Category Archives: Surface Record

IPCC, Surface Record

Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature study – their team can not write words “urban heat island”

13 Comments

I am curious if anybody is holding out hope that this “Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature study” has a hope in hell of producing anything worthwhile.

I am posting this to give readers a space to comment on what the Berkeley team are telling us about what they are doing.

I suggest interested people read what is available online, it will not take you long.

I note they seem to be a post-Climategate formation and I also see on the team at least one prominent pre-Climategate “standard IPCC warmist” now very active re-inventing as a “person of reason” in the middle of the current debate.

Jones et al, Surface Record

Do We Really Know Earth’s Temperature?

38 Comments

Guest article by Pat Frank
We’ve all read the diagnosis, for example here, that the global climate has suffered “unprecedented warming,” since about 1900. The accepted increase across the 20th century is 0.7 (+/-)0.2 C. As an experimental chemist, I always wondered at that “(+/-)0.2 C.” In my experience, it seemed an awfully narrow uncertainty, given the exigencies of instruments and outdoor measurements.

When I read the literature, going right back to such basics as Phil Jones’ early papers [1, 2], I found no mention of instrumental uncertainty in their discussions of sources of error. Continue reading Do We Really Know Earth’s Temperature? →

GISS, IPCC, NZ Climate Science Coalition, Surface Record, Urban Heat Islands

Simple GISS diagram illustrating warming effect of conventional “adjustments” of “steps” in T data due to site moves outward from urban centre.

9 Comments

I have been reading the 169 page NIWA pdf – “Report on the Review of NIWA’s “Seven-Station” Temperature Series December 2010” – downloaded here
I have not yet found the BoM review – only the one page letter from the BoM – see pdf page 13 in the above.

I draw readers attention to the excellent little GISS diagrams which perfectly illustrate the warming effect of adjusting out the multitude of step changes which are common throughout all temperature data as thousands of recording sites have been moved outwards in their respective urban areas.
GISS illustrating typical urban T data with a step due to outward site move – before adjustment.
GISS diagram a
GISS illustrating typical urban T data with a step due to outward site move – after adjustment – now with UHI warmed trend built in.
GISS diagram b
Reading their 169 page pdf report above – it is crystal clear that NIWA do exactly this – repeatedly adjusting out step changes – all through their seven station series – in this way NIWA cement UHI warming in their NZ 7 station century long adjusted trend.
PS: I had a little post on this in 2006

BoM Australia, News and Views, Surface Record

Late 19th Century photographic evidence of the Stevenson Screen in Australian meteorology

13 Comments

I notice over at wattsupwiththat.com
Luke comments: June 13, 2010 at 4:39 am
[El Gordo remarks about temperatures pre 1900 being higher but gee if we’re into UHI issues – those data were recorded in a Glaisher stand. That’s why.]
Not so Luke.
Luke is repeating the standard BoM excuse to avoid facing the facts that many Australian stations recorded a warm period in the late 19th Century – the BoM (and Luke) claim that these warm temperatures were recorded in an older style open thermometer stand (often a Glaisher stand in Australia).
Sadly for the BoM and Luke, Colonial historical records from the late 1800’s are increasingly revealing that the Stevenson screen was in widespread use. That is not to say that older exposures were completely done away with, of course not – but for high order stations the Stevenson screen was being introduced from the 1880’s. See my scanned 1995 4 page paper from the International Journal of Climatology, Vol. 15. In that I reviewed proceedings from Intercolonial Conferences that touched on meteorological subjects. In the early 1990’s I was only able to find the one photograph – from the Darwin Post Office yard said by the NT to be from 1890 – which showed a Stevenson screen pre 1900.
The photo was sourced from here territorystories.nt.gov.au/10070/312247
Now thanks to correspondents who have kindly sent me information – I am aware that various Australian archives and libraries – both State and Commonwealth – have searchable online collections of photographs and newspapers from the colonial period. Just a few examples now.
Melbourne 1879 – from Museum Victoria.

Another lucky preservation from Tasmanian Archives from ~1900 Hobart, St George’s Terrace, Battery Point, circa 1900 damaged – person is Leventhorpe Hall.

Here is an extract from The West Australian Wednesday 25 October 1899 page 4 – The meteorological report for 1898, prepared by Mr. W. E. Cooke.
from The West Australian 25 Oct 1899
A Stevenson screen at Kings Park Perth WA –

can be seen in this 1899 photograph.
From remote far north Colonial Queensland comes this 1896 photo of a Stevenson screen at Musgrave telegraph station
Musgrave - Stevenson screen 1896
For larger image ex National Archives of Australia.
Added 16 June after readers start finding online examples of pre-1900 Stevenson screens for themselves.
I have a few photographs from the Brisbane Meterological Observatory – Wickham Tce. Clement Wragge was appointed Govt. Meteorologist there in 1887.
This scene sent to me as hard copy from the State Library of Queensland as “View from Windmill looking east” – ca 1890 – three Stevenson screens can be see in the Observatory yard.
3 Stevenson screens 1890 Brisbane
This scene from sent to me from the State Library of Queensland is from their Hartshorn Family Photographs – and is I believe the first location of Wragge’s Stevenson screens which is on the opposite side of the Observatory to the above photograph.

