Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
According to an article in the Hindustan Times by someone for whom English is a second language, I find:
Senior scientists at the Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology (WITG) has rejected the Global Warming Theory and told that the Himalayas are quite safer zone on earth, where Global Warming has no role in controlling the conditions.
In an exclusive chat with HT, Director WIHG Dr AK Dubey has said that the conditions of Himalayas are controlled by the winter snowfall rather than external factors like much hyped Global Warming. He told that for a concrete result, at least 30 years of continuous research with steady outcome is needed to confirm the actual impact.
“According to a data for over 140 years available with a British weather observatory situated in Mukteswar (2311m) in Almora has actually revealed that temperature in that region witnessed a dip of .4 degrees,” he said.
So, as is my wont, I figured I’d go take a look. To distinguish urban from rural sites, GISS uses a “brightness index” which shows how much light comes from around the site as seen from a satellite. GISS lists Mukteshwar Ku as having a brightness index of zero, so they treat it as a rural station. Here’s the location per the GISS data, at 29.47°N, 79.65°E. It definitely appears to be a rural site.
Figure 1. Aerial View of the Mukteshwar Ku Surface Station locality.
Having seen the problems that occurred in Matanuska due to the application of a computer algorithm without quality control and checking, I next went to look at the record. Here is the GISS record for Mukteshwar Ku, before it has been subjected to the “homogeneity adjustment”:
Figure 2. GISS record of the temperature at Mukteshwar Ku before homogeneity adjustment
There’s a couple of oddities here. First, Dr. Dubey said that there were 140 years of temperature records from the station, but the GISS data covers 1897 to the present, or 113 years including the missing years.
In addition, it is clear that there has been some kind of serious change in the station. It is missing data from about 1993 to 1998, and when it starts up again the temperatures are much warmer than when it left off. (I can’t say exactly what years are missing, because curiously, the GISS server comes up with a “404 Not Found” when I ask it for the actual data.)
Seeing such an obvious problem with the data, I looked at the graph showing the temperature after homogenization to see how they had dealt with the problem … foolish me. I forgot that it was a rural station (brightness = 0), so it wasn’t adjusted at all. Sad to say, that’s the data that they used.
I’m used to not finding the data where I expect it to be, so to continue my analysis I just digitized the GISS graph so I could look at the effect of their leaving the data uncorrected. The gap was as I estimated, 1993-1998. Here’s that result:
Figure 3. Final GISS record of the temperature at Mukteshwar Ku. Note the difference in the trends when the recent data is included. Photo is of Nanda Devi Peak from Mukteshwar Ku.
As I said in my article about Matanuska cited above, the problem is that you can’t just devise a method for computer adjusting temperature data, apply it to all of the world’s stations, and call the job done. You need to look at and consider each and every station, as they are as individual as human beings. This is called “quality control”, and it is sadly lacking in all three of the major global temperature records (GISS, CRU, and GHCN).
Does this invalidate the GISS global temperature record? No. However, it does mean that they are not doing their job. They haven’t removed an obvious inconsistency in this case. How common is this type of problem? I don’t know.
But until they start over and do it right, it does mean that, like the baseball records of players who are known to have used steroids, the GISS global temperature has to be entered in the record books “with an asterisk” to indicate that lingering questions still remain.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The material about these 1200 stations is needing careful examination . If I were a young man I would probably like others are doing right now with the us figures spend the time and the money to verify the published figures . Being over 60 years of age and still very active in our society the most I am able to do right now is send a donation to anyone willing to do this painstaking work digging into the details of all published information . This problem of cherry-picking digits is pretty common in our society , the pharmaceutical and airline business is full of it . Over 40 years ago i was asked to check the projected figures for the airline – industry where the singsong was that we needed to double the available airports in order to cope with future traffic – requirements . After studying the figures the coming of the b747 lead to a lower amount of aircraft-movements , which is quite logical and there would be no need for extra airports for the first 25 years , so reality sank in . When is reality given the chance to sink in into matters related to our climate ?
Slight OT, but has anybody seen anything by old school mountaineers on the state of the Himalayas present and (recent) past?
