New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial


Locutus
#1
PRESS RELEASE – U.S. Temperature trends show a spurious doubling due to NOAA station siting problems and post measurement adjustments.

Chico, CA July 29th, 2012 – 12 PM PDT – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

A comparison and summary of trends is shown from the paper. Acceptably placed thermometers away from common urban influences read much cooler nationwide:





A reanalysis of U.S. surface station temperatures has been performed using the recently WMO-approved Siting Classification System devised by METEO-France’s Michel Leroy. The new siting classification more accurately characterizes the quality of the location in terms of monitoring long-term spatially representative surface temperature trends. The new analysis demonstrates that reported 1979-2008 U.S. temperature trends are spuriously doubled, with 92% of that over-estimation resulting from erroneous NOAA adjustments of well-sited stations upward. The paper is the first to use the updated siting system which addresses USHCN siting issues and data adjustments.

The new improved assessment, for the years 1979 to 2008, yields a trend of +0.155C per decade from the high quality sites, a +0.248 C per decade trend for poorly sited locations, and a trend of +0.309 C per decade after NOAA adjusts the data. This issue of station siting quality is expected to be an issue with respect to the monitoring of land surface temperature throughout the Global Historical Climate Network and in the BEST network.

Today, a new paper has been released that is the culmination of knowledge gleaned from five years of work by Anthony Watts and the many volunteers and contributors to the SurfaceStations project started in 2007.


more


New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial | Watts Up With That?


h/t sda
 
petros
+1
#2
So I won't be up to my tits in sea water by fall?
 
taxslave
+3
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

So I won't be up to my tits in sea water by fall?

Looks like I won't be getting waterfront property anytime soon either. I had hoped on polar ice melt to bring the water to me since the odds seemed better than winning the lottery so I could afford to buy waterfront property.
 
Cabbagesandking
+2
#4
Desperation knows no limits. Watts rushes a fairy story days after the BEST study kills all his previous denial. A fairy story written by a college dropout Weatherman (Watts); a mining engineer (MacIntyre); Jones ( a long time nobody and sidekisk of Watts); Christy (the only scientist of the four BUT one who puts his Church teachings before his science).

This is the foolish crap that Watts has been promising for six or seven years. He did not "write" the promised paper earlier because, Menne, one of the citations, in an independent study, proved that Watts was "right" and that thhere was a slight bias. A slight cooling bias and the opposite of Watts claims.

Of course, the fact that the bias is adjusted for would not be something that Watts would want to acknowledge even if, in his abysmal ignorance of science, he understood.

Pure crap and likely Watts last gasp before his bubble bursts and the bubble reputation he has enjoyed for several years among the frightened and ignorant, bursts with it.
 
Ron in Regina
+3
#5
You are just a ray of sunshine.
 
EagleSmack
+5
#6
Well there are always people who want the Apocalypse Ron. Cabbage falls into that category. He needs End Times.
 
Cabbagesandking
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

Well there are always people who want the Apocalypse Ron. Cabbage falls into that category. He needs End Times.

Again, you do not see the forest for the trees. The "End Times;" the Rapture, is what Christy, the scientist among the four, is waiting for. The Rapture is what the adherents to Stephen Harper's Church are waiting for. Stockwell Day and all those religious Righters in the US, including a bunch of Republican Congressmen and Senators, are waiting for it.

It is among those waiting for the End Times that the fossil fuel industry finds most of its support.

I would like to prevent the "End Times" coming from the Rule of the Laws of Physics. A very different End Times.
 
Ron in Regina
+1
#8
The Thread title say's: " New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial"

I came in wondering if it referred to half the claims of global warming in the USA.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#9
I wonder if the people who did this study cherry picked information and ignored information about adjustments made for temperatures coming from urban heat islands.
 
EagleSmack
+2
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by Cabbagesandking View Post

Again, you do not see the forest for the trees. The "End Times;" the Rapture, is what Christy, the scientist among the four, is waiting for. The Rapture is what the adherents to Stephen Harper's Church are waiting for. Stockwell Day and all those religious Righters in the US, including a bunch of Republican Congressmen and Senators, are waiting for it.

Keep drinking that Kool-Aid

Quote:

It is among those waiting for the End Times that the fossil fuel industry finds most of its support.

I would like to prevent the "End Times" coming from the Rule of the Laws of Physics. A very different End Times.

End times can be many things... not just the rapture. End times simply means the end of the world as far as I am concerned.

Tell me Cabbage... are you afraid? Are you in fear of this?
 
L Gilbert
+1
#11
Unless something really weird happens, like a meteor smacks us out of orbit or something, there won't be any end of times till the sun starts going into red giant phase and the planet turns into a charcoal briquet.
 
