Ocean Heat Content: cooling gone today with new adjustment

WUWT readers may recall last week that we had an excellent guest analysis by Bob Tisdale titled:

Ocean Heat Content: Dropping again

Easy come, easy go. The data has been changed. Read on – Anthony

NODC’s CORRECTION TO OHC (0-700m) DATA

Guest Post by Bob Tisdale

I was advised today (Thanks, Fred) that the NODC has revised their Ocean Heat Content data. A quick check of the KNMI Climate Explorer News webpage…

http://climexp.knmi.nl/news.cgi?someone@somewhere

…reveals that it was revised on October 15, 2009 at KNMI.

And a check of the NODC data…

ftp://ftp.nodc.noaa.gov/pub/data.nodc/woa/DATA_ANALYSIS/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/DATA/heat_3month/HC_0-700-3month.tar.gz

…shows that it was corrected on 10/15/09.

Dr. Geert Jan van Oldenborgh writes, “There was an error in the last 3-month data point of the NODC ocean heat content dataset, as anyone who made a map of the data could see. The problem has been fixed at NODC (thanks Gavin, Tim).”

Apparently the NODC hadn’t bothered to plot the data prior to posting it on September 14, 2009, or hadn’t thought there was a problem until…

Here’s a gif of the correction

http://i36.tinypic.com/2coomlw.gif

NODC CORRECTION

Thanks, Gavin and Tim.

Hmm, I’ll have to go back and update the “ENSO Dominates NODC Ocean Heat Content (0-700 Meters) Data” post to make sure the ENSO-induced step changes are still there and verify the “North Atlantic Ocean Heat Content (0-700 Meters) Is Governed By Natural Variables” hasn’t changed, too.

H/T to Fred.

############

UPDATE (October 15 @ 5:40PM):

After I posted the above, I found that Dr. Geert Jan van Oldenborgh had emailed me to notify me of the correction. I have received his permission to reproduce his email:

Dear Bob Tisdale,

please note that NODC discovered that they had accidentally posted the wrong version of their last file (apr-jun2009), a preliminary version with most data still missing had somehow made it to their web site. A quick look at the map for that quarter showed that there were hardly any anomalies visible and big anomalies in the North Atlantic and Pacific did not persist from the previous quarter, so the data were clearly suspicious. This mix-up has been fixed tonight (Dutch time) at NODC and in the Climate Explorer. A corrected version of the average heat content is attached, the value of apr-jun2009 is now more in line with the values of previous quarters.

Greetings from chilly Holland,

Geert Jan

Advertisements

96 thoughts on “Ocean Heat Content: cooling gone today with new adjustment

  1. My, how convenient.
    There’s been a lot ‘data issues’ as of late.
    They must be slippery little rascals considering how frequently they elude the posted data sets.

  2. Although such a sudden drop is likely the sign of an error someone I find it interesting that no one at the NODC has questioned the similarily odd jump in 2003. Has anyone bothered to ask them why?

  3. “Data Issues”must be a subspecies of Gremlins-always able to cover for bad math or engineering mistakes…
    Or faulty Satellite sensors….
    This is beginning to smell like last Friday’s fish…
    -Not Refrigerated of course…

  4. I really appreciated the post with updated heat content graphs by Bob T, but I was expecting a revision, as the sudden down spike in heat content at the end of the series looked suspicious to me.

  5. Anyone find it suspicious that all corrections to temps. and now OHC seem to move reported anomalies or amounts upward?
    It’s very rare or not at all to see a correction downward, unless it’s more than a few decades back.

  6. Raven (16:25:37) :

    Although such a sudden drop is likely the sign of an error someone I find it interesting that no one at the NODC has questioned the similarily odd jump in 2003. Has anyone bothered to ask them why?

    That jump was warming & therefore must be correct /sarc
    DaveE.

  7. I’m convinced that NONE of this data on Global Warming is valid.
    I don’t believe that we are any warmer today than we’ve been in the past
    I don’t believe that the arctic is anymore ice free today than it has been in the past
    I don’t believe the arctic temperature posted on the side of this page.
    I dang sure don’t believe that the ocean temp is as high as they are reporting, and will continue to go up up and away.
    I don’t believe that what passes for sunspots today was remotely what was condsidered a sun spot 100 years ago ..[I mean .. I see one .. they see 20 .. go figure].
    I don’t believe any of this crap!!!
    I think the time has come that Science is outsmarting itself!!!

  8. It’s weird that all these data issues lately support the hoax. I am sure it’s just random. And nothing to don with the hoaxers bill coming up.
    Yet the weather outside looks white …

  9. Well that’s not good news, coupled with the recent slight uptick in sea levels,
    http://sealevel.colorado.edu/current/sl_noib_ns_global.txt
    I though that the record low solar cycle 24 was finally effecting things…
    Soon we can expect new graphs like those shown here…
    http://www.edf.org/documents/5544_SolarActivity_One-pager.pdf
    shown with the solar activity vs temperature curves completely diverging… the solar cycle curve diving with the temperature curve staying constant (or going back up based on recent satalite data) …. it’s going to get very difficult to justify a solar link.
    Wonder how long the lag is?

