For Crickham- Critique of GISS Urbanization Adjustments

Discussion in 'Environment' started by IanC, Jun 3, 2014.

  1. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    10,601
    Thanks Received:
    1,239
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,072
    crickham said-
    I stumbled upon this paper that analyzes GISS algorithms for homogenizing temp data and removing urban bias. I thought you might like to read it.

    it certainly clears up quite a few of the adjustments and the methods for doing so.

    http://oprj.net/oprj-archive/climate-science/31/oprj-article-climate-science-31.pdf

    I, for one, have always been suspicious of new figures for old readings.

    this really is the oddest part. why does GISS basically stop adjusting after 1990?

    this paper really is amazing. I recommend it for anyone who wants to know more about the nuts and bolts of how global temp datasets are made.
     
  2. Crick
    Offline

    Crick Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2014
    Messages:
    11,932
    Thanks Received:
    1,050
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    N/A
    Ratings:
    +3,954
    First:Your really amazing paper: "Version: 0.1 (non peer-reviewed)"

    Second: "Not all cities show a warming relative to their rural surroundings. After trends were adjusted in urban weather stations around the world to match rural stations in their regions, in an effort to homogenise the temperature record, in 42 percent of cases, cities were getting cooler relative to their surroundings rather than warmer. One reason is that urban areas are heterogeneous, and weather stations are often sited in "cool islands" – parks, for example – within urban areas.
    [
    J. Hansen, R. Ruedy, M. Sato, M. Imhoff, W. Lawrence, D. Easterling, T. Peterson, and T. Karl (2001). "A closer look at United States and global surface temperature change". Journal of Geophysical Research 106: 239–247
    ]

    Third: "The preliminary results of an independent assessment carried out by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature group, and made available to the public in October 2011, found that among other scientific concerns raised by skeptics, the urban heat island effect did not bias the results obtained by NOAA, the Hadley Centre and NASA's GISS. The Berkeley Earth group also confirmed that over the past 50 years the land surface warmed by 0.911 °C, and their results closely matched those obtained from earlier studies.
    [
    1) Jeff Tollefson (2011-10-20). "Different method, same result: global warming is real". Nature News. doi:10.1038/news.2011.607. Retrieved 2011-10-22.
    2) "Cooling the Warming Debate: Major New Analysis Confirms That Global Warming Is Real". Science Daily. 2011-10-21. Retrieved 2011-10-22.
    3) Ian Sample (2011-10-20). "Global warming study finds no grounds for climate sceptics' concerns". The Guardian. Retrieved 2011-10-22.
    4) Richard Black (2011-10-21). "Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study". BBC News. Retrieved 2011-10-21.
    5) "Climate change: The heat is on". The Economist. 2011-10-22. Retrieved 2011-10-22.

    ]

    Items 2 and 3 via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_heat_island
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2014
  3. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    10,601
    Thanks Received:
    1,239
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,072
    does that mean you arent going to read it?

    are you not the slightest bit interested in finding out whether there actually are faults? or at least finding out more about how the process works even if you dont consider anything to be a fault?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    95,085
    Thanks Received:
    17,348
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +57,132
    The Warmers have been caught with their thumb on the scale so many times now, they have no credibility
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    10,601
    Thanks Received:
    1,239
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,072
    perhaps. but at least this paper shows why and how that thumb is applied. I read at least one of the Hansen&Reudy papers on UHI correction but this paper explains it better than they did. the homogenization algorithm is, um, interesting.

    one actual error, from a different source, showed how a large swath in Russia, Siberia, was contaminated because the original co-ordinates for the town (a city of a 1/4 of a million now) was now a reservoir and hence no bright lights! it is considered rural! and it spreads around to other temp stations within a thousand kilometers.
     
  6. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    10,601
    Thanks Received:
    1,239
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,072
    this is covered. you should read about it.

     
  7. Crick
    Offline

    Crick Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2014
    Messages:
    11,932
    Thanks Received:
    1,050
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    N/A
    Ratings:
    +3,954
    It does? Show us where they contacted GISS and simple ASKED?
     
  8. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    10,601
    Thanks Received:
    1,239
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,072
    to be fair, I think Reudy was only recently notified.

    for more background information check here...

    Cooling The Past In Siberia ? some supplementary information | Peter O'Neill's Blog
     
  9. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    10,601
    Thanks Received:
    1,239
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,072
  10. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    58,101
    Thanks Received:
    7,051
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +18,193
    Ian, when Muller began his study, you stated that you were ready to accept the results, whatever they were. When the results did not agree with your perconceived notions, you now refuse to accept them. You are not being honest at all.
     

Share This Page