From Tallblokes Talkshop, note what happens before 1958.
HOW GISS MANUFACTURES WARMING (LOTS OF IT) IN THE ANTARCTIC
by Roger Andrews
The close match between GISS and me after 1955 is encouraging in that it shows that there’s at least one corner of the Earth where GISS hasn’t seriously mutilated the raw data. But GISS bumps Antarctic warming up from little or none since 1955 to two full degrees since 1900 by extending the Antarctic record back to 1904. Here’s where GISS gets the pre-1955 temperatures from:
The 1945-55 temperatures come entirely from stations on and around the Antarctic Peninsula that show much more warming than the mainland stations over the period of common record after 1955, and the 1904-44 temperatures come from a single station – Base Orcadas in the South Orkneys northeast of the Antarctic Peninsula.
Projecting temperatures from the Antarctic Peninsula over the entire the entire 64-90S latitude zone, which covers an area of 25 million square kilometers, is bad enough, and projecting temperatures from a single record like Base Orcadas over a zone this large is even worse. But it gets worse yet. The map below shows where Base Orcadas is. At 60 degrees 44 minutes south latitude IT ISN’T EVEN IN the 64-90S latitude zone. It’s in the next GISS latitude zone up – the 44-64S zone.
It’s hard to see how data manipulation in the service of global warming could get much more creative than that.
Full story here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m guessing that Base Orcadas, judging by it’s latitude, was so cold from 1904-44 because of the expansion of the antarctic polar vortex due to the ozone hole, which we’re told today is the only way the sub-arctic regions of Antarctica cool in the face of global warming.
HenryP says:
October 22, 2012 at 7:04 am
Lets discuss it on a more appropriate thread. Call by on the De Vries cycle thread at my place if you like.
Roger Andrews says
b) that there’s been no significant warming in the South Orkneys since 1900.
henry says
As I was saying, earlier on:
Remember that the total warming/cooling rate over the whole of this 88 year cycle (plus some lag years either way) is 0.0 K per year….
In the old days on remote stations they used a simple method to establish the mean: take the max and the min for the day and divide by 2.
I am asking how you can compare those results with current results where measurements are taken every second and recorded and a mean is calculated for the day?
Better to keep looking at maxima only, it will give you most of what you are looking for..
.http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
Roger Andrews says:
October 22, 2012 at 8:36 am
I’ve updated the Talkshop post with this comment and put the graphs inline.
Minor oops to be sorted out:
Jostemikk says:
October 22, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Roger Andrews:
“You have solved the problem. Thank you.”
My new name could easily be JosteERRmik. Louise Island is located on the Antarctic Penninsula, and that’s the funny part. Not so funny is that the Louise part of the explanation on the data from KNMI Climate Explorer wasn’t ment to be typed. I have never heard of the Louise Island before, and can’t explain what happened.
I’m sorry for my mistake, and I can assure you I only intended to show the difference between the two versions of GHCN (adjusted) data v2/v3.
I’ll guess this doesn’t make any difference. They adjust their adjustments all the time. GHCN adjusts their data several times a month.The GHCN data is downloaded from:
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/v3/
The reason I typed the date oct 17 2012 on the graph is because they have changed the data several times before and since that date. Take a look at this, and its from Klimaforskning member la1goa on another GHCN station:
Unadjusted:
ghcnm.tavg.v3.2.0.20120908.qcu.dat 716.66815186 + 0.45558590x Black
Adjusted:
ghcnm.tavg.v3.2.0.20120908.qca.dat -1415.11840820 + 1.53020287x Blue
ghcnm.tavg.v3.2.0.20120921.qca.dat -677.69775391 + 1.16321862x Red
ghcnm.tavg.v3.2.0.20121009.qca.dat -767.05212402 + 1.21529031x Green
http://klimaforskning.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=994.0;attach=3090;image
I’ll correct the graphs in my next post.
Jostemikk says:
October 22, 2012 at 6:24 pm
With appologies to Roger and Roger:
http://klimaforskning.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1003.0;attach=3092;image
http://klimaforskning.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1003.0;attach=3094;image
vukcevic said
“OT
6 years jail sentence each for the Italian scientists who failed to predict the earthquake.
Climate scientists watch out!”
Really ?!