  10. I’m still suspicious of that 2003/2004 jump in OHC from when the good Argo data begins. The previous data is questionable to say the least and It looks like a splicing error.
    There is still no warming in the Argo data despite the confident predictions of Hansen and the climate models.
    Good post by Tamino on the subject despite the fact he confidently asserts OHC is increasing and will increase.
    http://tamino.wordpress.com/2007/01/18/ocean-heat-content/

  11. I’m assuming that this is the right data now.
    At least we can assume that they double-checked the numbers and now we can officially extend the period of no 0-700M warming in the ocean from 2003 to 2009.5

  12. I’ve been watching the AGW story for quite a while and it always surprises me how the spotting and correcting of errors seem to only ever go in one direction. If it ‘warms’ well that to be expected right? If it cools … ooo, better investigate and figure out what went wrong.

  13. martin457 (16:41:28) :
    Even though the science is settled, political science sucks.
    Political Science — now there’s an oxymoron if I ever saw one.

  14. We are getting a nor’easter here in PA, projected to drop a foot of snow in some places, to be followed by another snowstorm this weekend. If those adjusters could come and adjust the real weather it would be appreciated. A foot of snow let’s just statistically adjust it to a more reasonable dusting. I mean it never snows in PA in October, it is obviously an error in the data.

  15. Sideshow Bob;
    “it’s going to get very difficult to justify a solar link.”
    It is going to be very difficult to justify ANY link!!!!
    Air temp flat.
    Ocean temp flat.
    Ocean Heat Content flat.
    Arctic recovering.
    Antarctic flat (and really big).
    Greenland recovering.
    CO2 going up steadily.
    Sun tiny signs of awakening.
    Seems like no correlation is holding its own!!!! Of course, with bad data that is to be expected!!

  16. Deanster (16:46:34) :

    I’m convinced that NONE of this data on Global Warming is valid.
    I don’t believe that we are any warmer today than we’ve been in the past
    I don’t believe that the arctic is anymore ice free today than it has been in the past
    I don’t believe the arctic temperature posted on the side of this page.
    I dang sure don’t believe that the ocean temp is as high as they are reporting, and will continue to go up up and away.
    I don’t believe that what passes for sunspots today was remotely what was condsidered a sun spot 100 years ago ..[I mean .. I see one .. they see 20 .. go figure].
    I don’t believe any of this crap!!!
    I think the time has come that Science is outsmarting itself!!!

    Sorry mate but you’re probably wrong. The World has certainly warmed over the last 30 years! Personally, I’m not so sure it’s any warmer than the previous warm spell in the 30s but that’s just my view.
    What a lot of people miss is that the warming is in Winter. The LIA Summers were often as warm as now but the Winters were brutal and longer! Then the Winters warmed, then cooled, then warmed then cooled, then warmed again.
    This however is one of the fatal flaws in the AGW process. We won’t fry because it’s not the Summers that are changing, it’s the Winters.
    DaveE.

  17. Political Science — now there’s an oxymoron if I ever saw one.
    It’s a Marxist term. Scientific socialism and all that {insert your preferred word}.

  18. Up, up and away in my beautiful hot air balloon.
    So, now that it’s still not getting warmer, the oceans are just as warm as ever, and the sun is still as quiet as it has been for 3 years, what now?
    Didn’t these oceans just flip cold? Or, did the data just flip over and play dead?
    Sensor problems, again?
    Oh, I have it. Yes, that’s it.
    It’s CGR Climate Forcing. They warm the waters but cool the land.
    Watch out for big snows.

  19. It’s also getting obvious to me that Unisys is not in total support of the AGW agenda, SST’s on their map are still going down from the recent high.
    http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
    Their data is showing the oceans noticably cooler than what NOAA’s data shows.
    Also note the graph I saw on the last thread on OHC that sometimes it almost looks as if SST’s lag OHC or OHC lags SST’s, it’s not clear which leads which if you look at the whole thing.

  20. I’m trying to understand how such errors are sliding through unnoticed. Surely there is some sort of criteria to prevent this sort of thing. Beginning to think the whole world has gone mad and is trying to create mass hysteria.

  21. I would agree that any data coming from employed gov’t workers is sceptical at best. People are afraid for their jobs and since the powers that be want AGW to be true, the scientists employed have every incentive to falsefy data. It’s their job that’s on the line.
    How many people have said “if you don’t believe in man made global warming you should have your scientific credentials removed”? Many.
    The fact of the matter is 20 billion dollars have been spent on a theory that man’s production of CO2 into the atmosphere is greater than the earths ability to absorb it. What arrogance! 3/4 of the earth is water, and deep at that. To date no correlation has been made to rising CO2 levels and rising temps.
    It doesnh’t take a scientist to know the earth is cooling. Look outside.
    Snow in South Africa, SAudi Arabia, Malibu, Houston?
    The sun has gone quiet and all that warmth we received from the active sun during the 20th century will be a well missed event.
    What bothers me the most of all this AGW talk is no one is preparing the country, or it’s people, for a prolonged period of crushing cold temps and the shortened gowing seasons that are sure to follow. We are wasting time and money on an idea that has been proven false.
    How many people will have to starve to death before people wake up to reality?
    The head of

