Over on Climate Audit, Jean S points out a curious anomaly in the March GISS Temperature data for Finland.
Maybe that’s where all of Trenberth’s “missing heat” went. Note the deep red anomaly is in a sea of blue that surrounds it.
Jean writes of the data:
GISS station values are even more spectacular, the warmest March on record is set in every Finnish station GISS is following. For instance, according to GISS, the mean March temperature in Sodankylä (61402836000) was a remarkable +1.5 °C beating the old record (-2.2 °C) from 1920 by 3.7 °C!
Well, according to the Finnish Meteorological Institute, March 2010 was colder than usual all over Finland, especially in the northern part. For instance, the mean temperature in Sodankylä was -10.3 °C, which is almost three degrees below the base period 1971-2000 average (-7.5 °C). So the GISS March value for Sodankylä is off by amazing 11.8 °C!
Even more curious, when you look at the NASA data from another division. NASA’s Earth Observations (NEO) The GISS Finlandic Temperature anomaly disappears!
Here are the satellite derived daytime and nighttime temperature anomalies for the world. Just like what the Finnish Meteorological Institute says, Finland was well below normal.
Here’s the daytime temperature anomaly:
Here’s the nighttime temperature anomaly:
The whole of Finland remains a cool blue in both images. So we have NASA NEO saying Finland is “below normal” and we have the Finnish Meteorological Institute saying below normal, but GISS shows a hotspot.
Gosh, who to believe?
I have a working theory as to why this happened, look for an update to this post if I’m able to confirm it – Anthony
UPDATE: GISS has posted a correction on their website which reads –
2010-04-15: The data shown between 4/13 and 4/15 were based on data downloaded on 4/12 and included some station reports from Finland in which the minus sign may have been dropped. NOAA updated GHCN on 4/13 by removing those data and we updated our displays today. The March 2010 global mean temperature was affected by about 2/100 of a degree Celsius, well below the margin of error (about 15/100 of a degree for monthly global means).
Back in January, I was working on a minus sign issue in data, and GISS making mention of this confirms it to be a real problem. I’ll have more later today. -A
UPDATE2: A commenter calls this “fraud” – folks please don’t go there. See below and wait for my next post. – A
Hockeystickler
even if Giss accidentally dropped the minus sign, -1.5 (C) would still be 8.8 degrees warmer than the -10.3 figure from the Finnish Meteorological Institute. there is only one word for this – fraud.
REPLY: Actually, it’s not fraud, but common human error. Give me a couple of hours and I’ll demonstrate how this happens. GISS is a consumer of GHCN data, compiled by NOAA, and while their quality control may be nonexistent or slipshod, it’s not fraud that they plotted this erroneously transmitted data. – Anthony
DeNihilist (11:03:42) : I just signed up too. I’ve often wondered why when a climate story unfavorable to the alarmists breaks on WUWT, Jo Nova etc that the alarmist trolls pile on. Now my suspicions have been confirmed.
Another great catch Anthony…doesn’t change the fact that 2010 is a very warm year so far, but it’s great that you’re keeping these guys on their toes!
For those who would like to read a report of complete utter garbage on the Catlin expedition, this report from AlJazeera entitled “the evil twin of climate change” is really something special.
http://blogs.aljazeera.net/americas/2010/04/17/evil-twin-climate-change
Even Al Gore might blush with embarrassment over this.
Maybe when they were compiling the numbers for Finland, they asked Phil Jones if they looked OK.
“Absolutely”, he said.
How does the volcanic plume effect the data?
This raises the obvious question: How often does this error in sign happen? If it was spotty, it would not be noticed. Why not use Kelvin to avoid the confusion?
Pardon my ignorance about the heat balance of the earth, but isn’t there much more involved than just temperatures? Was account made of photosynthesis, for example, changing all that nasty CO2 back into woody plants and Oxygen? When the heat balance is done, is enthalpy accounted for? Is there a web page somewhere that explains how it was done? All I could find indicated it was just a comparison of heat in and heat out.
