Greenland’s Capital Cooling 24 Degrees Per Century Since 2003

The fraudsters at the New York Times claim that Greenland is heating rapidly. In fact, temperatures there are plummeting.

Temperatures at Nuuk, Greenland have been below normal for the past five years. This year is the coldest since the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in the early 1990’s. Since 2003, temperatures there have been falling at a rate of 24 degrees C per century.

2015-10-31-03-35-12

Vikings used to farm near Nuuk. But now it is much too cold there for farming.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Greenland’s Capital Cooling 24 Degrees Per Century Since 2003

  1. Notes on the Feasibility of Committing Successful Fraud in the Greenland Temperature Record

    by Richard T. Fowler
    2015/10/31

    An interesting note: based on the above graph, if just 2010 and 2003 are reduced from their indicated level to the level of 1985, it seems we just about have a cooling trend from all the way back to 1958, and up through 2015. That is a period of 58 years.

    How easy is it, with fraud, to get 201o down to the level of 1985? Well, just look at the following hypotheticals as an example:

    Month. . . Anomaly (°C)

    Jan. +7.0
    Feb. +6.0
    Mr. +4.5
    Apr. +3.5
    My. +2.0
    Jne. +1.0
    Jul. +0.7
    Aug. +1.0
    Sep. +2.0
    Oct. +3.5
    Nov. +4.5
    Dec. +6.0

    MEAN ANOMALY: +3.475 °C

    ==========================

    Month. . . Anomaly (°C). . .Δ (Scenario 1 – Scenario 2)

    Jan. +5.0 +2.0°C
    Feb. +4.0 +2.0°C
    Mr. +3.0 +1.5°C
    Apr. +1.5 +2.0°C
    My. +0.5 +1.5°C
    Jne. 0.0 +1.0°C
    Jul. 0.0 +0.7°C
    Aug. 0.0 +1.0°C
    Sep. +0.5 +1.5°C
    Oct. +1.5 +2.0°C
    Nov. +3.0 +1.5°C
    Dec. +4.0 +2.0°C

    MEAN ANOMALY: +1.92°C
    ANNUAL Δ (SCENARIO 1 – SCENARIO 2): +1.555°C

    ================================

    Now, on the first scenario, if you take Jan. and Dec. and just add 1.0°C to each of them, the mean anomaly for the year goes from +3.475°C to 3.64°C — just from changing two months by 1.0°C each.

    And such a change can often be done to a month simply by erasing one or two days’ worth of temperature data from the database. If, in some cases, that’s not enough to give the desired amount of fraud, one can just boost a few of the remaining temperatures by a few degrees each. After all, the new normal is that they no longer consider it necessary to inform any of us the reason for any of the “adjustments” they make.

    Also notice that, in a year like my example where summer temps are at or very close to the mean, one can create all the necessary fraud simply by boosting the winter months. While such a difference in actual winter temps would obviously have no discernible effect on the Greenland ice sheet’s melting rate, these scenarios show that in certain cases, that change alone (just for a few months out of a single year in a 58-year series) can be sufficient to change a statistically significant 58-year warming trend into a statistically significant 58-year cooling trend.

    Which is, of course, a reflection of the high degree of uncertainty pertaining to these types of estimates of the trend in mean temperature for a region as small as Greenland. In other words, based on the prevailing coverage rates in terms of square miles per thermometer, a region the size of Greenland has too few stations (or at least too few in the GHCN) to yield a low degree of uncertainty over a period as short as 58 years. To get low uncertainty for such a small region, one has to either have a lot higher coverage rate than is typical for the GHCN, or a lot more than 58 years of good data.

    But the greatest point to be drawn here is that for fraudsters, the high level of uncertainty is a positive feature, since for each act of fraud, they get a lot more bang in terms of its effect on the overall mean.

    • Correction: the last sentence of the third-to-last paragraph should read “[. . .] to change a statistically significant 58-year cooling trend into a statistically significant 58-year warming trend.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.