Guest post by John Goetz
As noted in the previous post, GISS has released their monthly global temperature summary for June, 2009. This month’s whopping anomaly of 0.63C is once again much higher than that of RSS, UAH, and even NOAA, which is the source of the GISS temperature data. Not only is the anomaly higher than the other metrics, but it is trending in the opposite direction.
Temperature data from 1079 stations worldwide contributed to the analysis, 134 of them being located in the 50 US states. Data from essentially the same few stations have been used for the past twenty-four months. Many, many hundreds of stations that have historically been included in the record and still collect data today continue to be ignored by GISS in global temperature calculations.
Once again, the bulk of temperatures comprising the present-day worldwide GISS average come from airports – in this case 554 airports, according to the NOAA metadata from the V2 station inventory. In the US, the ratio of airports to total stations continues to run very high, with 121 out of the 134 reporting stations being located at airports.
Why worry about airports? Aside from recent posts on this site documenting problems with airport ASOS equipment in the US, WUWT has also documented a number of equipment siting problems, notably the typical close proximity of the equipment to a tarmac heat sink. Airports can introduce a mini-UHI effect where one would otherwise not be found.
The NOAA metadata is not entirely accurate, and several stations located at airports are not noted as such. Some examples include Londrina and Brasilia in Brazil, Ely / Yelland in Nevada, and Broome in Austrailia. Those stations were easy to find because they had “airport” (or some variant) in the station name. A check of coordinates using Google Earth confirmed the airport locations.
Let’s examine the metadata a little further, shall we?
NOAA says that 345 of the stations it passes on to GISS are rural and presumably free of UHI influence. Fifteen of those stations are located in the US. However, only 201 of those rural stations are not located at an airport, and therefore presumably free of UHI effects (including tarmac heat sinks). In the US, only one of the fifteen stations is listed as both rural, and not located at an airport: Ely / Yelland in Nevada.
Doh!!! As noted above, that station is located at an airport – confirmed not just by Google Earth, but also by NOAA’s NCDC website as well! This means that all of the US temperatures – including those for Alaska and Hawaii – were collected from either an airport (the bulk of the data) or an urban location.
As for the rest of the world, some of the stations listed as being rural and not at an airport have metadata indicating they are located in an area of “dim” or “bright” lights. Filtering those out, we find a total of 128 stations that are rural, not at an airport, and “dark”.
Why are “dark” stations important? Recall that GISS uses dark stations to adjust for UHI in the urban stations. With only 128 dark stations available, none being in the US, it would seem this is an impossible task.
Fortunately, GISS adjustment rules allow old data to be used in adjusting new data. The older “non-reporting” rural weather stations continue to adjust reporting urban stations, even though the most recent two years of overlap is missing.
Thankfully, the algorithms are robust enough to calculate adjustments to the 100th of a degree even when data is missing.
Frank Lansner (06:10:04) :
“Havent read it yet..”
I shouldn’t bother; it’ll only turn your stomach. Or at least the comments will. On second thoughts, go look at the guy calling himself “yeah … whatever”. At one stage he was demonstrating his ignorance by confusing CO and CO2. That posting seems to have disappeared but the rest of his stuff is pure vitriol and as far as I can see has not an ounce of scientific sense in it.
Still it can only embarrass his fellow-alarmists which is all to the good, I suppose.
“This month’s whopping anomaly of 0.63C is once again much higher than that of RSS, UAH,…
Once again?
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1980/offset:-0.24/plot/uah/from:1980
Some of this increase is the result of GISS’s 1200 km smoothing algorithm. The 250 km map only shows +0.54C for June.
250 km map
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_nmap.py?year_last=2009&month_last=06&sat=4&sst=1&type=anoms&mean_gen=06&year1=2009&year2=2009&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=250&pol=reg
1200 km map
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_nmap.py?year_last=2009&month_last=06&sat=4&sst=1&type=anoms&mean_gen=06&year1=2009&year2=2009&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=1200&pol=reg
Maybe OT, but it seems that cries about the icecaps melting have not been heard this summer, at least in the sites I frequent…
Cathy (06:08:23) :
I love Ambrose Bierce. Here’s a nice definition (Devil’s Dictionary) which fits Dr. Hansen, Gore et al very nicely…
IDIOT, n.