Rather OT but geographically connected in part. Apologies if already noted, but something is afoot at the BBC with its new science programme about the solar system, Part 1 of 5, “the powerhouse of the sun”! Ex-rocker Prof Brian Cox was splendid talking about the power of the sun & how it affects our planet in many ways, much we don’t understand, & how its magnetic field extends way past the solar system! However, he highlighted links to solar cycles with river flows in South America, & the monsoons in Asia, in response to sunspot activity, with more water flowing in both areas with higher activity, but an apparent opposite correlation in the Sahara. NOW I did pop out to the kitchen both on Sunday evening & last night during its repeat showing, so I cannot confirm that no mention of AGW was made, but I didn’t notice it elsewhere! The honesty was refreshing. Will watch again on BBC iplayer to see what I missed! Hope you guys get it in the colonies soon.
OT.
Just to say that right now it is snowing in my hometown, in Spain.
Willis et al:
I got a response from the Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology. The scientist said that after looking at GISS he was
“surprised to note that 1990s Mukteshwar temp data is missing. The raw data, however, is available with Indian Meteorology Department Pune. For more details you can visit the website http://www.imdpune.gov.in .”
Dr. Dubey was copied on the correspondence. Unfortunately that site is pretty confusing and I have yet to find where the data is. I have followed up and asked for a more specific link. You or others may want to check the Indian Meteorology Department site. I will keep looking.
Anthony Watts (20:26:16) :
I found details on it, the full place name is:
Mukteshwar Kumaon
See Sinan Unur’s page on it, same data gap.
http://www.unur.com/climate/ghcn-v2/207/42147.html
Anthony, is it my imagination or is the Step Up in that Graph after the data loss a lot less than the GISS one?
“Willis Eschenbach (02:26:06) :
You are correct, he and others have gotten 13 million pounds. Dividing each grant by the number of people for that grant, I calculate that for him personally its about six million bucks.”
Willis, I suspect he is salaried. So making statements like that is inflammatory for no purpose whatsoever.
Re: TomVonk (Mar 10 00:57),
Especially as we already do .
Tom, I didn’t realise that you are a US taxpayer? Nor, of course am I. But this is the answer to the billions of dollars issue. Yes, of course it’s worth spending money to do this to every reasonable person’s satisfaction. Write your congressman!
No use complaining about how Phil or Gavin aren’t doing it. It’s not their job, however worthless you think their job may be. Make sure it is somebody’s job, and that they are funded adequately to do it.
I do understand about UHI, but surely it makes a difference if the temp. sensor in a truly rural location is sited next to a heat source. As the Surface Station project shows, each and every station has to be looked at individually, as well as sensor calibration, for any meaningful data.
Some posts on other blogs suggest that ‘anomalies’ deal with this problem if there are large amounts of data. But if a majority of sensors are biased to start with and the developmental history and siting is unknown, I don’t see how this can be so.
Another issue with this temperature data, is that being rural it is probably used to homogenize local urban temperatures. If it has a false positive slope it is going to result in false (more positive) slopes for a lot of other climate stations in the region that are more urban.
There are so many errors,
and so much sloppy data collection,
and so many inappropriate adjustments,
and so much cherry picking,
and so much misuse of statistics,
and so much hidden computer code,
and so much lying,
and so much political maneuvering,
how could anybody continue to believe anything about global warming claims?
“Wren (20:46:16) :
If I leave out 1936 through 1941, the 1942 temperature is much warmer than when I left off (1935). So what?”
The new temps exhibit this characteristic… the new lows are equivilent to the older highs, and the new highs are unprecedented. Something happened to the sensor, and they didn’t correct the temperature to be inline with the older set.
Background:
According to the latest Indian Census (2009) Mukteshwar has 358 households and a populatyion of 1,168 http://censusindia.gov.in/Population_Finder/View_Village_Population.aspx?pcaid=862845&category=VILLAGE
This seems odd given the apparent popularity of the village.
Tom, I didn’t realise that you are a US taxpayer?
No I am not . But who was talking about US ? Unfortunately this waste of money being global , my tax money is also funding it wherever I am . And be sure that I also act to limit climate “science” financing to a reasonable minimum at my place too .
No use complaining about how Phil or Gavin aren’t doing it. It’s not their job, however worthless you think their job may be. Make sure it is somebody’s job, and that they are funded adequately to do it.
It’s not a complaint , it’s a suggestion . A necessary work must be done while useless work is done ? A logical solution is to trash the useless and transfer to necessary . Schmidt , IPCC workshops in exotic places , redundant model teams and RC are obvious choices but not the only ones .
