NASA GISS has released their global temperature anomaly data for June 2009 and it is quite the surprise.
In both the UAH and RSS satellite data sets, global temperature anomaly went down in June. GISS went up, and is now the largest June anomaly since 1998, when we had the super El Nino.
Data source:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
Here are the June global temperature anomaly comparisons:
GISS .63C
RSS .075
UAH .001
The divergence between the satellite derived global temperature anomalies of UAH and RSS and the GISS land-ocean anomaly is the largest in recent memory.
But that isn’t the only oddity. Over on Lucia’s blog, the first commenter out of the gate, “Nylo” noticed something odd:
Nylo (Comment#16257) July 14th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Regarding updates in past temperatures, this is not the most important change. Very noticeable is the fact that now 2007 is the second hottest year, having replaced 1998 in the statistics. This has been achieved by lowering the 1998 J-D average temperature anomaly to 0.56 , and raising the 2007 J-D average temperature anomaly to 0.57. Last month they were viceversa.
It is curious to me that such adjustments in GISS seem to occur in a way that enhances the present trend. Perhaps it is like a fine liqueur, aged to perfection.
Blink comparator of GISS USA temperature anomaly – click image if not blinking
You can keep a secret if only two people know it, and one of them is dead.
Who are the algorithm gate keepers a GISS? Surely not one (the ONE) person?
Any chance for a whistleblower?
Or the ONE want to be busted. Out.
Flanagan (23:35:32):
So you are saying that consistency is not compromised: as the surface heats up the lower troposphere, the satellite temperatues will follow the GISS numbers.
It would be most interesting if your scenario plays out; we then would have further proof against CO2-based AGW for in that theory, the lower troposphere heats up the surface.
Is this what is known as taking the GISS?
It’s not like the source of the difference is a major mystery. The changes shown in the blinker occurred for the most part as a consequence of the introduction of the TOBS and SHAP adjustments. The former covers the systematic change of time of observation in the US, the other one corrections for station moves as documented in the station meta data. Which of these adjustments do you object to and on what basis?
When comparing anomalies, keep in mind that they have different baselines. It’s like comparing height measurements from the ground to others made from the table top and just comparing the numbers.
Fraud. Simple as that.
REPLY: Let’s not use that word. Never assign malice where simple incompetence will do. – Anthony
I notice Roy Spencer has updated the UAH June anomaly to 0.00
NS: it is not a new phenomenon, it’s called the atmospheric upwelling.
Inquirer: that would not discredit the greenhouse effect at all. In this case we have an El Nino building up, which means hot water goes to the surface and frees energy to the atmosphere. The question is: where does the energy that heated this water come from?
It is strange to notice that during the deepest solar minimum in a century, we observe the strongest anomalies, no? The El Nino that is forming is not even a strong one (and it’s only the beginning)… Anyway we get anomalies that are the same as in 1998?
The only tipping point that I am aware of is the GISS Data shifting from manipulation to outright fraud and corruption. This cannot be allowed to go on.
I bet if you add in seasonal noise we pass Hansens tipping point yearly.
Is it breaking some sort of law to change these numbers?
Fraud. Simple as that.
REPLY: Let’s not use that word. Never assign malice where simple incompetence will do. – Anthony.
It is not only incompetence and may not even be fraud. A large part is the delusion scientifically inclined people have in favor of their theory of the world. ( a good example: the barycenter followers.)
It is a hanging on with tenacity on the proposed world explanation ; all scientists are prone to that, from the lowest to the highest in intellect and stature. They would not have entered the field otherwise.
Of course to be good scientists they would have to be able to , at some point, put aside their favoritism towards their own theory and look clearly at the data, which is something AGW climatologists are not able to do.
Flanagan: “It would not be surprising then to have some delay between the two if the surface heats (the air must go up). ”
Sounds easy enough to check. The July satellite readings should correspond to the June surface readings. Why don’t we carry out the following audit: compare all the satellite readings against the GISS readings and we will see that the satellites lag the GISS by 1 month. Or not.
