Answer To Reader Questions On GISS

http://realclimatescience.com/

Good questions.

1. The baseline difference is not going to come close to accounting for the 5-10C discrepancy in northern Greenland.

2. The smoothing is exactly the problem. GISS has been diverging from HadCRUT over the last decade, because they generate imaginary Arctic data. Hansen wrote this :

“A likely explanation for discrepancy in identification of the warmest year is the fact that the HadCRUT analysis excludes much of the Arctic ….. (whereas GISS) estimates temperature anomalies throughout most of the Arctic.”

3. Temperatures in the capital Nuuk have been far below normal all but a few days since the beginning of March.

http://www.wunderground.com/

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Answer To Reader Questions On GISS

  1. magellan says:

    LOL
    glc has been trying to sell his dead parrot on other forums. You Steve are wasting your time. Glc has a lifetime membership on the GISS defense team, and as you well know, Zeke @ co. have replicated GIStemp using GISS values thereby justifying Hansen’s treatment of Arctic unmeasured measurements.

    I can pretty much predict his responses. Expect at least one to include some cherry picked start/end points showing “good agreement” between GISS and ___________ (fill in the blank) employing a meaningless linear regression “analysis” with R2 values of about zero. When that is shot down in flames he’ll come back with some other goofy cockeyed argument.

    Oh and beware; David Stockwell, Briggs, McIntyre, Loehle……. all dopes. Hansen otoh is a statistical genius with a gift to know within .01 degC the temperature of any particular location on the globe without the need to measure it using obsolete thermometers, but especially the Arctic where nobody can prove the negative. See, you just don’t have the capacity to understand the intellectual giant that is Dr. James Hansen.

    All those GISS adjustments? No problem. Cooling the past and warming the present is perfectly justifiable; saving the planet is too important to quibble about such trivial matters. Again, the Great Wizard knows all. Nothing to see here, move along.

    That the surface is warming faster than the lower troposphere when it should be the opposite according to the greenhouse effect theory, well just ignore that too. UHI and other issues are all accounted for. Remember, GISS has been replicated using GISS values. Besides, Hansen has already stated global warming has continued unabated, accelerating out of control as has OHC, sea level rise etc., and that’s the important part (Hansen).

    It is time to assimilate and just give up Steve.

  2. Jimbo says:

    Hey Glc,
    smoothing = guessing or gissing whichever you prefer 😉

    I wonder way the multi-arrested activist Hansen would lean his gut instinct guesses.

  3. Glc says:

    No-one is saying that Greenland was 5-10 deg above normal. The anomaly maps you linked to are not reliable on a regional level. You’re reading too much into them.

    Let’s get other wunderground station data from Greenland and compare it with GISS data. Come on, Steve, it’s time to perform a proper analysis.

    • What are you talking about? The extrapolated grid cells (represented by the map) are how GISS calculates the global temperature.

    • suyts says:

      lol, so GISS regional temp analysis is pretty meaningless(even though its used to discern global temps), so its unfair for Steve to make comparisons to the meaningless invented regional temps ascribed by GISS via the pink marker……….. go it.

      • Glc says:

        Steve et al

        Since you seem reluctant to do a proper anlaysis I’ve had a look at a number of the March 2011 tmeprature records in the wunderground database.

        Now we’ve already seen that GISS and Wunderground agree in Nuuk. The also agree at Egedesminde where WU reports a mean March Temperature of -13 deg C (GISS is -12.9 deg C). See
        http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/BGAA/2011/3/1/CustomHistory.html?dayend=31&monthend=3&yearend=2011&req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA

        However the interesting bit is Northern Greenland. I’ve checked 2 stations, i.e. Danmarkshavn (76 deg N) and Nord Aws (81.6 deg N). Unfortunately, the WU station history does not report the mean figures however it does show a monthly graph.

        This is for Danmarkshavn (the most southerly station of the 2)

        http://www.wunderground.com/history/wmo/04320/2011/3/1/CustomHistory.html?dayend=31&monthend=3&yearend=2011&req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA

        GISS reports a mean March temperature of -20.3 deg. I’m going to stick my neck out and say that looks pretty lose to the WU mean temp. Next we have Nord Aws (or Ads in GISS). At 81.6 deg N this is the most notherly Greenland station I could find
        Here’s the graph for March

        http://www.wunderground.com/history/station/04312/2011/3/1/CustomHistory.html?dayend=31&monthend=3&yearend=2011&req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA

        The GISS mean temperature for March is -24.6. Again this looks pretty close to the the graph. I’m sure we can always check the actual figures somewhere. Anyway – now we have the interesting bit.

        The Danmarkshavn temperature for March 2011 is around 2.4 deg warmer than the 1981-2010 average. But as we move further North the anomaly becomes greater. The Nord Aws temperature for March 2011 is 5.5 deg warmer than the 1981-2010 average.

        It seems, therefore, as though GISS may be right. While Southern Greenland was cooler than normal, Northern Greenland was warmer than average. The “discrepancy” you found, Steve, was simply a short term “discrepancy” between the surface and the LT. It’s the sort of thing that probably happens all the while.