  22. “Here’s a gif of the correction”
    Heh! I actually first read the line as “here’s the gift of the correction”. 🙂

  23. If they only corrected the last 3 month datum point, then why does the blink comparator gif show a drop in a peak value in early 1980, 1996, 1999, and 2002 among other points? — John M Reynolds

  24. Sideshow Bob (16:52:01) :
    Well that’s not good news, coupled with the recent slight uptick in sea levels…http://sealevel.colorado.edu/current/sl_noib_ns_global.txt

    You gotta do better than that, bro. Sea levels fluctuate over the eons….and over the years.
    And even then…they are not unexplained by natural procesess.
    Regardless…there are some world-class experts in the subject that say the current scare on that one (yeah LOL I remember the 20-foot wall of water in the Gore movie)….there are some that say sea levels are relatively stable.
    http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Mörner+Sea+Level&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  25. Sudbury: Ooooh, sneaky those data adjusters are.
    I notice that too, while the corrections are very small, it gives an indication they may be cooking the data in a similar way and to a smaller extent than GISS, to say something similar to an old blog post by Anthony, “Like a fine wine the data is perfected over many years” (though in this case getting it ready to show the AGW scare is based on ‘fact’)

  26. jmrSudbury:
    It could simply be the way that red / blue colours anti-alias in the image, it is only about 1 pixel different, and a gif.

  27. Rather than write a long analysis whenever there is a drop in any purported measure of some aspect of global temperatures, it would probably be more efficient to send a very brief message to the data keepers to ask them when they are going to find what they believe is an error and adjust it upwards.

  28. The people whose careers and tidy fortunes are made off of claiming to understand what the data means are also the ones who control the data.

  29. DaveE (17:25:38) :. . . What a lot of people miss is that the warming is in Winter. The LIA Summers were often as warm as now but the Winters were brutal and longer! Then the Winters warmed, then cooled, then warmed then cooled, then warmed again.
    This however is one of the fatal flaws in the AGW process. We won’t fry because it’s not the Summers that are changing, it’s the Winters.

    We had a few mild winters here in eastern Massachusetts earlier in this decade; scarcely any snow at all. People said it was ‘global warming’. Then in ’07 I finally broke down and bought a snowblower, because the unexpectedly heavy December snow was getting to my back. During the last interminable winter I began wishing I had bought a bigger one. This winter. . . I suspect I’ll need a tractor. Our pretty October has just vanished into 40º days, with cold rain and maybe a little snow promised for tomorrow.
    It was clearly warmer for a few years in the summer, too. But I haven’t heard a mockingbird for a couple of summers now. Still, that’s all anecdotal. They say, “If you don’t like the weather in New England, just wait a day.” Folks who give up on the climate move to Florida. I guess it becomes ‘climate’ when you get older.
    These ‘global’ temperatures, whether atmospheric (not ‘land’) or sea, seem like will-o’-the-wisps: ever elusive, perhaps imaginary; lots of crappy data. Maybe the only way to reconstruct climate history is to see what grew where and when: the flora and fauna are a pretty good indication of the local climate, and stratigraphy will tell you how it changed. Not much grew here 20,000 years ago, or over much of the hemisphere, that’s for sure. What caused the ice to melt? I don’t reckon it was CO2.
    The sad thing is that all these histrionics about ‘climate’ would really be much ado about nothin’, except that the self-aggrandizing politicians have seized upon ‘climate change’ as an excuse to raise taxes and pretend that they are saving us from ourselves. The danger is, not knowing the first thing about the nature and history of the Earth, they may actually believe it. Such folly will cost us dearly. Already it is opening the doors for the real aggrandizers, the tyrants who will seize any opportunity and use any excuse to lord it over the rest of us.
    H. L. Mencken: “The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it.”
    /Mr Lynn

  30. The planet has been cooling dramatically for 2 years now. Here’s where I got my first heads up to keep an eye on things.
    “A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year’s time. For all four sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down. ”
    Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling
    http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Widescale+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm

  31. Hi,
    Anthony.. didn’t SM do a buckets metal verses canvas on this subject and then also ship inlet data to buckets? I think this is a cornucopia of data they use. so you can basically do what ever you want to the data.

  32. Sideshow Bob: “the solar cycle curve diving with the temperature curve staying constant (or going back up based on recent satalite data) …. it’s going to get very difficult to justify a solar link.”
    Vell, virst you must subtracta the ozean zycles, zen the zun will emerge, vum behind de cloudsa…
    No single variable will correlate well over short time scales…why did the sun ramp up drastically though 1960, yet the temperature flatlined in 1945? Hmmm?