A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in human affairs has always been dominant and controlling. The Idiot’s activity is not confined to any special field of thought or action, but “pervades and regulates the whole.” He has the last word in everything; his decision is unappealable. He sets the fashions and opinion of taste, dictates the limitations of speech and circumscribes conduct with a dead-line.
Bill: then you cannot accuse media of alarmism, can you? The Antarctic is slightly higher than last year and than average) and the Arctic is lower than last year (way below average)
http://www.nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
http://www.nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
or
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png
for a comparison with last year extent.
Sorry Vincent: what a load of BS I actually read this article in the Spectator (australian version) It definitely was not intentionally sarcastic (that is by Delingpole)
“Vincent (06:25:46) :
Regarding the BBC blog Frank mentioned: I had a quick look and discovered that it’s an article about an article in Spectator about Ian Pilmer’s book. Intentionally sarcastic, it was reviewed in the Spectator by Delingpole because Pilmer is one of a ‘dying breed who concedes nothing in climate change.’ The only point in the BBC article as far as I can see is to add that Moonbat has compiled a list of basic errors and finds it laughable.”
“GISS adjustment rules allow old data to be used in adjusting new data”
And the new data is used to adjust the old data.
What is this, Anthony. I can’t believe it. NASA’s GISS doctoring temperature data to make Earth seem warmer?!?! Nooo. Who is the head of GISS? Oh, Dr. James Hansen, you say? Ah, that explains it.
As Pierre Gossilen (5:54) writes:”SCIENCE PERVERTS”, with supporting data as to the meaning of that phrase. No ad hominems here. Real history. Real science. Eric Naegle (7:31), “IDIOT”, with full literate definition. Hareynolds (6:49), [airports create] “a thermal ‘mountain’ in the heat of the day”, from his professional experience. Anthony’s “Doh!!” says it all.
Anthony, keep holding the liar’s feet to the fire.
REPLY: I don’t like calling anyone at GISS liars or frauds, let’s not use those words. Here is what I think is going on. A methodology was developed, called GISTEMP. The methodology has weaknesses, and due to the way base assumptions were made, creates the output on those base assumptions from the Team. Because of choices made, such as airports, and baselines, and many others we aren’t privy to, we see the result we have today, including the ongoing adjustments which seem to be part of the data analysis base assumptions since they seem to happen with regularity.
When GISTEMP was coded, considering siting and airports was not in the thought process I don’t think. Neither Hansen nor Schmidt are instrumentation specialists or apparently versed in metrology (note that’s not meteorology). They are theorists. It boils down to a twist on the old Star Trek line: “Dammit Jim I’m a theoretician not a thermometer jockey.”
But the metrology associated with the surface data measurement is the foundation of the data. With the errors and biases we’ve seen, the data is questionable. GISS has not once addressed the issue, they assume the data is free of such issues, as they did with base assumptions when GISTEMP was created.
What I think we have with GISS is a large case of confirmation bias, and the inability to change the base assumptions since so much is invested in it. That’s not a lie, and not fraud until proven. It is however likely bad science to not address the issues and to deal with the change of knowledge. – Anthony
If the surface data is wrongly measured, then if data is additionally adjusted, then satellites’ temps readings are also adjusted with respect to ground stations..and so on. Who will in the future know, if only approximately, nowadays temperatures?. Our time will be called the “confused data era”.
Steve S,
It appears you and Tailhook are on to something. I’ve already seen a number of posters on different blogs suggest as much. The problem with all of this is, when does surface “data” become not data, but a means to advance a certain narrative? No real scientist in any field would seriously accept data that has been massaged to fit a certain point of view. I mean if the surface data collected from airports and NOAA COOP stations is highly suspect, why use it at all? If Hansen is going to focus his alchemy on the effects of El Nino, why doesn’t he do the same for La Ninas? (rhetorical question).
No one has a clue what NASA is doing with its data from one month to the next. A few years ago 1998 was the warmest. Now we find that June 2007 was. During La Nina months, the Pacific data is ignored. But, during the beginnings of a El Nino it is heavily weighted. I wonder how many versions of the GISS data sets are out there? Is there one for very month? It sounds quite a bit like Baskin Robbins -a little something for everyone.
Jeff Wiita (06:17:31) :
“Could we start a campaign to educate Bill O’reilly on Fox News. He believes GISS and Jim Hansen. Glenn Beck has tried to explain what is going on, but Bill is six cookies short of a dozen. He repeated the GISS nonsense again, yesterday, July 14. His email is oreilly@foxnews.com.”