The Stevenson screens were I think moved to the opposite side of the building and several photos turn up in searches – some showing telephone poles and increased tree plantings in the Terrace.
Such as this scene cropped from a larger photograph.
3 Stevenson screens at a later date
If you search the Queensland Library site you will find more images – such as this later circa 1900 view photograph with instruments on the windmill side of the Observatory.
Links to my published papers on the introduction of the Stevenson Screen to Australia – and related papers all available now in pdf versions.

IPCC, Jones et al, Surface Record

IPCC-UKMO-Jones et al errors with Russian temperature trends Lake Baikal region

2 Comments

A decade ago I wrote my “USSR High Magnitude Climate Warming Anomalies 1901-1996”. In January I posted “Surface minus satellites – some differences look political” finding that for the huge Asian gridbox 40 to 70 North – 60 to 130 East; HadCRUT3 warmed over UAH MSU lower troposphere 1979-2008 giving a possible surface error of 0.13 deg C per decade – an error in excess of the rate of IPCC GW.
Out of curiosity I looked at what the UKMO/Jones et al are using for Irkutsk now and compared to gridbox data. Because Irkutsk is at 104.3 East I took the two 5 deg gridboxes 50 to 55 North – 100 to 110 East , puts Irkutsk fairly central.
The difference between CRUT3 and UAH MSU 1979-2009 for the gridbox 50 to 55 North – 100 to 110 East is now 0.137 deg decade and for Irkutsk station minus UAH MSU 0.159 deg decade.
To wrap up for now, a graphic of Irkutsk and smaller regionals UKMO station data compared to satellite lower troposphere and a graphic of Irkutsk UKMO minus Barguzin. Note both Barguzin and Zigalovo have identical huge gaps from 1990-2008 so we have just 2009 building the time series again. Maybe some Russian readers might know where the missing data may be.

Jones et al, Surface Record

Climate science at work #1 – Jones et al 1985-86 papers in review

19 Comments

I was stunned to hear Professor Jones say this at the UK House of Commons Inquiry.

The most startling observation came when he was asked how often scientists reviewing his papers for probity before publication asked to see details of his raw data, methodology and computer codes. “They’ve never asked,” he said.”

The Jones et al 1985-86 hemispheric compilations which birthed “IPCC global warming” as we now know it, were both published in the American Meteorological Society (AMS) – Journal of Applied Meteorology. Online versions Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere.

To get a feel for how the Jones et al papers fared in review I have done a quick check of the page length and time spent in review for all papers in the two issues of Journal of Applied Meteorology containing the Jones et al papers. Continue reading Climate science at work #1 – Jones et al 1985-86 papers in review →

IPCC, Surface Record, Urban Heat Islands

Dr Edward R Long’s disturbing study of 48 urban rural pairs USA

8 Comments

Download the original pdf for yourself – it is only 14 pages and very readable – Dr Long is ex NASA.
This study looks at NCDC raw and adjusted temperature trends and finds that rural data has been adjusted warmer to meet urban trends. It would Never go for the cheapest prices. best buy for viagra pamelaannschoolofdance.com/aid-3041 The generic medication is clinically approved to treat a range of disorders including pulmonary hypertension, a condition where the lungs’ blood vessels tighten. tadalafil 5mg india In fact, it isn’t an illness in any respect! But, for decades people have believed that alcohol addiction is an incurable disease sildenafil 100mg tablet pamelaannschoolofdance.com/aid-3509 that must be “managed” for a lifetime, and that “there is no cure” However, it’s not a guaranteed thing that all men will encounter ED as they age. Mississippi has partisan divisions: Caucasian voters overwhelmingly voting Republican and African-American pamelaannschoolofdance.com/aid-2665 generic viagra online voters overwhelmingly voting Democrat. be great if somebody had the time to check what Jones/UKMO has for Dr Long’s stations (which he lists). I predict now Jones/UKMO will treat them quite differently.

Remember, four years back I showed that GISS was doing something similar – read Dr Jim Hansen’s email.

IPCC, Jones et al, Surface Record

USA Dept of Energy Jones et al 1986 350 pages station documentation now online in pdf

22 Comments

It has finally happened, many thanks to a volunteer in California who through the inter-library loan system found a copy of the Martin Marietta 1991 edition DoE book published by CDIAC – and has scanned the entire book.

The Jones et al Northern Hemisphere TR022 book with station documentation details, including corrections is now available as four pdf files. The much shorter TR027 Southern Hemisphere book has been online in html form for several weeks.

Can I just make the point that this is the only time Jones et al published station documentation details. It was not done for later iterations and is still not being done by the UKMO.