  33. DaveE …
    You say the Globe has warmed .. PROVE IT!
    You can’t use the Thermometer data … it’s contaminated with land use issues and UHI effects.
    You can’t use Satellite .. though, it’s likely more accurate than thermometers, it’s little more than a bunch of calculations on satellite data that measure slices of the troposphere.
    Granted, I’m being a tad cantancorous [sp .. and no I’m not going to go look up the correct spelling of that word] … but really. Sure, I know the PDO flipped, at least that’s what they say it did. They Say we had a bunch of El Ninos in a row … but how in the hell am I supposed to confirm that?? Am I just supposed to “trust” the data?? OK .. the arctic ice has melted a bit …. or has it??? .. maybe it’s just another satellite glitch.
    I know this …. I remember growing up in Dallas Texas, in the 60s and 70s, and I remember summers .. scorching summers. And we may have gotten a snow storm 1 or 2 times a years. Guess What …. today … the summers are scorchers still …and the place still gets a few ice events a year.
    I guess there is some place on earth that has experienced severe global warming .. and as such, it is what is driving all those “measurements” up so we have global warming. But for the life of me .. I think the majority of earth is just status quo! … the same ol same ol.
    Like I said .. I think people are seeing pink elephants .. because the WANT to see pink elephants.

  34. Blueridge (17:47:42) :
    It doesn’t take a scientist to know the earth is cooling. Look outside.
    Snow in South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Malibu, Houston ?

    I’m looking outside, but I don’t see any snow in Houston.

  35. Australia has just had another 40+ cm of snow in the high country 2 weeks after the close of the official ski season.
    The season started 6 weeks early because of a massive 70cm dump in May. 2009 was one of our best ski seasons and all the resorts presently have a snowpack as good as it has been at the peak of the season.
    Unfortunately all the resorts closed 2 weeks ago so only us hardy backcountry skiiers can enjoy it! Ho Ho Ho!
    So far this month most of Australia has had temperature anomolies up to 4 degrees celcius below average. If this continues we will have a significantly cooler October compared to the average.
    Considering the news from Europe and NA it sounds like it will be a cool month globally.

  36. OHC 0-700m would seem to indicate that NODC is referring to ARGO buoy data. My understanding was that this had already been adjusted. Dr.Willis’ explanation did seem reasonable at the time. However the warm bias in climate data adjustments when viewed together seems statistically improbable.
    And some further adjustments….
    I can see another source of data that will soon need to be adjusted, which would be the Internet. Much of the information on the newer BLOG climate system shows a distinct cooling bias when compared to traditional and reliable MSM climate reporting systems. Initial adjustments attempted using the Fenton / Soros methodology may have been inadequate as there appears to be a continuing divergence problem between MSM and BLOG climate data. More wide spread use of the Connolly / Petersen filtering and adjustment system could be a possible solution. This method would necessitate a significant and costly expansion of government bureaucracy, however revenue from carbon taxation should offset this.

  37. I read somewhere that when the climate scientists reviewed the Argo SST and compared it to what they had before they found the Argo temperatures lower than expected, so what did they do? They adjusted the Argo temperatures lower because they couldn’t believe the SST could be as low as Argo reported, never mind that Argo uses the most sophisticated sensors ever to measure SST.
    Global Warming — is there nothing it can’t do?

  38. Calgary Olympic Park is opening for the ski season this Saturday, that’s their earliest start in at least 50 years. Last year they didn’t open until December.

  39. Blueridge said (17:47:42) :
    “It doesn’t take a scientist to know the earth is cooling. Look outside.
    Snow in South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Malibu, Houston ?”

    Mike McMillan said (20:04:15): “I’m looking outside, but I don’t see any snow in Houston.”
    Ummm….Blueridge is referring to crazy, anomalous snowfalls within the past couple o’ years.
    Nothing wrong with that. Pure observation. Houston and New Orleans….last year…November.
    Add them up with late spring Victoria snowfalls in Australia the other day, the freak storms in Argentina back in July…..the record early snowcap in the Alps this October….measured in METERS…. the record early snows in Europe from the same…and the all-time record snow anomalies in the USA as well…
    Seems like some serious cooling going on.
    Waiting for an intelligent refute. Ho hum. Falling asleep…because there will not be one.
    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  40. Deanster, I guess if you can’t trust any of the man made measurement devices you could always look and see what dates birds started migrating. Certainly there must be an answer there for you.

  41. This past May the Southern Hemisphere had record cold weather, I wonder if November will produce record cold weather in the Northern hemisphere.

  42. Add to that list Canadian Geese that decided to summer in No. Calif. instead of flying north. Add the birds flocking in the No. Sacramento Valley in the early part of September.
    The animals are great predictors. They know.

  43. Blueridge (21:36:29) :
    That has been the pattern, leapfrog winters, each successive one doing a “top this” act.

  44. Adam from Kansas (17:44:45) :
    It’s also getting obvious to me that Unisys is not in total support of the AGW agenda, SST’s on their map are still going down from the recent high.
    http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
    Their data is showing the oceans noticably cooler than what NOAA’s data shows.
    Also note the graph I saw on the last thread on OHC that sometimes it almost looks as if SST’s lag OHC or OHC lags SST’s, it’s not clear which leads which if you look at the whole thing.
    ——————————-
    Neither has to lead if they are influenced from the outside and are merely the effect to a cause. Especially if they are negatively correlated.

