff).
Is it just me or is there no information for the justification of those adjustments?
And what on earth did a station like the one shown in this article begin as X years ago before that parking lot? *Curious!*
O.T. but it seems that the HadCET data series is now available again. Could this be in response to my recent outpouring of annoyance on this blog at it’s removal and yet another example of the burgeoning power of wuwt on both sides of the pond?
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cet_info_mean.html
Essentially no global warming for 30 years!!!! (forget about trendlines). While useful to a degree, applying linear least squares to this data (and then using the results to influence government policy) is absurd.
Flanagan (11:42:05) :
Always the same analysis of small wiggles… Don’t you see that the very fact that a zero anomaly is hailed t like that (for one month only) is a proof that it has become increasingly rare? How many times in the last 10 years (that is last 120 months) did we get close to, or equal to zero? Now compare that to the 90ies…
Wow. I see you want the temperature anomaly to be zero for the entire record? I’d guess I’d be wasting my time pointing out (again) that volcanic events in the first half of the graph increase the slope of the linear trend, creating more below zero anomalies in the 80/90s.
Edward,
Try looking at GISS record, that’s probably where you’d find a .8c rise. over 100+ years
Anthony,
I don’t know if this has been posted elsewhere but you have had praise in a UK broadsheet.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5664069/Polar-bear-expert-barred-by-global-warmists.html
Temps are the same as before Mr.Hansen made his first presentation of his models before your congress….so it would be advisable for you to ask, as citizens, to revise his affirmations (or i should say his “predictions”?) and check them if fulfilled.
@Karl Horrex from NCDC
“Rather, an ordered series of sophisticated technical processes, developed through decades of scientific achievement, are required to convert raw ……. data”
Yeah, we know that already, Karl,
i.e.:
– NOAA/NCDC + GISS + HadCRUT
– offical Consumer Price Index (CPI)
– unemployment numbers
– M3 (Oops, sorry that isn’t published anymore,
was too bad to successfully apply adjustments)
… and so on, and so on
Jeez, what a [selfsnip] biz you are talking about?
Flanagan (11:42:05) :
Always the same analysis of small wiggles… Don’t you see that the very fact that a zero anomaly is hailed t like that (for one month only) is a proof that it has become increasingly rare? How many times in the last 10 years (that is last 120 months) did we get close to, or equal to zero? Now compare that to the 90ies…
Ok Flanagan, you win.
We are all going to die.
“It is important to note raw satellite data and rapidly produced weather products derived from satellite sensors are rarely useful for climate change studies. Rather, an ordered series of sophisticated technical processes, developed through decades of scientific achievement, are required to convert raw satellite sensor data into Climate Data Records ”
Sounds like he’s jealous of the satellite’s consistencey and precision.
@ur momisugly Flanagan (11:42:05) :
And what would you call all of the AGW hand waving then? That it is proof that AGW doesn’t exist? By your logic, AGW hand waving is proof that AGW doesn’t exist!
Even if the temps were not being “adjusted” where in the history of the world has warmer meant a disaster. Who the heck got to decide what the best temp for the Earth is? Do we get a vote? Cause its not as warm as I would like it.. Oh and in all those hideously top 8 of the last however many warmest whatevers, can ya show me the huge disasters that were caused by man’s Co2 contribution and have never occured in the past?
Yet the G8 meeting of all of the supposed leaders of our countries promises to hold the temperature of the Earth down to two degrees until 2050. I swear! No acually if I werent a lady, I would swear… My only hope is people these days. Many seem to be coming out of the haze and realizing that our current leaders, even the house and senate, dont really get it do they? It doesnt matter what side you are on. Come on people .. stupid is as stupid does.
Flanagan (11:42:05) :
Always the same analysis of small wiggles… from Flanagan.
Dream on, boy,
but take care, to have good warming clothes at hand
when you are awakening.