My theory is that there are an abnormal number of mini black-holes extant, floating around, soaking up energy and creating all the earth quakes 🙂
The fact that the people at GISS, NASA, CRU, UN/IPCC, NOAA, XYZ, ETC… are human is not nor ever was a question…. and say it all together now: Of Course Not!
So what’s my point? Human they of course are, but I don’t expect- nay, may I say I DEMAND that they not be average humans! Prone to average mistakes!
For what they are being paid, for how much tax money they are spending, for the educational level they have, for the position they hold, for the influence they wield, I DEMAND they use proven and widely excepted scientific methodology AND REAL statistical analysis in their work and therein I DEMAND they NOT be sloopy, I DEMAND they be unscrupulously honest, I DEMAND they be intelligent AND use that intelligence without prejudice or preconception, I DEMAND they be open and share without discrimination, I DEMAND that they honestly believe that what they are trying to “produce” actually have some benefit for mankind and finally I DEMAND that when their theories are proven to be wrong, whether by themselves or by someone else, they “own-up” to their failure as a SCIENTIST!
And Dave Day @ur momisugly (12:18:04) : had a great idea because as far back as I can remember, and that might be longer than some of you have been alive, I don’t believe any of the above has EVER made a “mistake” toward the cool side. Of course, I’m just another average human…. that not one of us is relying on for the TRUTH about the future of our planet!
And considering what the likes of the above have given us so far (and the “mistakes” they HAVE made, we should all be thanking Al Gore for inventing the Internet ☺ – – – oh, and you Anthony for providing this forum and a whole bunch more people (here) for BEING all the things some of the above have NOT!
Fraud? No. But if they were working for me, they’d already been given their pink slips!
Makes you wonder how many other minus signs have “inadvertently” gone missing”
‘it’s not fraud that they plotted this erroneously transmitted data. – Anthony’
lol, so instead of them being evil doctor dooms’ they’re just plain incompetent.
Everyone’s supposed to be able to trust their work!
unortunately for the AGW crowd three major pillars have refused to cooperate
1 http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php
2 http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent.antarctic.png
3 http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps+002
the last one temps notice how the slope of late is not even following normal at this rate mate were heading for the mea=under LOL
While it does seem that the CAGW crowd doesn’t catch errors on the warm side without some help from the skeptic community. How many errors to the cold side has the skeptic community caught?
I think that it is natural to look at data and if it fits your preconcieved idea of what it should be then one is less likely to look for errors than if it seems anomolous. That goes for all of us and it is something that good scientist should be watching out for. Not fraud just confirmation bias.
I’m wondering how many other errors there are/have been that *haven’t* been caught?
What’s up with the other red areas? NW Africa and the Mid East don’t look any where near as warm in the satt data. And what’s going on in Antarctica? It’s one solid red block in the GISS graph, and some tiny little orange and tiny little blue dots in the satt data.
They may not have committed fraud but they are supposed to be an authoritative source of climate information. So by failing to do due diligence to avoid their mistakes, they have actually committed a crime worse than fraud. Think about it.
This GISS picture does not fit at all with the Russians’ claim that this march may have been the coldest ever in Siberia.
How comes?
From Wiki: The Mercator projection is a cylindrical map projection presented by the Flemish geographer and cartographer Gerardus Mercator, in 1569.
Why is NASA is using a map form that is 440 years old? I am so bored of NASA. I can’t give them any benefit of the doubt. Maybe this particular “mistake” is sheer incompetence, or maybe it’s systematic. In either case it stinks, the map stinks, NASA stinks, and the whole global warming sham stinks.
It’s all about funding, i.e. robbing the taxpayers to line the pockets of a privileged few. NASA is one of the prime beggars, cup in hand, pleading with the taxpayers to fork over $billions every year. They trot out astronauts and mighty rockets. They all wear pocket protectors and white lab coats. They want us to think they are super smart. Woo woo rocket science!