  45. DaveE (17:25:38) :
    “What a lot of people miss is that the warming is in Winter. The LIA Summers were often as warm as now but the Winters were brutal and longer! Then the Winters warmed, then cooled, then warmed then cooled, then warmed again.”
    “This however is one of the fatal flaws in the AGW process. We won’t fry because it’s not the Summers that are changing, it’s the Winters.”
    Yes indeed. If the so-called global warming is due to the increase in CO2, why are only the winters warmer, but not the summers?

  46. What does the ocean heat content mean? Is the correction a good or bad thing?
    99% of the heat in the Earth’s climate is in the oceans due to the much greater heat capacity of water versus air. Therefore the only valid measure of whether Earth’s climate is warming or cooling is the heat content of the oceans.
    Prior to 2003/4 the OHC data is dubious and IMO pretty much worthless (buckets thrown over the side of ships and a thermometer thrown into the bucket when it is hauled on deck). Post 2003/4 is data from the Argo project set up specifically to measure OHC. The Argo data shows no warming.
    The significance of the correction is that the OHC data no longer presages a fall in atmospheric temperatures (ocean temperatures drive atmospheric temperatures). Rather it indicates atmospheric temperatures will neither warm or cool significantly over the next couple of years.
    regards

  47. Blueridge
    The climate reporting in Australia is so pro AGW that presenters don’t bother asking alarmists for proof. It seems getting the truth out there is only possible through these blogs which most people don’t read. True anyone in Govt employ are not going to go against the grain although the moment they retire they start telling the truth. Too late.
    I suspect a far more effective method of grabbing the common folk by the scruff and indirectly deflecting our great leaders from their destructive anti CO2 legislation is to go for the hip pocket. I’m sure that when people know the real cost of ETS etc they may be less supportive of the URGENT need to reverse GW. They might even start to ask questions. Now that could be interesting especially when they eventually find that they have been hoodwinked.

  48. This graph is new to me so I do not know the history of the sudden jump in 2003 however it looks like they made an adjusment at this time that they forgot to do when they issued the last set of data. If I have done my sums right the 0.2GJ /m2 increase in 2003 is equivalent to an extra 7 watts per m2 every second of the day. I don’t buy that as something that happened in one year and then stayed. I can see that this sort of change can happen as an oscillation (with a balancing loss in deep sea energy) but not as a permanent shift. This implies an implausibly sudden and unique net energy gain by the climate system.This looks fishy to me. Incidentally if such an energy gain was real it would make a nonsense of the AGW arguments since we know that the physics of the greenhouse effect could not support such a huge forcing. We would therefore have to look for another natural cause and accept that the greenhouse effect is tiny in comparison .

  49. Michael Bishop:
    Not so cold up here mate- in fact bloody hot! Cool mornings, but hot days (because South winds are dry). People forget Australia has (at least) 3 climates. Same everywhere- climate is REGIONAL not global.

  50. I’m thinking it’s the other way about. Maybe the incorrect preliminary data was put out as a teaser to get the ‘denialosphere’ buzzing, then correction comes and the warmista can take pot shots at us for being unscientific and jumping the gun.
    The official bodies which publish the data make too many of these ‘mistakes’. Sea ice satllits sensor data, GISS repeating previous month’s values, OHC…

  51. In any case, I notice from Bob’s blink comparison that OHC is down, just not by much. A fall is still a fall though.

  52. David (23:11:51)
    I’m guessing you mean Bill Maher, but being in Australia I don’t know his work. I could check the wikipedia entry but…
    Lawrie Ayres (00:52:11)
    I feel the blogs are having a significant effect. While the Australian MSM maybe choosing advocacy journalese over journalism, readers comments in response to newspaper and online stories are showing a different picture. I am constantly amazed and encouraged by how scientifically literate and informed the increasing number of skeptical commentators are. Skeptics in Australia seem to increasing at an unprecedented rate, it could be worse than the MSM thought.

  53. Blueridge (17:47:42) : How many people will have to starve to death before people wake up to reality?
    I’d put it at about 100,000,000.
    We regularly have tens of thousands die each year and don’t notice. At the 100,000 to 1,000,000 level you get global normal diseases and we don’t notice. In the 10,000,000 to 100,000,000 range we get pandemics and world wars. Then people notice and start to change their thinking.
    At the 1,000,000,000 range we have truly horrid pandemics and catastrophic global events. Folks won’t notice then either, as they will either be dead or trying really hard not to be dead and will not be thinking of others…

  54. Deanster (19:50:48) :
    DaveE …
    You say the Globe has warmed .. PROVE IT!
    You can’t use the Thermometer data … it’s contaminated with land use issues and UHI effects.