Let him run for right now. His theme this week is to expose the insanity of cap and trade. Not a bad message from someone claiming to believe in global warming. We can start the education process later.
“Tarmac” is not a generic term for solid surfaces at an airport (ok may it is now but it shouldn’t be). The airport runways are made of concrete.
There I feel better now perhaps my medication is kicking in.
Re Bill Illis: I like how the small warm part of Western Greenland (250km map) gets spreaded over the huge part of Arctic (1200km map), where are no stations. What the f__k?
Flanagan:
“This month’s whopping anomaly of 0.63C is once again much higher than that of RSS, UAH,…
Once again?
Yeah, once again. Why don’t you look at the data you reference?
Steve S (07:03:02) :
Well here’s a helpful explanation from a RealClimate poster
I think it’s James Hansen or Al Gore as some guy named Wayne?
He predicts “Global temperatures may be highest in history soon.”
Only in written history wich is much worth as the paper it is written on.
GISS global temperature plots are not credible to me (within, say, 1C) due to all the unproven adjustments and assumptions — not to mention the paucity of quality data from many parts of the world that must be adjusted and filled in using unproven methods.
I cannot wait to see the “Watts Team” final detailed report on historical USA temperature anomalies. Hopefully, it will be based on using quality raw data from well understood documented sites — rather than on “manipulating” data.
I wrote Bill O’reilly.
What he says is this: Global warming is undoubtedly happening. Its the “cause” that is in question. And, regardless, Cap & Trade will not fix anything.
Seems similar to my viewpoint.
Excuse my ignorance, what does ROW mean?
REPLY: Rest Of World
Actually, you should read the BBC link… where you’ll find such laughable statements as:
As if Monbiot is the last word, or indeed, as if Monbiot has any sort of valid opinion whatsoever, on anything. Come on, tell me that isn’t hilarious!
Also, I love their misspellings (“prooves”).
However, the real gold there is the comments section.
One nice thing about the Internet is it keeps raving lunatics raving in front of their monitors, not raving on the streets where they might actually cause some disturbance. Reading some of the regular commenters at BBC and other bastions of warmists, I am often reminded of a guy that I used to see walking near my office. He would carry on both sides of a conversation, LOUDLY, and sometimes get quite worked up over things. But no matter how intense the argument, it never really made any difference outside of his own head.
Besides the obvious warming effect of lots of concrete and asphalt, is there maybe another factor that pollutes temperature measurements made at airports? Isn’t there an abundance of CO2 being spewed close to the ground by all those giant jet engines while idling in line awaiting permission to take off as well as during all those high-thrust takeoffs being made down the runway in rapid succession?
I can recall the early jets when combustion was much less complete than it is with modern engines, and a long black tail was visible behind those early engines, particularly during takeoff. But even if you can’t see it, there is bound to be plenty of CO2 concentrated near those airport temperature sensors, and isn’t CO2 supposed to be a “greenhouse” heat absorber? If lots of US temperature measurements are made at airports, are there any grants available to study how greenhouse gas may affect temperature measurements being made at them?
Great headline, Anthony.
Don’t matter what GISS says, all agricultural and avian signs in NE Oregon indicate cold late start to summer. That matters a great deal to ranchers and farmers here. NOAA used to serve agricultural interests. Not any more. Many farms and ranches have their own weather stations now and are studying weather pattern variation drivers so that they can make informed decisions. NOAA, GISS, and associated climate change scientists have become media driven useless entities in terms of food production. And city dwellers just need to know whether or not to take an umbrella to work. We could be saving some tax dollars here by cutting these useless agencies out of our federal budget. Had the farmers and ranchers in NE Oregon followed this “warming” drivel, they would be in worse shape than they are right now.
As the rate of decrease in ‘real’ global temperature starts with the NH winter, Hansen’s nubers will be shown as the fraud they really are. I almost feel sorry for the guy, as the very same politicians who currently support his efforts will turn on him like a pack of wolves once the game is up. The word ‘scapegoat’ springs to mind.
Are these stations measuring a simple max-min temperature? (with no averaging of that max temp)?
If so, one blast of hot air from a Rolls Royce Trent would be enough to give a few degrees ramp in maximum temperature. This would not happen every day, as it would depend on wind direction/speed and station location. But you can bet that when the conditions were right, the station would receive great dollops of hot exhaust gas. I know, because I work at airports every day, and you can easily feel the temperature rise on your skin.