But they are mired in the Dark Ages. They are not that smart. Their rockets blow up, landers auger in, satellites malfunction, and their maps are scratched on vellum by Medieval monks.
Cut their funding. Let’s give them zero this year. Close the doors. Sell the equipment. If the employees are so gosh darn smart, they will have no trouble making a living in the real world. If they aren’t smart, then we shouldn’t be paying them the big bucks in the first place.
apparently they mixed up the data sets from Helsinki, New Mexico; Jyväskylä, Florida and Hämeenlinna, Colarado with Helsinki, Jyväskylä and Hämeenlinna in Finland. could happen to anyone.
“…While it does seem that the CAGW crowd doesn’t catch errors on the warm side without some help from the skeptic community. How many errors to the cold side has the skeptic community caught?…”
1. The owners of the data/makers of the chart have ensured that the smallest positive anomalies get ever deepening shades of red. They WANT that red to catch your eye.
2. Right now, it’s the middle of the NH winter. The loss of sign will show up. In the middle of summer, very few reports will come in with a minus sign.
The problem isn’t the loss of sign. The fact is that the quality of the data can be questioned. Those deep blues/purples in the middle of Siberia and Alaska should also be checked. 7.5 degrees COLDER than the averaging period?
So will we see a retraction or all those hottest ever stories do ya think?
Anthony, please get in contact with GISS and tell them that in the central part of Argentina the warming indicated by them is about +2 to 3ºC AND THAT IS A LIE! According to our National Meteo Service (SNM) March showed NO increase at all –but the FLAT line of the mean temperature corresponds to 2ºC COOLER than historical normal for the month. Please see the temperature graphs for station Pilar (used by GISS and NOAA) that I have uploaded to:
http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/images-36/pilar_feb_march_2010.jpg
You may want to update your post with thos graphs if you wish.
The graph has temperatures for February that shows a strong cooling (4ºC below normal because it was a very rainy month) and March showing a FLAT line for the mean.
Reminds me of the October / November data screw-up of the Siberian monthly data a year or so ago. How come these high level organizations supposedly staffed by the best and the brightest don’t hire a good quality control manager?
Steve Case (19:10:43)
NOAA corrected one day later, a few days before this article. GISS followed suit a few days after that. Looks like quality control is doing their job. For all we know, the error originated in the Finnish reporting stations. If you expect perfection every minute of the day, you’re always going to be disappointed.
Stephan (10:45:35) :
If CA had not reported it would have been kept there as long as possible. Maybe CA should not be reporting this… so they can be really archived and then hammered in the future.
Except that it had already been changed by the time CA wrote about it!
Anthony: I checked data in GISS database for Pilar (in http://tinyurl.com/y2647pz ) and got these figures for January, February and March, respectively: 24.7, 23.0, 22.2ºC.
I get daily reports from our SMN (National Weather Service) and I keep my own database. And January, February and March temperatures were: 23.3, 22.6, 21.8.
There is a cumulative error of +5.2ºC in just three months.
Is “human error” to blame for three consecutive months? Or are there some sharp pencils at work in GISS?
kim (09:44:52) :
Judith Curry, in comments at Pielke Fils and at Bishop Hill is saying that we need to have a whole new effort made to make a reliable temperature and paleo record. I think she’s had enough of the foolishness.
Yes, at Bishop Hill’s blog her first post at the bottom of page two under the
+++Acton’s Eleven – the response+++ thread is very welcome, as though a barrier had finally come down allowing her to see things much more clearly. She’s speaking the language of how to do Science correctly especially as it concerns the ipcc. [Though I disagree with her when she later opines to the effect that the CRU Climate Science did not “falsify” the science in order to get a desired result, when she considers the matter of scientific malpractice from a technical standpoint.]