    And GIStemp fabricates it into a broken fantasy. But if you select only the most stable thermometer records, there is no warming. It is only in the short lived thermometers that the winters “warm”. That those thermometers were added at airports in the topics is just a coincidence, I’m sure /sarcoff>
    You can’t use Satellite .. though, it’s likely more accurate than thermometers, it’s little more than a bunch of calculations on satellite data that measure slices of the troposphere.
    I’ve been looking into this. Not enough yet for a posting, but it looks to me like the satellites all use radar to measure various things (ice, temperature, clouds, rain, …). Now maybe I’m being a bit paranoid here, but it just smells like there is plenty of opportunity for a radar pulse to be reflected off, oh, nano-sized ice or water particles from cosmic rays and be interpreted as ‘heat’ or something else instead. Like I said, I need to finish the work on this, but it just looks rife with opportunities to screw up badly. Especially as particle sizes become small.
    Granted, I’m being a tad cantancorous [sp .. and no I’m not going to go look up the correct spelling of that word] …
    When in doubt, just paste a word into Google and click search. Their spell checker will give you the right spelling and with hardly any effort at all:
    cantankerous
    I keep a Google search page open most of the time just as a very easy spell checker 😉
    I guess there is some place on earth that has experienced severe global warming ..
    None that I can find.
    and as such, it is what is driving all those “measurements” up so we have global warming.
    The measurements are being driven up by putting more thermometers at warm airports and fewer of them in Siberian snow fields. Really.
    But for the life of me .. I think the majority of earth is just status quo! … the same ol same ol.
    You got it. With a 60 year ripple up and down. And since most folks are younger than 60, they think “this time is different and special”. It isn’t.

  55. savethesharks (18:43:12) ,
    re: Morner…gotta problem with him. He may be dead right but thanks to his background in “dowsing” he’s not credible.
    If you’re making a case for no real sealevel rise, and you use him as a reference, someone is going to laugh you out of the debate. See randi.org for the challenge.
    Hokum just doesn’t have a place in science.
    Maybe Daly’s work is better, though not peer reviewed.

  56. E.M.Smith (03:46:00):,
    “You got it. With a 60 year ripple up and down. And since most folks are younger than 60, they think “this time is different and special”. It isn’t.”
    I think many of the over 60 crowd went through this same problem in the 60s and 70s. The big difference was the science was medical research. One scare story after another was propagated. In addition, you saw predictions of cures for major diseases in 5-10 years. We now know it was all wrong, but at the time most folks believed it.
    I see the AGW scare as another infact science repeating history.

  57. Adam from Kansas: You wrote, “It’s also getting obvious to me that Unisys is not in total support of the AGW agenda, SST’s on their map are still going down from the recent high.”
    I believe what we recently saw was an unusual early warming (venting) in the NINO areas on top of the seasonal signal. Some of the decrease you’re seeing now is a result the normal seasonal component in the Northern Hemisphere anomaly data. It peaks during July and August each year.
    Regards

  58. tallbloke: You wrote, “I’m thinking it’s the other way about. Maybe the incorrect preliminary data was put out as a teaser to get the ‘denialosphere’ buzzing, then correction comes and the warmista can take pot shots at us for being unscientific and jumping the gun.”
    But that really show shoddy workmanship on their part. Also, it backfires because I get to repost the comparison of the GISS prediction to the observed data.
    http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/10/nodc-corrections-to-ocean-heat-content.html
    And that graph doesn’t need a closing comment.
    http://i37.tinypic.com/i6xtnl.png
    And when things settle down, I’ve got another planned post about the poor GISS prediction. I’ll try to keep it visible.
    Regards

  59. Does anybody have a realistic estimate of the margin of error for any of these measurements?
    Is the process for gathering, reporting, recording the data well documented? Has it been audited?
    Why is it we have more regulations for how business must record and report their data than we seem to have for most scientific and government entities?

  60. jmrSudbury: You wrote, “If they only corrected the last 3 month datum point, then why does the blink comparator gif show a drop in a peak value in early 1980, 1996, 1999, and 2002 among other points?”
    There were a few very small earlier changes in some of the basin subsets. It’s an “evolving” dataset, just like GISTEMP and CruTEMP. If you want, you can compare the “before and after” graphs. I’ve just posted the corrections. I’m not going to provide comparisons of each basin, sorry.
    Here’s the BEFORE post:
    http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/10/update-of-nodc-levitus-et-al-2009-ohc.html
    And here’s the AFTER post:
    http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/10/nodc-corrections-to-ocean-heat-content_16.html

  61. 0-700m is not the best set of data to get a sense of short term fluctuations as there are oceanographic arguments in the literature that suggest the first 200m is the key depth where the global warming signal is locked in – with little exchange at depths greater than this (am I right?) – if you take the data down to 700m you are going to get a signal from deeper ocean mixing and dilute the ‘warming’ or ‘cooling’ signal from the top 200m – does anyone know if the top 200m data is available separately?

  62. I’m not sure what pomulgated this change. By the wording it sounds as if they used a value from a different time period in the first result. But some posters seem to be implying that the data has been “adjusted”. That is a very different thing.
    Anyone got any idea what exactly is going on?

  63. Peter Taylor (06:03:33) :
    0-700m is not the best set of data to get a sense of short term fluctuations as there are oceanographic arguments in the literature that suggest the first 200m is the key depth where the global warming signal is locked in

    Peter, I ran some calcs which show that the average temperature rise of the top 700m is consistent with the increase in SST 1993-2003. However, the figure I arrived at for the total excess energy retained in the ocean for the period, which I calculated from the satellite altimetry and the estimated steric contribution, is in excess of the Levitus et al figure. It is my belief that they have currently underestimated the energy content to downplay solar contribution and come up with a figure close to the 1.7W/m^2 forcing for co2. Levitus et al 2000 is a lot nearer the mark. You have my email address if you want more details.

