Yesterday I made mention of the fact that there would be a report today from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, now NCEI. Today, they have released their 2014 report, and unfortunately it appears they are telling porkies right out of the gate.
First, they claim in slide four:
“Four major independent datasets show 2014 was the warmest year since records began in 1880”.
While I’m not going to dispute what their data shows, I will tell you that the word “independent” is a flat out lie.
As many readers know, NOAA/NCDC (NCEI) is the SOLE SOURCE of data the global surface temperature dataset. They are the source for GHCN surface temperature record, and for the ERSST v4 sea surface temperature dataset. Both are highly adjusted, the adjustments are in one direction, a warmer trend, and both datasets are entirely under the control of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center. The other agencies and their “independent” datasets use the source GHCN and ERSST data from NOAA/NCDC to make their own datasets, applying their own set of adjustments.
This is why those supposedly “independent” datasets agree on the graph they plot – they start with the same source data!
NOAA knows they are the sole source of surface data, so it baffles me as to why they’d tell this porky to the press in a briefing. The only thing I can say is that that are trying to control the narrative with the press by making this false claim.
Climate scientist Dr. Roger Kennedy of the UK Met office recently expounded on this issue at WUWT in ” A Return to the Question “Was 2014 the warmest year?”
Another thing they claim in slide 5 is:
Upper Atmosphere Temperatures Followed Long-Term Trends
Well, that’s only true up to a point, and what they won’t show you is their incorrectly claimed “independent” data compared to the the satellite data, such as Bob Tisdale has done.
Note the divergence in trends between the “independent” surface temperature data and the UAH/RSS satellite data. Also note the note about the CMIP5 Model mean trend. None of the datasets even approach the rate of warming of the models.
Dr. Roy Spencer says:
Even if it has warmed in the last 15 years, the rate of surface warming (and deep-ocean warming) we have seen in the last 50 years still implies low climate sensitivity.
He has a blog post on the issue: New Pause-Busting Temperature Dataset Implies Only 1.5 C Climate Sensitivity
The rest of the SOTC 2014 report is available here: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/briefings/201507.pdf
UPDATE: Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. provides this comment:
Hi Anthony – Excellent [point]. You are correct on their erroneous claim that the
“Four major independent datasets” are independent.
In our paper
Pielke Sr., R.A., C. Davey, D. Niyogi, S. Fall, J. Steinweg-Woods, K. Hubbard, X. Lin, M. Cai, Y.-K. Lim, H. Li, J. Nielsen-Gammon, K. Gallo, R. Hale, R. Mahmood, S. Foster, R.T. McNider, and P. Blanken, 2007: Unresolved issues with the assessment of multi-decadal global land surface temperature trends. J. Geophys. Res., 112, D24S08, doi:10.1029/2006JD008229. http://pielkeclimatesci.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/r-321.pdf
“The raw surface temperature data from which all of the different global surface temperature trend analyses are derived are essentially the same. The best estimate that has been reported is that 90 – 95% of the raw data in each of the analyses is the same (P. Jones, personal communication,2003). That the analyses produce similar trends should therefore come as no surprise. Indeed, this overlapping of raw data between different analyses of multidecadal surface temperature trends is an issue which has not received adequate scrutiny with respect to the value added of more than one analysis.”
Here are my weblog posts that include a discussion of this issue of lack of honestly presenting the actual interdependence of the surface temperature data [which also includes the BEST data]
In the later post, I wrote
In the report “Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere: Steps for Understanding and Reconciling Differences Final Report, Synthesis and Assessment Product 1.1” on page 32 it is written
“The global surface air temperature data sets used in this report are to a large extent based on data readily exchanged internationally, e.g., through CLIMAT reports and the WMO publication Monthly Climatic Data for the World. Commercial and other considerations prevent a fuller exchange, though the United States may be better represented than many other areas. In this report, we present three global surface climate records, created from available data by NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies [GISS], NOAA National Climatic Data Center [NCDC], and the cooperative project of the U.K. Hadley Centre and the Climate Research Unit [CRU]of the University of East Anglia (HadCRUT2v).”
These three analyses are led by Tom Karl (NCDC), Jim Hansen (GISS) and Phil Jones (CRU).
The differences between the three global surface temperatures that occur are a result of the analysis methodology as used by each of the three groups. They are not “completely independent”. This is further explained on page 48 of the CCSP report where it is written with respect to the surface temperature data (as well as the other temperature data sets) that
“The data sets are distinguished from one another by differences in the details of their construction.”
On page 50 it is written
“Currently, there are three main groups creating global analyses of surface temperature (see Table 3.1), differing in the choice of available data that are utilized as well as the manner in which these data are synthesized.”
“Since the three chosen data sets utilize many of the same raw observations, there is a degree of interdependence.”
The chapter then states on page 51 that
“While there are fundamental differences in the methodology used to create the surface data sets, the differing techniques with the same data produce almost the same results (Vose et al., 2005a). The small differences in deductions about climate change derived from the surface data sets are likely to be due mostly to differences in construction methodology and global averaging procedures.”
and thus, to no surprise, it is concluded that
“Examination of the three global surface temperature anomaly time series (TS) from 1958 to the present shown in Figure 3.1 reveals that the three time series have a very high level of agreement.”
More of my posts on this can be viewed at https://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/?s=the+raw+data+in+each+of+the+analyses+is+the+same