These books are witness to the processes operating at the birth of what we now know as IPCC AGW. Information contained in TR022 and TR027 will assist people who are curious to uncover what Jones et al have done with temperature data from their village, town, city, region, state or nation. What data they have examined, rejected, altered, truncated, corrected and finally USED – various versions of station data that Jones et al USED are available from 1991, 1994, 1999 to the current versions on the UKMO website.

Once investigators have a grip on the above they can then compare their timeseries to those produced by the GHCN, GISS and their own national weather service.

We are told that all of the station data listed in Appendices A can not now be found at CRU – these contain the data rejected by Jones et al.

Which brings me to one of the great misinformation campaigns in climate science. That is the attempt by CRU and Jones to direct investigators to the GHCN station data in lieu of Jones et al/CRU station data. The two groups conduct distinctly different processes on station data and researchers will seldom get close to understanding what Jones/CRU have done by relying on GHCN station versions. The GHCN is riddled with its own multitude of errors and is more than a subject for study in itself.

I look forward to hearing from people making their own investigations of Jones/CRU data from their cities and regions.

BoM Australia, IPCC, Jones et al, Surface Record, Urban Heat Islands

Some essential history of IPCC global warming from 20 years ago.

12 Comments

Over at the matchless blog Wattsupwiththat:

Look for two comments by Mohib (21:33:01) on 1st Feb – I thought Mohib’s questions were important enough to try and explain the history .

Jones et al 1986 did indeed reject 38 stations from their Northern Hemisphere study. Note UHI not actually mentioned in the 1986 Table 1 – but no doubt covered under “non-climatic warming trends” – so a nuance there compounded by PDJ ref to “affected by urbanization” in the ClimateGate mails 1184779319.txt link at Watts.

Nth Hem Journal paper pdf downloadable here

TR022 Nth Hem documentation book partly online with 2 tables showing the breakdowns of their station numbers in each homogenization category.
38 stations UHI affected out of the thousands of NH cities is somewhat laughable and the paper should have been sent back by the editor or reviewers. But Jones could say that other UHI affected data were caught up in other checks of his and rejected for other reasons, eg. Category D maybe.

BTW Geoff Jenkins was one of the original 1990 IPCC authors and you might expect would know these things.
In the case of the Jones et al 1986 Southern Hemisphere Journal paper downloadable and TR027 book fully online.

Jones et al found only 3 (yes three) UHI affected stations to reject. Even more surreal than 38 – 3 out of what, 120 plus major cities in the Sth Hem.

So there are a few “nuances” to comprehend in the statements such as “On the one hand in 1986 he knows UHI affects the temperature..”.

IMHO Jones et al 1986 spoke and did less than the bare minimum required to be able to claim that they had adequately dealt with the UHI in global T data.

There was presumably some disquiet remaining in climate circles after the 1988 publication of Wood’s critique of Jones et al 1986. Otherwise, how do you explain the need for the Jones et al 1990 Letter to Nature at al ?

In the 1990 Letter to Nature they compared purportedly rural series from 3 regions, Western USSR, Eastern China, Eastern Australia – with their grid point trends from those same regions and claimed to prove that negligible UHI effect remained in their grid point trends – a conclusion the IPCC and UKMO has quoted ever since.

In fact what happened IMHO (and I did share in a work checking what they did in Eastern Australia) – was that their Rural series contained significant UHI amplification in the trend – hence they were able to demonstrate tolerable agreement with their grid points trends which also carry UHI contamination.

So Mohib, when you say above; “But then in his 1990 paper he takes the position with Wang that UHI is not a factor in temperatures.” Can you see now that is not a fair summing up of the situation.

In fact Jones et al 1990 was purporting to demonstrate that Rural series had similar trends to his grid point series – ergo by their reasoning there can not be significant UHI effect in either. I hope that that explain it clearer.

Jones et al 1990 is now further unraveling helped along by Doug Keenans persistence and events revealed in Climategate emails. That all these prominent co-authors lent their names to the shoddy 1990 Letter to Nature is a classic case of IPCC science at work.

BoM Australia, News and Views, Surface Record

How can it serve the Australian national interest by having the BoM mislead us ?

22 Comments

On the night of the 11th-12 of Jan 2010 Melbourne sweated through an uncomfortably hot night. Just a couple of media refs will give you the gist but Google could find more no doubt. There is talk of Melbourne’s “..equal hottest night ever.” But I see no sign of balancing statements which should have refered to two facts.
[1] The record equal temperature was measured in the centre of the Melbourne urban heat island (UHI) which has grown at night by 2 degrees centigrade in the last 60 years.
[2] The BoM should have stated that there was little sign the hot night was a record breaker outside of Melbourne.
This BoM map shows the minimum temperature anomaly for the 12th Jan.
Vic min T anomaly 12 Jan 2010
Click for the full Australian map.
You can make those maps here.
To test how widespread record breaking temperatures were that night I checked 11 sets of station data and found only one with a record high minimum on the 12th. Note my daily data is only updated to April 2007, so the true rankings might be even lower if there have been notably hot nights in the 32 months since then.
Continue reading How can it serve the Australian national interest by having the BoM mislead us ? →