Can anyone arrange a Climate Team conference in Italy for Ben Santer, Mike Mann, James Hansen, Lubchenko, et al.
tallbloke says:
October 22, 2012 at 10:42 am
—–
Thank you;-)
If Louise Island is on the Antarctic Peninsula and not on South Orkney I guess I’d better apologize to GISS for accusing them of something they didn’t do.
But it’s still curious that no one uses the Louise Island record. It’s only one in the Antarctic Peninsula that goes back close to the turn of the century and as far as I can see there’s nothing wrong with it, except of course that it doesn’t show any warming.
According to HadCRUT3, the Antarctic trend has been dead flat for the entire period that human CO2 emissions could have been a factor: http://www.climate4you.com/images/70-90S%20MonthlyAnomaly%20Since1957.gif
The trend prior to c. 1950 is irrelevant.
Henry Clark says:
October 22, 2012 at 4:10 am
Antarctica is a special situation where the ice is so pure as to be whiter than clouds. High-albedo shading, reflective clouds, ordinarily cooling, instead warm Antarctica. A reduction in cloud cover which would relatively warm other landmasses or the ocean can instead cool Antarctica.
This insight about whiter-than-white Antarctic snow with greater albedo than clouds, is fascinating and opens up many intriuging questions.
– It underlines a central controlling role for cloud in climate and global temperatures, not only at the equator and the ITCZ, but all the way to the poles;
– it adds plausibility to the hypothesis by Tzedakis and others that interglacial intervals terminate after a period of reciprocal north-south glaciation, called the “bipolar seesaw”
– it has major nonlinear-chaotic pattern implications. The classic scenario identified by Alan Turing for biological pattern formation includes a simple model such as: one signal chemical promotes growth at short range, a second signal chemical inhibits growth at long range. Mix up their two effects and the result is emergent complexity. So a fat big Antarctica at the bottom of the world respnding in the opposite direction to global cloud-driven temperature trends could have profound influence on spatio-temporal climate and temperature patterns (but I have no idea what kind of influence). It could act to stabilise attractors in certain regimes.
Its no coincidence that on those graphs of Louise Island, the 1940 region is the warmest…..which coincides with almost all of the temp records before they were adjusted. Its getting beyond a joke, all the evidence points to 1930 -1940 period as the warmest time in the record.
thank you tallbloke. It is important these conmen are exposed, repeatedly.
…and Roger Andrews, thank you as above
If they can use an island 3,300km from the South Pole for anomalies for the Antarctica then they can use Stockholm for the Arctic.
Billy Liar says:
October 22, 2012 at 7:06 am
You all seemed to have missed the fact that the GISS motto is: ‘Cooling the Past’
————————————————-
“cooling the past to fund the future”
I am VERY happy that the Talkshop has been reclassified OUT of the Transcendent Rant category. A good move for all concerned.
Even the “peninsula” stations are mostly on K George Island in the S Shetland Islands, 100km off the coast of the actual Peninsula, and therefore out in the ocean currents.
I’m missing information here. What happens now? When will this trend be corrected, if ever?
vukcevic says:
October 22, 2012 at 8:26 am
OT
6 years jail sentence each for the Italian scientists who failed to predict the earthquake.
Climate scientists watch out!
Sadly I do not believe that is true. The earthquake scientist made it clear that there was a large level of uncertainty which media presentation lost in the transmission as far as I can see. Climate scientist have always maintained a spurious and unjustified certainty but are now so entrenched in the political machine there is no chance whatever of them being held accountable for the immense waste of money their predictions have caused.
We still have not even got the fact that the data discrepancy between the new reference network and the old one is greater than any warming or even that there is a discrepancy. I am not sure if it has got as far as there being a comparison at all.
No i believe they are safe as too many too powerful and rich people have too much to lose.
It’s amazing the lucky coincidences the agw folks get. It turns out that in the same year they get the new stations in Antarctica the temperature on the mainland spikes 3C in that year. How coincidental because without that spike the record might look flat. It also is very convenient that Antarctica is such a large land mass that including such a spike at 1945 helps with that thorny problem of the decline in temperatures between 1945-1975. Placed right in the middle this helps a lot to lift those temps to give the nice smooth upward graph for worldwide temps that matches the models much better. Lucky thing that Antarctica decided to turn blast furnace on at 1945. SARCASM OFF.