Where Will GISS Find Future Warming?

Much of the reported warming from the 20th century was due to upwards adjustments of recent temperatures, and downwards adjustments of older temperatures.

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/epubs/ndp/ushcn/ts.ushcn_anom25_diffs_urb-raw_pg.gif

This worked pretty well until satellites showed up and provided some badly needed checks and balances on the adjusters. Since 1990 it has been tougher to justify any further upwards adjustments to the data.

For the claimed warming since 2000, GISS has relied on their data free Arctic hole.

Essentially all of the warming which GISS reports since 2000 has been due to imaginary extrapolated Arctic data. The animation below shows GISS 2000-2009 trends, alternating between measured data and extrapolated data.

GISS shows between 2 and 4C warming at the pole, without a single thermometer reading within 800 km. This heavily skews the global trend data, because places which actually have thermometers show little or no warming.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/

So how does Hansen’s 2-4C Arctic warming compare with satellite data? UAH shows about one tenth of Hansen’s imaginary Arctic trend – at 0.25C.

Bottom line. Other than the 1979-2000 (0.2C) warming confirmed by satellites, much of the claimed global warming is based on tainted and probably useless data. Why is this nonsense allowed to continue? It isn’t science.

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

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

10 Responses to Where Will GISS Find Future Warming?

  1. Sandy Rham says:

    I am beginning to suspect that an awful lot of Academically trusted ‘science’ needs auditting by the armchair army, not just climatology.

  2. Dr. James Hansen …”even though in certain cases it might be more accurate to use reanalysis rather than extrapolate observations, I prefer not to mix observations and models. Sometimes the extrapolations will be off in one direction and sometimes in another. If the weather patterns are such that there is a cool pool in the central Arctic, then our extrapolation is likely to misrepresent the situation. So I don’t intend to leave the impression that I think it is accurate in individual situations, but I think that, on the average, it is better than omitting the Arctic, thus implicitly assuming that it has the same tendency as the average of all global regions with data.”

    Make of that what you will.

    • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

      I prefer not to mix observations and models.

      So he goes with the models.

      (I went with a couple of models. Was difficult, high maintenance and all, you know?)

  3. LetsGoViking says:

    Sounds like hedging to me…

  4. Scarface says:

    So, we have computer models for future climate conditions that are based on wrong assumptions in order to make it warmer in 100 years and we have current measurements that show it’s already warmer today than it really is, that are based on the absence of real data.

    How long will it take for the rest of the world to find out that this CAGW is BS?

  5. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    imaginary extrapolated Arctic data

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

    Imagine there’s no cold in the Arctic
    It’s easy if you try
    Warming at the South Pole
    Above us polar bears that have died

    Imagine all the stations
    Recorded, not repor-or-or-orted

    You may say I’m a believer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope some day you’ll join us
    And the world will live as drones

    Imagine there’s no money
    Only serfdom everywhere
    Al Gore in a Gulfstream
    Pachauri in a bed

    Imagine all the people
    In Zhivago ho-ome-steads

    Yo-o-o-o-ou

    You may say I’m a believer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope some day you’ll join us
    And the world will live as drones

    Imagine cat 5 hurricanes
    Tornadoes from the sky
    Floods, dust storms, and starvation
    Children only cry

    Don’t think so? There’s no pressure,
    Red button, you will di-i-i-i-i-ie

    You may say I’m a believer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope some day you’ll join us
    And the world will live as drones

    Imagine there’s no science
    An Inconvenient is the Truth
    The IPCC the only text book
    The consensus thinks for you

    Imagine all the pupils
    Learning controlled view-ew-ew-ew-ew-ews

    You may say I’m a believer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope some day you’ll join us
    And the world will live as drones

    😉

  6. PJB says:

    Where there’s a will (ingness to unscrupulously adulterate or invent values that support a pre-determined expectation)

    There’s a way (to go Steven for calling out the bullies and the blusterers on their falsehoods and machinations)

  7. Pingback: AGW’s Logical Impossibility: The ‘Argument Ad Providentiam’ « The Unbearable Nakedness of CLIMATE CHANGE

  8. omnologos says:

    Thank you Steven for helping add yet another item to my list of signs that AGW seems more and more a miracle than anything else…

    As for AAiM, this is one of my AGW songs…those Minnesotans are not alone… 😎

    “It ain’t necessarily so”

    It ain’t necessarily so
    It ain’t necessarily so
    The t’ings dat yo’ li’ble
    To read in de IPCC,
    It ain’t necessarily so.

    Li’l CO2 was small, but oh my !
    Li’l CO2 was small, but oh my !
    He fought Big Solar Influence
    Who lay down an’ dieth !
    Li’l CO2 was small, but oh my !

    Wadoo, zim bam boddle-oo,
    Hoodle ah da wa da,
    Scatty wah !
    Oh yeah !…

    Oh Phil Jones, he lived in de CRU,
    Oh Phil Jones, he lived in de CRU,
    Fo’ he made his home in
    Dat institute’s warming.
    Oh Phil Jones, he lived in de CRU.

    Li’l Mann was fond of a trend.
    Li’l Mann was fond of a trend.
    He floated on bristlecones
    Till Ol’ Briffa and colleagues,
    They saved him, they said, and dat trend.

    Wadoo …

    Well, it ain’t necessarily so
    Well, it ain’t necessarily so
    Dey tells all you chillun
    De skepticism’s a villun,
    But it ain’t necessarily so !

    To get with the Science
    Don’ bet your emissions!
    Live clean ! Don’ have no pollution !
    Oh, I takes dat IPCC gospel
    Whenever it’s pos’ble,
    But wid a grain of salt.

    Gavin Schmidt wrote nine hundred blogs,
    Gavin Schmidt wrote nine hundred blogs,
    But who calls dat writin’
    When no reality will give in
    To no man with nine hundred blogs ?

    I’m preachin’ dis sermon to show,
    It ain’t nece-ain’t nece
    Ain’t nece-ain’t nece
    Ain’t necessarily … so !

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s