And it has a use because if nobody suggests stopping useless things , they will go on as such is human nature .
I find alot of name calling on this post-plus-comments. I have identified some of the culprits and have added some evidence of my own.
3/9/10
NickB. (18:45:40) : “Willis the Merciless”
NickB.(19:39:12): “Darth Eschenbach”
WE (20:53:33): “Anthony, You Are the Man”
WE on the Dynamic Duo: (3/10-2:14:30): “Just the Facts, Ma’am”
Bernie (19:31:22): Keeper of the Holy Grail of Honesty
Bryan (19:52:20): The Stutter Studier
rbateman (20:25:2): The Bombadier Blaster
D.King (20:44:7): It’s the Rats Who are Sinking the Ship!
Ron: (20:29:25): The Pachuri Puncher
Pamela Gray (21:11:58): Straightest Shooter
Bill Tuttle (21:20:27): Sights on Shiva the Destroyer
3/10/10
Tom Vonk (00:57:29): Quality Control Management — It’s Easy, You Dopes!
David (02:02:26): Modeler of Models
climategatesstuff (03:55:04): What’s in a salary?
Great stuff. Great fun. Great fraud. Time to Lock and Load. Time for Trials.
NickB. (19:13:25) :
“Ruhroh,
Climate scientologists also don’t ascribe to old outdated notions of reproducability and falsification – I assume that’s ok with you too?
Question, if data quality like this was acceptable for drug development would you still trust it?”
Or if this was how you accountant treated your business records would the IRS (or equivalent) slap you with fines and/or jail?
I am afraid that as a QC lab manager in a FDA regulated company i DID see this type of stuff going on. That is one of the reasons I am a skeptic.
Wally,
Depends on which side of the tax bill your on.
Willis:
This is not a great argument because GISS and UAH don’t measure the same physical quantity. GISTEMP measures in the ABL and UAH measures above it. This isn’t a talking point, it’s physics.
All data sets show trends from 1.3°C/century to 1.6°C/century 1980-current, so worst case, that just brackets the measurement error.
As to comparing a 30-year trend from one physical measure to the 100-year trend from another, too much wine?
oops
to
r.
I have explored the Indian Meteorological Site and it looks like one has to pay for the data for Mukteshwar. See for example, http://www.imdpune.gov.in/E_%20Products%20of%20NCC.pdf and http://www.imdpune.gov.in/research/ndc/ndc_index.html
I will try making contact directly with the IMD.
climategatestuff (03:55:04) : It makes no difference to me whether Jones has kept the money himself or p*ssed it away on whatever he has done instead of producing an accurate verifiable climate record. He has had the money, it is gone, and there is precious little reliable work product.
climategatestuff,
I have about 60 people that work for me, most salaried. They pull in a helluva lot more than we pay them, and a helluva lot more than their fully loaded rate (pay, benefits, management overhead costs)… but if the revenue dries up they are out the door (not by my choice, by our uppers) so to put this in perspective for Dr. Jones and the UEA of Doom – even if it’s not going in his pocket it does help justify his position, his salary, his bonus plan (if such a thing exists in academia I don’t know), and his esteem among his uppers and his peers.
Salaried does not mean immune to the effects of funding, over-funding, or a lack of funding… but I see your point and agree. I don’t think he’s running around in a Lambo, swimming in pools of money
Nick Stokes (23:57:21) :
Re: Willis Eschenbach (Mar 9 23:30),
“But if I were planning to bet a billion dollars on this… “
OK, you’ve described a pretty time-consuming procedure for one station. There are over 7000 stations, and over 1200 currently reporting. Would you support funding that activity?
REPLY:
It looks to me like the activity is getting done by a corp of volunteers here at WUWT.
Given the number of universities around the world and the number of students taking environmental courses I do not think “FUNDING” is needed for this excersise just the will to get it done.
r I believe you have arrived at the crux of the matter.
Climategatestuff,
“Willis, I suspect he is salaried. So making statements like that is inflammatory for no purpose whatsoever.”
The question of funding is entirely appropriate. It is standard practice in any business to check labour and material costs against output to identify profitability. In this case it is appropriate to ask, if costs per man are this high, how productive are they. What’s inflammatory about that?