  64. Moving from sea to land, snow’s hit someof Europe’s resorts early (Again!)
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/snowandski/6338140/Snow-arrives-in-Europes-Alpine-resorts.html
    The paper copy of today’s The Daily Telegraph, notes
    “Unseasonably early snow storms have blanketed much of central Europe..”
    “Austria’s Alps have had as much as 35 inches of snow in the past two days, prompting several ski resorts to open their slopes for the earliest season start on record>

  65. Well have you noticed that we “arm chair” scientists who are merely applying our fundamental science skills to a problem area where the same physical laws still apply; are constasntly berated; or is that derated, by those who have been formally trained in the ancient religious ritual called “Climatology”.
    We are not qualified to comment, since we have been baptised with the dogma.
    So how come it is these same formally trained experts who are constantly screwing up, and issuing reports at taxpayer’s expense, containing false data.
    It seems that about half of the issues that seem to come up on Anthony’s blog here are related to official government sanctioned screwups.
    Any minimum wage earner can read a thermometer; well you don’t even have to read a thermometer anymore; they can read themselves, and directly report the correct temperature; and they can be manufactured by the gazillion for a few pennies.
    But then of course comes the AlGorythm. Those temperatures have to be “treated”; it’s about like the tax code. Workers keep adding on layer after layer of bandaids to get the data to “perform” tot their liking.
    Take the Hubble Space telescope for example; containing one of the most accuately manufactured optical elements; if not the most, ever built. Except it was built with great exactitude to the wrong shape; and the company that built it knows who they are.
    Subsequent missions to Hubble have layered on band-aids to try to correct for that snafu; and with considerable success. The instrument gives spectacular results.
    But! Like the Mona Lisa in the Louvre; the Hubble Telescope Primary mirror has a twin. Except this one was built by the Eastman Kodak Company; except they had the temerity to build it to the correct shape instead of the wrong shape. So Hubble’s twin languishes somewhere, gathering dust while a usurper functions in a half pi shadow of the original intent. Yes modern instruments have been added to increase the capability; but that original piece of optical junk should have been replaced by the twin years ago. Maybe the ersatz mirror could be used for a bird bath; perhaps outside the corporate headquarters of the company that made it.
    And let’s not forget the space craft that crashed on Mars, because somebody who is an accredited expert in his field (peer reviewed no doubt), used his wife’s Tailer’s tape to measure some critical component.
    I once heard of some pieces of an alien space craft that were handed down from father to son; made out of 99.99% pure Aluminium, in the form of squares and circles. A PhD “Scientist” reported that the pieces were “Exactly” 6 x 6 x 1 mm and the round ones were 6 mm diameter (exactly). Well I told the reporter who was running with this story, that no scientist worth his salt would say the pieces were exactly 6 x 6 x 1 mm, without giving some error tolerance; and why would space aliens be using our completely arbitrary metric system of units. The mystery aluminum was also much “stronger” than normal, since you couldn’t bend the pieces with your fingers, and Alcoa Scientists said you should be able to if they were 6 x 6 x 1 mm. So clearly it wasn’t terrestrial aluminium, even though mass spec could find almost not impurities in the material.
    So the reporter (lady) checked back with the PhD with my objections; and he finally admitted that he had “measured” the pieces with his ELECTRON MICROSCOPE ! So his yard stick was dependent on the gain of amplifiers and such like. He finally took my suggestion and tried an ordinary micrometer good to one hundredth of a mm; and reported the joyous revelation that the mystery spacecraft pieces were now EXACTLY 6.35 x 6.35 x 1.59 mm.
    Well to within the 1/100 mm precision of the micrometer. The Reporter and the “Scientist” were now overjoyed to have the correct dimensions, and see they no longer intimately linked to our arbitrary metric system; proving they really were from outer space.
    Well no not really I pointed out to them. Your space junk parts are now (almost exactly) 1/4 x 1/4 x 1/16 inches; and what’s more instead of having a 6 : 1 length to thickness ratio; they were now only 4 : 1 and now much stiffer than if they had been six to one ratio. So now all of a sudden the anomalous aluminium propertioes are removed, and the materials is now just ordinary 0.062 inch 1100 alloy Aluminum sheet; that you can buy in any harware store.
    And the pieces themselves were most likely made in America; last bastion of the rod/stone/fortnight system; and probably simply squares and round holes puched out of a sheet to make a grill for the back of a refrigerator or something; the round holes being for some mounting bolts.
    But this reporter and her “scientist” had a large (worldwide) audience convinced she was holding some alien space craft parts. Really ! who in their right mind building an interstellar spacecraft is going to make any part of that machine out of 1100 alloy aluminum; a material of such poor mechanical strength properties, that you wouldn’t allow a molecule of it to contaminate your spacecraft, where weight is a major issue.
    Well I could write a whole encyclopedia of such snafus by accredited scientists. I won’t embarrass the chap by naming him; he actually does have a good reputation in his past career; and he got roped into a pig in a poke exercise.
    So to all of those readers and posters here; who get upset when these constant revelations of dropping the ball turn up; keep on trusting your instincts, and don’t take everthing for granted that is presented to you with the air of authority.
    And to the Tisdales, and Macintyres who keep their ears to the rail to hear what’s coming down the track; we spectators appreciate your efforts to keep them honest. (well this one does anyway)

