Gee, where have we seen this pioneered for gathering data before? Of course, Professor Stott saw fit to not invite Dr. Roger Pielke Sr., myself or anyone who has any experience with this sort of thing to the Exeter meeting of surfacetemperatures.org. But as they say, “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery”.
Your chance to help chart past climate
12 October 2010
Voyages of World War One Royal Navy warships are being used to help scientists understand the climate of the past and unearth new historical information, with help from the public.
Visitors to the website OldWeather.org, which launches today, are being invited to input weather observations of the routes taken by any of 280 Royal Navy ships. Once on the website, volunteers will be asked to transcribe information from the digital copies of historical logbooks, making notes of weather and any interesting events.
Dr Peter Stott, Head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution at the Met Office, said: “Historical weather data is vital because it allows us to test our models of the Earth’s climate: if we can correctly account for what the weather was doing in the past, then we can have more confidence in our predictions of the future. Unfortunately, the historical record is full of gaps, particularly from before 1920, and at sea, so this project is invaluable.”
Dr Chris Lintott of Oxford University, one of the team behind the OldWeather.org project added: “These naval logbooks contain an amazing treasure trove of information, but because the entries are handwritten they are incredibly difficult for a computer to read. By getting an army of online human volunteers to retrace these voyages and transcribe the information recorded by British sailors we can relive both the climate of the past and key moments in naval history.”
OldWeather.org forms a key part of the International ACRE Project, which is recovering past weather and climate data from around the world and bringing them into widespread use. Met Office Hadley Centre scientist Dr Rob Allan, the ACRE project leader said: “Reconstructing past weather from these historical documents will help further our knowledge of weather patterns and climatic changes.”
Most of the data about past climate comes from land-based weather monitoring stations which have been systematically recording data for over 150 years. The weather information from the ships at OldWeather.org, which spans the period 1905–1929, effectively extends this land-based network to 280 seaborne weather stations traversing the world’s oceans.
The weather records digitised by Old Weather will be added to the International Comprehensive Ocean-Atmosphere Data Set, and will be freely available for all uses.
=====================
h/t to WUWT reader DavidS
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
the only way this makes sense is to have 3 sets of eyes on every page. 2 volunteers transcribe each page and submit their results. A third person reviews and compares those results and if there is any meaningful discrepency those results are thrown out and must be redone by 2 other volunteers and validated by a different third person.
Only way to be sure … nuke them from space !!!
stephen richards says: October 15, 2010 at 9:49 am
The CET data is adjusted. It is not raw. Be careful. Armagh is better but as they pointed out to me on more than one occasion , it still has it’s problems with location and instrumental changes.
Agree, but we can deal only with what is available. As you can see from my graph
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-NAP.htm
on many occasions two sets of data do not agree, and that is expected, but the NAP data tends to capture the main trends.
There is another reason I think that CETs are relatively reliable, and it is confirmed by a default.
In 2007 Australian scientist Ken McCracken (ex NASA) published work based on the 10Be Greenland ice cores. He intended to calculate strength of the heliospheric field at the Earth’s orbit. What he actually calculated is the last thing he wanted, i.e. the North Atlantic temperature anomaly. His data (if not corrected, which I made an attempt to do for Dalton minimum, one of more interesting periods) only makes sense for post 1960’s when the satellite data was collected (by instruments designed by himself).
Here is McCracken’s result compared to the CCTs
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-McC.htm
Of course the ice core dating methods aren’t always perfect, but looks that the ice core 10Be (inverted count) did a good job of verifying CETs.
Dr Peter Stott, Head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution at the Met Office, said: “Historical weather data is vital because it allows us to test our models of the Earth’s climate: if we can correctly account for what the weather was doing in the past, then we can have more confidence in our predictions of the future.”
As long as they do not model the real principles, do not include ALL of the relevant factors, and use mathematical analogs rather than the real equations, the models will continue to have the utility of a broken toaster.
Sifting through old records can be fun, but this sounds more like they are trying to look like they are trying to improve than actually doing so.
I think it was Hansen and his ilk that wrote about that climate models were just simplified weather models that the meteorological folks are using. Something about weather models being to complex and inherently non-linear which they can’t apply to 5, 10, 50 or a hundred years time line.
So there fancy and bugged out models begin with a modeled average stretched out over a 100 year period but that average lacks the accumulated daily weather data, instead the data is just fantasy statistics of what could be if . . .
To see if such looney models are accurate they’d actually need to invert the process down to individual daily weather data (and not fantastically smeared out statistical averages of ones own creation) and see if those are spot on for real world daily weather data for any historical time period. When they can present something like this, they’d be getting lots of converts, but until such time they’re just be the simpletons looking for easy hand outs.