        • You are astonishing me with your inability to comprehend what I am talking about. The problem is the areas where they don’t have data, not the areas where they do.

      • papertiger says:

        The Danmarkshavn temperature for March 2011 is around 2.4 deg warmer than the 1981-2010 average. But as we move further North the anomaly becomes greater. The Nord Aws temperature for March 2011 is 5.5 deg warmer than the 1981-2010 average.
        ====================================================

        I thought we already established that GISS numbers are based on the 1951-1980 baseline.

        Apples and oranges mate.

        Unless the mismatched baselines you noted as issue #1 was just horse shit that you were using as a rhetorical filigree.

  4. Glc says:

    Apologies for the typos in the previous post. I couldn’t see what I was typing much of the time. However, I think the main points are clear enough.

  5. Glc says:

    stevengoddard says:
    May 11, 2011 at 10:13 pm
    You are astonishing me with your inability to comprehend what I am talking about. The problem is the areas where they don’t have data, not the areas where they do.

    Rubbish. Your original post discussed the ‘discrepancy’ between GISS and UAH (and later RSS) – implying that GISS had got Greenland wrong. However, you made the mistake of citing the wunderground data. Checking both sets of data it’s clear that GISS and WU are in complete agreement right across Greenland. There is an apparent discrepancy between GISS and the satellite data over the northern region of Greenland but that will understandably happen from time to time due to measurement at different altitudes.

    You have tried to change the discussion to one about arctic extrapolation, i.e. a separate issue but one I’m happy to discuss if you wish. We can start y looking at the DMI plot for March

    http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

    March lies roughly between Day 60 and Day 90. The temperature for most of that period is at least 5 deg above normal which is in close agreement with GISS if I recall correctly.

  6. Glc says:

    I thought we already established that GISS numbers are based on the 1951-1980 baseline

    It’s a simple enough task to convert to a different baseline. GISS actually provides the tools to allow you to do it.

    • papertiger says:

      So you admit that point #1 was just bullshit advanced because you had nothing constructive to say.

      Noted.

  7. Glc says:

    stevengoddard says:
    May 11, 2011 at 11:09 pm
    You are absolutely brilliant. Find me the station in northern Greenland which is 5C above normal

    I have good reason to believe this station was ~5.5 deg warmer than normal in March

    http://www.wunderground.com/history/station/04312/2011/3/1/CustomHistory.html?dayend=31&monthend=3&yearend=2011&req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA

  8. Glc says:

    stevengoddard says:
    May 12, 2011 at 3:25 am

    GISS has no March data for the northern half of the island, which is the part Hansen shows as being hot.

    GISS does have data for the northern half of the island. I’ve shown it in previous posts – AND shown how GISS data agrees with multiple other sources.

    March was the 45th coldest out of 131 years in Nuuk.

    GISS does not disagree with this – nor do I. I’ve said – at least twice – that southern Greeenland was below normal (GISS shows this) but northern Greenland was above normal (See Danarkshavn and Nord Aws data). GISS, however, records that the whole region above 80N was about 5 deg C above normal in March. DMI agrees with this. The station data from within that region agrees with this – whichever source you use.

    I’m sorry that I don’t uncritically accept everything you post like a number of other readers but it’s clear that Your original point on this issue is WRONG.

    • Thanks for alerting me to this. The GISS data for Danarkshavn is completely at odds with satellite data. Using the same 1981-2010 baseline, GISS shows March more than 2C above normal, and satellite data shows it 1C below normal. Nord Ads is missing nearly half its years and can’t be considered a reasonable point of reference. The ice sheet makes up more than 90% of the island. Most of Greenland is at high altitude. GISS has no stations on the ice sheet and none that are much above sea level.

  9. Glc says:

    stevengoddard says:
    May 12, 2011 at 11:29 am
    Thanks for alerting me to this. The GISS data for Danarkshavn is completely at odds with satellite data.

    Are you having trouble here, Steve. Why don’t you get the wunderground data for Danmarkshavn. You were keen to use WU when you thought it supported your argument. I’ve said there is a discrepancy between the surface and satellite measurements. There may be a number of very good reasons for this. The question is – Is the GISS surface record for Danmarkshavn reliable? The answer is …. YES.

    See this link, Steve

    http://www.tutiempo.net/en/Climate/Danmarkshavn/03-2011/43200.htm

    It tells us that the average temperature for March 2011 is -20.3 deg C This is exactly the same as the GISS record. Please feel free to check it out. Now look here, Steve

    http://www.climatetemp.info/greenland/danmarkshavn.html

    This tells us that the average Danmarkshavn for March is -23 deg C thus implying that March 2011 was 2-3 deg warmer than normal at Danmarkshavn. Note, Steve, that I’m not even using GISS. I’m showing you that temepratures at the surface were warmer than normal in the northern half of the country whichever data source you use. The fact that temperatures in the LT were lower than normal is completley irrelevant. It just shows that surface and LT temps don’t always move in synch.

Leave a Reply

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