I received the following note* from Vincent Gray. He began by wishing us all "the compliments of the season" and then lauched into a discussion of mean global surface temperature records:
The theory that "Climate Change" is caused by increases in carbon dioxide stands or falls on the reliability of the "mean global surface temperature record" as compiled by the three compilers, Hadley Centre (UK) , GISS (Goddard Institute of Space Studies), USA, and GHCN (Global Historic Climatology Network), USA.
But how reliable is it?
There are enormous changes in the numbers of weather stations used for compilation of the "suface record" at different periods. In 1900 there were 1500, in 1980 there were 6000 and in 1998 there were 2700.
The averages are taken from "grid boxes" made up of 5ºx5º latitude/longitude squares on a Mercator map. Out of a possible total of 2,592 grid boxes, there were 300 available In 1900, 850 in 1980 and 500 in 1998. However, these were not distributed uniformly. There was a high density in the USA and in Western Europe and vast gaps in Africa, South America, India and Siberia. Antarctica had none until fairly recently.
Then there is the reliability for individual weather stations to record temperature trends.
The following website gives photographs of a large number of official weather stations, all of which are obviously unsuitable for recording long term trends. One is even on top of a building:
Cheers, Vincent Gray
New Zealand
-----------------------
* I have shortened and edited 'the note'.
Also by Vincent Grey:
"The Cause of Global Warming", Energy and Environment 11 pages 613-629, 2000,
http://www.john-daly.com/cause/cause.htm), and
"Regional Climate Change" at http://www.john-daly.com/guests/regional.htm.
God - does anyone read this crap? I was just looking for a 2006 average surface temperature - I am thinking it is about the 6th warmest year on record. The Arctic is cooling as well. This continues the sideways trend in global temperatures since 1998. Until a rational discussion of the how and why of this reality occurs - after 8 years of global cooling - I despair of the spin doctors of science.
I would advise less theory and more empiricism.
No Louis - your entire blogging history is verbal biffo and ad hom stun gun followed by "shock surprise" - an instant glass jaw job to any rebuttal !
Quote:
"Louis can talk about ad homs and strongly worded opinions to himself - he's an expert in verbal biffo but does a great glass jaw routine when it suits him too."
Logically this means my preceding post: "After Luke's latest, I am speechless. Nothing to add.
And this is the blog voice for climate change?"
caused Luke to opine.
Raises eyebrows slightly. Wonders what 'ad hom' he uttered on this thread. Concludes that Luke has problems distinguishing fiction with reality.
Back on the Pielke "number of stations" issue - Pielke needs to show bias as a consequence of any of this - I don't see that he has ! It's just more quibbling and squirming.
Yo Jim still here .. ..
We have discussed this at length on the blog in recent posts over the last 2 months - the position is that the few stations in inner continental Antarctica are showing only slight warming (or not moving much in trend) while the Antarctic Peninsula is warming as is the surrounding ocean.
The issue is discussed in 'Interpretation of Recent Southern Hemisphere Climate Change' by Thompson and Solomon
in Science 3 May 2002: 895, DOI: 10.1126/science.1069270
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/296/5569/895 for more information
For a graphic view of that trend visit http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=17257.
The net result of the ozone hole and greenhouse effect is to lock the polar vortex in one direction essentially isolating the inner part of continent. i.e. it makes quite good sense. The northern Arctic is very different for a number of reasons and warming quickly.
For a whole rave on cold anomalies see - http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/001802.html
Don't know if you're still here Luke but if so , as we established in a previous post , Antartica is cooling not warming up.
The source was NASA as I recall......
Very strange 403 forbidden error with my ISP - I have now seen the difficult to see animations on another Internet Service Provider.
I find the drop off in climate station numbers in Australia after 1990 to almost a handful, most implausible.
Check Figure 2 here:
http://www.nrw.qld.gov.au/silo/datadrill/
Therefore I have little confidence in these animations.
Louis can talk about ad homs and strongly worded opinions to himself - he's an expert in verbal biffo but does a great glass jaw routine when it suits him too.
(1) your comment on the Tennyson paper is cryptic - what point are you making. It's not clear. If it's logarithmic - yes that's already been factored in - so what?
(2) Similarly your point on the PNAS paper - what do you mean?
So I reiterate I'm unclear what you're banging on about.
(3) If you're referring to the station location mpgs I get the same error reported by one of the blog commentators.
"Forbidden
You don’t have permission to access /~climate/html_pages/ghcn_T_stn.html on this server.
Forbidden
You don’t have permission to access /~climate/html_pages/Ghcn2_images/air_loc.mpg on this server."
The suggested workaround below doesn't work either.
In any case I can well imagine what it shows from the text supplied.
So you have to ask yourself then do we know anything about terrestrial temperatures? Clearly we do in Australia from the BoM high quality reference network. CRU have published above what they think the error estimates on their work are. No comment from yourself. I think they are well aware of limitations of the global data if you read their paper critically. The estimate of global temperature is an estimate - is it good enough as a trend indicator or not?
But we also have borehole data suggesting it's warming. Artic melt. Melting around the edge of Greenland (accelerating) and Antartica. Species moving and behaving ahead of schedule. Glaciers melting. Frosts declining. Extreme cold temperature events trending down in Europe, Asia, USA, Australia. (see my post this blog of a week ago. Satellite measurements of ocean temperatures, tropospheric and stratospheric temperatures. Confirmation of the quantum of greenhouse flux and water vapour impact by ground radiometer measurement - Philpona (archives this blog) and closure of radiation windows observed by satellite commensurate with a greenhouse response (archives this blog).
Malcolm I think we do have some collaborating evidence other than ground stations !
So yes there are difficulties with the global met station data sets. As acknowledged by the authors. Are the difficulties enough to dismiss the CRU, GHCN and GISS measurements as totally useless. Let's not pussy foot around here. Pick "yes" but please don't make any more comments about warming or cooling coz you simply don't know !
I think despite the difficulties which are being looked ongoing for continuous quality improvement they are useful analyses based on the error analyses and furthermore the trends line up with other alternative lines of evidence.
Your position as stated is that we simply have no idea really what the world's temperature really is!
Because the difficulties are self evident.
As I said in my original inoccuous comments, run the Paul Biggs dynamic file for your self, see for your self, and draw your own conclusions.
Where is the quality research argument here.?
It is just statements of measured fact ie the number and disposition of measuring stations used over time, shown dynamically.
I added my own inferences to what I read and saw, and the same applies to the vg Tennyson paper on Water Vapour.
Personally I agree with Louis your response, to my seemingly innocous commentary was over the top.
It might be redeemable if you had a good record of reading and comprehending your own references before sounding off at others, never mind the endless propensity for abuse.
Good Bye
OK Malcolm I'm sorry (well I'm not really) but please come back. It's been a lonely two days and I haven't seen anyone except Phil and he can't speak or move without assistance.