M White says:
“Why just World War One Royal Navy warships, the Navy has records that go back much further.”
Sadly, it is no longer possible to talk to serving sailors about the WW1 records. It won’t be long before veterans of the 2nd WW will no longer be with us, and so information that might be useful will also be lost.
What annoys me about this is that there is already a much larger project to do this using the records in the National Maritime Museum both of RN ships and HM packets to investigate the weather going back to the 1760’s with especial reference to Arctic ice extent because the packets out of Halifax to Falmouth generally sailed as far north as they could given the ice conditions: which they routinely recorded with the reports filed with and retained after each voyage by the Post Office. This was a regular route with sailings throughout the year: although frequency declined steadily as US mails were increasingly carried by private lines out of New York such as the famous Black Ball line: much to the fury of the Post Office which not only paid ship letter rate on incoming mail, two old pence per letter, but also lost much of the outgoing traffic. When the packets were replaced by steam navigation the RN established a regular Arctic patrol which operated with some gaps until the end of the nineteenth century.
And given the Wegman controversy does this new project count as plagiarism?
Kindest Regards
I suggest t is important that they provide training in the reading of cursive script and its variants. This should be done before volunteers embark on the project.
stephen richards says: October 15, 2010 at 9:49 am
Armagh is better but as they pointed out to me on more than one occasion..
Mr. Richards
I forgot to ask have you got a link to the Armagh data?
Thanks.
Chris Lintott has been involved for years with a similar interactive project called Galaxy Zoo.
http://www.galaxyzoo.org/
“Welcome to Galaxy Zoo, where you can help astronomers explore the Universe
Galaxy Zoo: Hubble uses gorgeous imagery of hundreds of thousands of galaxies drawn from NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope archive. To understand how these galaxies, and our own, formed we need your help to classify them according to their shapes — a task at which your brain is better than even the most advanced computer.”
The vital difference between this project and the Met Office’s baby is that nobody, as far as I am aware, has any reason not to be truthful in classifying galaxies or any reason to homogenize or value-add to the results.
On a related subject, I vaguely recall reading accounts of the US Navy using the logs of whaleships for basic info about the many Pacific Islands for which there was very little knowledge recorded anywhere else.
I also think that the US Navy used the weather observations of the whaleships to generate basic climatological predictions and predictions on prevailing currents.
There’s a lot of info out there, although the old records are hard to access.
Chris Lintott has done a great job with crowd-sourcing hundreds of thousands of volunteers with the Galaxy-Zoo project and spinoffs. These efforts have made significant advances in astronomical research as well as new discoveries. Good to see some expertise brought into this project. I’ve participated with Galaxy-Zoo and Surfacestations and would suggest WUWT readers get involved here if they can.
@Ric Werme
Yes. There are several transcription projects in genealogy (census, BMD data, &c.). They all seem to work on (variations of) a ‘tell me twice’ approach – the transcribed data is often color-coded – one color/shade for transcribed once, another for twice & agreeing, thrice & agreeing & so on. They must have a procedure for dispute resolution (finger trouble the most common, I suppose), but I’ve only (parasitically) used, not contributed.
In the world of old deeds and land descriptions, you can work out the shape of the tract. If plotting out your reading of the description does not bring you back to your starting point, then there is an error. It seems something similar could be done with these records by paying attention to locations from one reading to the next. If you think the ship was in a particular place at a particular time, the next day it should not be half a world away. There must be many ways to cross check info. Good luck to everybody involved. Sounds fascinating.
The daily issue of rum to both officers and men on Royal Navy ships until comparatively recently was, by today’s standards, formidable.
Photographs of antique brass ships’ thermometers do not inspire confidence in any data collected from them.
Descriptions of the methodology deployed in temperature collection also give rise to some concern.
In short, a quaint little excercise, but hardly robust enough to have any bearing on the quest for an extended global temperature record.
Now where’s that Pussers Rum……………….? Hic!
Just a word of caution on using Navy sources for temperatures – I was a sailor for 6 years, and typically readings were taken on just about every system every hour. These weren’t dedicated scientists but very junior enlisted men. This getting very boring after a few weeks, and since the sailor “knows” the incoming seawater temperature was 48 F for the last two hours, he might just radio the next two entires as 48 F as well; this was called “radio’ing” the logs. While most sailors wouldn’t do it, many get bored and “radio” their logs.
Our PM in Australia does the same – have climate meetings and panels but exclude climate skeptics. Our department of climate change only has policies on glbal warming, so does the CSIRO. It is censorship extreme!
Peter Hearnden aka DEVONIAN
Said
You really can be a right sour-puss at times, Anthony.
Hey ho Dev, some leopards never change their spots.
