We find that, together, unsustainable groundwater use, artificial reservoir water impoundment, climate-driven changes in terrestrial water storage and the loss of water from closed basins have contributed a sea-level rise of about 0.77?mm?yr?1 between 1961 and 2003, about 42% of the observed sea-level rise.
Note the gratuitous comment about climate change – needed to get through peer-review. Also, reservoir water impoundment would tend to lower sea level.
h/t to jlc
One popular claim about USHCN adjustments is that they are “peer-reviewed” and thus sound.
This is complete nonsense. What is peer-reviewed are a couple of papers outlining potential issues impacting temperature readings and proposed remedies. It is like saying that a piece of production software has been validated, because a few people within the company agreed to a general high level specification.
I am a commercial software developer. The process of developing production software involves an seemingly endless series of reviews from specification to delivery, by a wide range of people from many different disciplines and from both within and outside of the organization. Any product which doesn’t go through this process is likely to fail.
I’ve done comparisons between the TOBS (Time of Observation Bias) spec, and the actual implementation of TOBS – and it isn’t even close to what is written in the spec – for several different reasons.
A Closer Look At USHCN TOBS Adjustments | Real Science
The total adjustments are much larger than the specification implies. As far as I can tell, the actual adjustment software has a grossly deficient quality control process.
Furthermore, once you start adjusting temperatures, you have opened the door to confirmation bias. The UHI adjustment is much too small, and the other adjustments are much too large. These temperature records form the basis of climate science, and they are generated by work which is the quality of a freshman programming project.
They have turned a cooling trend into a warming trend, and don’t even put a disclaimer on the graphs. This isn’t even good enough for government work. I see no reason to believe that NCDC/USHCN/NASA US temperature trends have any validity.
One year ago this week, President Barack Obama waited for a hot day in Washington and hurriedly held an outdoor speech, where he could perspire, engage in third rate acting, and blame global warming.
The president might be surprised to learn that temperatures are normally hot in the summer. The graph below shows the annual percentage of US June temperatures above 100 degrees through the 21st of the month.
Prior to 1954, 100 degree June days were much more common, and this June has been below the 1895-2014 mean.
For the entire summer, the frequency of 100 degree days has dropped dramatically since the 1930s.
I have been accused several times in the last 24 hours of data tampering and cherry picking, because I use the the entire unaltered, measured HCN data set.
Only altered, fabricated data which reverses the measured US cooling trend is considered acceptable by climate alarmists.
Yesterday I commented that Ghana’s right wing kept passing the ball to the German goalkeeper. And today The Telegraph reports.
Football match-fixing: Ghana deal casts cloud over World Cup finals in Brazil
Exclusive: undercover investigation by The Telegraph and Channel Four’s Dispatches programme finds that the President of Ghana’s Football Association agreed for the team to play in international matches that others were prepared to rig
Football match-fixing deal casts cloud over World Cup – Telegraph
I’ve shown how NASA and NOAA have dramatically altered the US temperature record, and they are doing the same thing in other countries, like Iceland and Australia – almost always cooling the past, which creates the appearance of warming.
Iceland
Australia
Progressives do everything they can to drive young men insane, by repressing all normal male behavior and telling teens that they are destroying the planet by driving their car.
Then when teenage boys go completely insane and kill their peers with knives, cars, explosives and guns, progressives jump to the obvious conclusion that the madness could have been prevented by punishing duck hunters.
Prior to the year 2000, NASA showed US temperatures cooling since the 1930’s, and 1934 much warmer than 1998.
NASA’s top climatologist said that the US had been cooling
Whither U.S. Climate?
By James Hansen, Reto Ruedy, Jay Glascoe and Makiko Sato — August 1999Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought.
in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases — in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the country
NOAA and CRU also reported no warming in the US during the century prior to 1989.
February 04, 1989
Last week, scientists from the United States Commerce Department’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said that a study of temperature readings for the contiguous 48 states over the last century showed there had been no significant change in average temperature over that period. Dr. (Phil) Jones said in a telephone interview today that his own results for the 48 states agreed with those findings.
Right after the year 2000, NASA and NOAA dramatically altered US climate history, making the past much colder and the present much warmer. The animation below shows how NASA cooled 1934 and warmed 1998, to make 1998 the hottest year in US history instead of 1934. This alteration turned a long term cooling trend since 1930 into a warming trend.
But NASA and NOAA have a little problem. The EPA still shows that heatwaves during the 1930s were by far the worst in US temperature record.
Heat waves in the 1930s remain the most severe heat waves in the U.S. historical record (see Figure 1).
George Orwell explained how this worked.
“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”
? George Orwell, 1984
The US goalkeeper was amazing. Bradley played great except for his Rooney moment in front of the goal. Incredible shot by Jones. Well coached by Klingsman, except for a poor decision at the end to not pull everybody back. Ronaldo was barely in the game until the last 10 seconds.
All in all a great result, because it makes next week’s match with Germany more interesting.