This whole air temperature fiasco is just another nail in the coffin for use as a climate metric. Roger Pielke has been saying for some considerable time that ocean heat accumulation is the most robust metric. Atmospheric temperatures correspond to only a small fraction of global warming and are very fickle.
Ocean temperatures as observed by the argo network have the advantage in that they can be cross verified by altimetry and gravimetric readings. For example, by subtracting the mass component (gravimetric) of SLR from total altimetry readings, we are left with the thermal expansion component which can confirm the argo temperature readings.
No accumulation of ocean heat has been observed since 2003.
Flanagan,
you make me laugh.
Here are the June global temperature anomaly comparisons:
GISS .63C
RSS .075
UAH .001
The divergence between the satellite derived global temperature anomalies of UAH and RSS and the GISS land-ocean anomaly is the largest in recent memory.
I still think the majority of the “divergence” is due to the lag from SST changes. I predicted this would happen earlier in the year. GISS and Hadley are ‘seeing’ the warm SST now. UAH and RSS won’t reflect current SST for another couple of months – possibly more. AMSU temperatures already look much warmer in July than June.
It’s funny no-one picked up on this in Jan and Feb when, relatively speaking, GISS and Hadley were lower than UAH and RSS.
James Hansen was in Washington yesterday. So I am wondering if he made these changes in the data so he could show continued warming in the earth to the politicians and the media ?
http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/07/14/14climatewire-does-nasas-james-hansen-still-matter-in-clim-82897.html?pagewanted=all
“A House Democrat, meanwhile, labeled (James) Hansen’s Capitol Hill appearance yesterday “irrelevant.” ”
NS (00:35:38) :
Flanagan (23:35:32) :
“I think there could be some reason for this:
………………….
It would not be surprising then to have some delay between the two if the surface heats (the air must go up). And we’re actually observing rightnow with UAH a strong increase in the anomaly
………….yad,yada……..”
Or it could be UHI. Nice match for almost all known warming too.
But yeh, sure, perhaps the air ain’t mixing up right or something. Could we build giant spoon to mix it all up proper?
UHI? what suddenly in June ? What about last Jan and Feb when the surface anomalies were lower (using 1979-1998 baseline) than the satellite anomalies.
Look, I’m not a believer in catastrophic AGW, but – and I never thought I’d say this – the warmers are talking a lot more sense than the sceptics on this.
I suggest we take a look at the UAH and RSS anomalies over the next few months and see what happens.
GISS and make up
You can’t have a argument for adjusting anomaly’s from 60 years back. Are they realy trying to get that hocky stick back on the chart. maybe there is another Al Gore sequel coming on this fall 2009. Let me gess he will be using Giss adjusment skills.
Its time this one goes out to al the media.
flanagan asked “…where the energy of the el nino came from ?”
Actually from the sun.
And el nino doesn’t mean that the heat content of the ocean increased, it is just distributed differently.
And if a possibly increased number of el ninos would tell us anything for the future, it would be, that this is would be a very strong negative feedback mechanism that transfers surplus energy to the atmosphere and radiate to outer space.
What was really remarkable, that we had a satellite anomaly of 0.00° this month even in the absence of la nina and though the cumulative effect the string of a few la ninas so far must be still small.
Just been playing with Wood for Trees – I love that site it makes things so much easier – and the surprising thing is the divergence of GISS from Hadcrut3 from 1998 onwards
I agree that linear trend lines are not much use but this was an eye opener
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1998/trend/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998/trend and matches the apparent visual divergence from the actual graphs http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1998/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998
No, Anthony, it is not a fine liqueur maturing, it is the heat generated by corruption and rot.
Time for an independent investigation. Is it about money, politics, incompetence, time to find out and remove the people responsible.
Never assume incompetence when there is a motive for malice.
GISS again?!
I can see it now, in the future, year-round snow starts piling up in Canada, a harbinger of future glaciers. Meanwhile, on the 4th of July, snowball fights break out in Central Park in NYC, while GISS is touting the warmest year on record.
Flanagan (23:35:32)
oh no!
heat from the surface does not wait days or weeks to go up, this happens rapidly and it is very simple thermodynamic!