See you in a months time…netweather climate forum
Ecotretas says:
October 15, 2010 at 10:27 am
It might be interesting to grab all the original data. I bet the original data will disappear when the massaged “value added” data gets out…
Ecotretas
Jimbo says:
October 15, 2010 at 10:38 am
Is this a wise move by the Met Office. I mean if data comes in to show warmer than present average Arctic temperatures / sea temperatures what will they say? Transcription errors, deranged seaman, heat from the propellers. :o)
I find this to be the saddest part of this whole politicization-of-science affair. Once people trusted the experts in a field. Then we had the various food scares “Eggs are good/bad/good/bad/good/bad/good/bad/good for you” and the revelations of Vioxx killing you, but unpublishedly, and then the cherry-picking revelations of various studies, then the background mechanations of Climategate, then various “adjustment” sagas (like New Zealand), and so on and so forth…
Now, if a prominent scientist was in your house, not only would you be arguing with his conclusions (as you should), you’d want to know the ins-and-outs of his revenue stream, and if he knew his peer/pal reviewers, and you’d now also treat his “facts” and “records” with scorn and suspicion.
On top of that, you’d count your silverware in case it got “adjusted”.
The fall-out from this will reach many years into the future. This is starting to be the sort of level of trust/derision politicians and bankers frequent.
As William M. Connolley has a lot of free time now, maybe he can contribute to this new project that is right in the area of his expertise.
Bit of a performance getting started, but, once in, a simple grind.
Readings every four hours [at the end of the watch, normally].
Looks to be straightforward – if time consuming.
I’ve been in shipping since it was legal to hang [serious] malefactors at the yard-arm, and this all appears pretty standard [albeit grey funnel standard, rather than, mostly, merchant ship].
UHI effects – certainly; the highest temperature I ever experienced was 170F in the Oil [Arabian/Persian] Gulf [down a pumproom: yes, in summer, and you climbed fifty feet (15m) out for a break!].
Did the ships carry and use Stevenson Screens? I don’t know; they might have done; the Voluntary Observing Ships today do.
It is likely that the RN tried to ensure all thermometers and barometers were calibrated annually [or at refits, which may have been two years apart.].
The observers for these logs were, for the most part on H.M. Ships, professional naval officers, with – very reasonably – an interest in the weather: they had to go through it. I – me, personally – think it is likelythat they tried (generally) to be accurate.
As has already been mentioned, similar method has been and continues to be done with genealogical data such as extracting from handwritten records such as census records: names, ages, marriages, occupations and other relevant data. BUT every GOOD genealogist relies on original records and not transcribed information. I search transcribed data, but source my database with the original records or a copies of the original records as other researchers (ancestors) may and will want to know where and how I found the information and arrived at certain conclusions.
Keep and make the original records available.
Leif Svalgaard says:
October 15, 2010 at 10:15 am
vukcevic says:
October 15, 2010 at 9:19 am
By close monitoring of the NAP process (as shown in the attached graph) it may be possible to anticipate in good time another radical change in direction of the climate movements.
How could they do this if you have not described the ‘process’? Perhaps you are reserving that for your 2-page Nobel Prize paper…
And of course, you’ll publish your ‘learned’ rebuttal on a PostIt® note, right?
Your posts fairly reek of condescending arrogance.
899 says:
October 15, 2010 at 5:57 pm
Your posts fairly reek of condescending arrogance.
Such a comment does not take into account the actual contents of my criticism, which is that the data used are uncertain, the proposed physics is energetically untenable, and the alleged ‘verification’ by McCracken is not valid. The arrogance is Vuk’s, with his inflated and undocumented claims which do disservice to WUWT.
899 says: October 15, 2010 at 5:57 pm
………….
With prolific number of publication available through internet, it is difficult even for renown scientist to get attention, unless of course he runs his own blog and continuously feeds it with new stuff.
For someone who does research on small and amateur scale, in spare time, not every day is a new discovery, may be one or two in lifetime if one is lucky.
Then there is another problem, the science establishment’s means of publishing are not easily accessible to the outsiders. So if you come across something you think is worthwhile you put it all together on internet, dozen people read it, and then it is forgotten, until some ambitious academia mole comes along, rewrites it all, inserts some fancy maths, puts his name to it, in short rips it off, and original author may even never know about it.
What is the alternative: It is great blog like WUWT .
If finding is really worthwhile than readers are interested, they will look at it, and thanks to the pesky ‘wasp’ of the blog, it certainly will not go unnoticed. Now instead of few, hundreds or even thousands are aware of it, far less chance of being ripped off ,when all details are presented finally. So as you can see all god’s creatures have their purpose.
I think what I have come across it is worthwhile
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-NAP.htm
As quoted else where:
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. –Arthur Schopenhauer
It appears I am on stage two, might have to wait for long time if ever for the third stage, but signs are promising. Thanks for the support.