Cabbagesandking
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

I wonder if the people who did this study cherry picked information and ignored information about adjustments made for temperatures coming from urban heat islands.

Some six or seven years ago, Watts made this claim and promised that he was going to "write a paper" about t. He never has in spite of being taunted by those who see through him. For myself, I wondered whether he was learning to write first.

A small army of volunteers from those who follow his nonsense, spent a lot of time gathering statistics from the so-called bad sites.

Then, Menne, published his study that found a very slight cooling effect that was, so insignificant that it was hardly worth talking about.

Watts has been quiet about it since. This bit of fakery is clearly a rush job to try to take the sting out of Mueller's conversion.
 
CDNBear
+6
#13  Top Rated Post
That's funny, I see a lot of attacks on the authors, not a lot of attack on, err, correction, no attack, on the paper.

It's odd how that's something some people cry like a bitch about, when the tables are turned, lol.
 
Just the Facts
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Ron in Regina View Post

The Thread title say's: " New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial"

I came in wondering if it referred to half the claims of global warming in the USA.

Yes, but not the half you were thinking of. It was the other half.
 
L Gilbert
#15
lol "New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial". So the study is saying that half the climate change actually was man-made I guess.
 
eh1eh
#16
Nobody here would know so why all the talk?
 
taxslave
#17
If all the politicians just shut their yaps for a while we would be headed back into an ice age.
 
Bar Sinister
#18
Always important to consider the source in these articles, and I note that the site publishing the article is a global warming denial site. Until the 99% of climatologists who agree with AGW reverse their stand I would take this article with a grain of salt.
 
Tonington
+2
#19
Well, after a read of the unpublished manuscript, I've found a couple problems. The first is that this paper is comparing NCDC homogenized data, that is data that has been processed to amongst other things remove the influence of the shoddy stations that Watts et al. have described, but also to account for various changes over the years such as the time of day measurements are taken, changes to station equipment, etc. Watts et al. at no point evaluate the homogenization, nor do they even produce their own homogenized data to compare apples to apples. The raw data they use as I mention already will have more than just urban heat islands influencing the trend, so that's one big fail.

A second is the huge disconnect between the satellite record and the record produced in this paper. And John Christy who runs one of the satellite groups is an author, as is Steve McIntyre! There is an amplification factor between the surface and the satellites which are measuring the entire lower troposphere, due to such things as the water vapour feedback. When McIntyre evaluated the amplification factor, he found that it varies between about 0.8 to 1.2, while Watts claimed in this paper that it varies between 1.1 to 1.4, which is a pretty big difference. In this paper, they calculated a trend of about 0.155°C per decade, while the satellites show a trend of ~0.24°C per decade.

The fundamental flaw is that Watts is assuming that the raw data is best, when clearly it is not. He never accounts for station moves, he never accounts for instrument changes, he never accounts for even time of measurement changes, and in the end his results are far outside even the satellite data which can't possibly be said to have placement issues like surface stations do.

A big yawn. He's comparing apples to oranges, and his fruit is spoiled by omissions of other significant and well known factors.

ETA: As an added bonus for really funny, Watts cites his publication in 2009...which was published by the Heartland Institute. Essentially that is grey literature, which is supremely funny considering Watts made a great deal out of the IPCC citing grey literature in their reports. I guess he's not really adverse to citing non-peer reviewed studies if it suits his purpose.
 
Scooby
+1
#20
The global warming issue is a really a very small part of the trouble facing the environment. Massive over-consumption of "throw-away" products and waste of resources will kill us all a lot sooner than rising sea levels and weather problems.
 
L Gilbert
#21
Lack of enough fresh water to go around will likely be the biggest threat to the world's population.
 
Bar Sinister
+2
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Scooby View Post

The global warming issue is a really a very small part of the trouble facing the environment. Massive over-consumption of "throw-away" products and waste of resources will kill us all a lot sooner than rising sea levels and weather problems.

I would not bet on that. Huge droughts in Africa have already killed tens of thousands and will kill more. Desertification and changing rainfall and snowfall patterns have and will disrupt agriculture worldwide resulting in rising food prices and shortages for those living at subsistence levels. I'm not saying that over-consumption is not a problem its just that it is one of many things humanity is doing to screw things up and in fact wasteful use of resources also contributes to global warming.
 
Walter
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Bar Sinister View Post

I would not bet on that. Huge droughts in Africa have already killed tens of thousands and will kill more. Desertification and changing rainfall and snowfall patterns have and will disrupt agriculture worldwide resulting in rising food prices and shortages for those living at subsistence levels. I'm not saying that over-consumption is not a problem its just that it is one of many things humanity is doing to screw things up and in fact wasteful use of resources also contributes to global warming.

Oh, no!