  66. “””” We are not qualified to comment, since we have been baptised with the dogma. “””
    >>> not <<<

  67. Vincent: You asked, “Anyone got any idea what exactly is going on?”
    They posted the wrong data. According to Geert Jan at KNMI, it was very incomplete. And there are some minor updates taking place in the older data. Nothing earthshattering. The big item was that they posted the wrong April to June 2009 data.

  68. Bob Tisdale (09:27:15) :
    I’m not looking for their estimate of their errors, but an independent review. Please see my entire post for details.
    Thank you

  69. John Galt: You wrote, “I’m not looking for their estimate of their errors, but an independent review.”
    Never heard of one. Never heard of an independent audit of other climate databases such as ERSST.v2 or ERSST.v3b SST data.

  70. Oh yeah… and don’t forget that the NOAA recently began adjusting all satellite temperature measurements for an “innate cold bias.” They are now relying on land based observations… from 50 year old weather stations that sit in/near 15 year old parking lots… and statistics (figures lie and liars figure) to correct state of the art space based measurements of OCEAN TEMPERATURES.
    The mind boggles

  71. Darn: You wrote, “Oh yeah… and don’t forget that the NOAA recently began adjusting all satellite temperature measurements for an ‘innate cold bias.'”
    A NOAA link for that, please. Thanks.

  72. Once again we see that the data is not credible. When unusual readings (colder that expected) keep getting purged from the data and missing data is filled in (made up) by computer programs we cannot claim to know anything very well. this means that all of the aggregate constructions need to be dumped as scientifically invalid and go back to looking at local temperatures to see what they tell us about the changes that are impacting people in various areas.
    But when we do that we find that people in urban areas are experiencing warmer temperatures, particularly in winter and at night. We see plants inside the city limits bloom several days or weeks than those outside of the suburbs. We see open water in inner city areas allow for some birds to avoid flying south for the winter. Over most of North America we see that temperatures have warmed up since the PDO flipped into a warm phase in the late 1970s but that they are not as warm as the 1930s. We see Alaska experiencing a stepwise increase in temperature in the late 1970s after being brutally cold in the previous three decades. And if we look to the record temperatures we do not see all that many highs in the most recent decade but quite a few in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s.
    What we do not see is catastrophic warming, dangers to polar bear populations (which have increased), major problems with global ice cover, etc. The fact that the AGW hype is a scam perpetuated by people who make their living off of it should be obvious to most people by now. I suspect that eventually even the politicians will get it.

  73. I am constantly amazed and encouraged by how scientifically literate and informed the increasing number of skeptical commentators are. Skeptics in Australia seem to increasing at an unprecedented rate, it could be worse than the MSM thought.

    I think that this is one of the most important features of the blogosphere that the MSM is missing. If you stop and think for a moment to compare the resources of the two groups it is a no contest situation in favor of the bloggers.
    A major media news room might have 2 -3 people that focus on a given issue, they have at their disposal a small research staff who in turn have a Rolodex of “expert” sources that they contact on the topic numbering in the 1- 10 range.
    A highly visible blog page might have 10,000 – 1,000,000 readers. By simple force of numbers, a fraction of those readers will be highly experienced in dozens or hundreds of specialties that have a bearing on the question at hand.
    Regular contributors here on wattsupwiththat see it on a daily basis, where some guy who spent 25 years working in some obscure specialty, chimes in on a topic and points out a reference, or a historical fact that the MSM would need to invest a thousand man hours of research to uncover. Obviously if they had no clue the fact existed, they would have no incentive to look for it, simply due to the deadline imperatives of their business. If they cannot turn up an important fact or resource in a few hours of searching, the editor will probably direct them to drop that line of investigation and look elsewhere for support of their story.
    On the other hand a blog by its very nature draws a crowd of folks who by their very nature are interested in the topics discussed, and many of them devote enormous amounts of time digging through obscure papers, and following faint trails of information.
    The modern blog is more and more resembling the “borg collective” model where all knowledge is known by someone some where, and the simple geometric growth of contacts and experience of a blog followed by thousands of interested observers means there is a very high likelihood that someone on this blog knows on a first hand basis, almost everyone in the computer literate world.
    Sort of the six degrees of separation game where you are probably only a few personal associations away from anyone in the world.
    It is simply a very straight forward application of geometrical growth. If everyone on this blog knows a hundred people, than the readership of this blog has a direct connection to :
    (blog readership x 100 – duplicates) on only the first layer associations
    Multiply that by one or two layers and you probably have a connection to every college educated person in the world.
    Larry

  74. ” MattN (16:32:50) :
    Still not warming….

    Yeah… there is definitely not an upward trend in that graph….
    ..sigh..

Comments are closed.