Posted: January 11, 2013 by tallbloke in solar system dynamics

Ah, tthe shifting sands of NASA and MET climate records

Real Science

Aaron Huertas, a spokesman for the Union of Concerned Scientists, argued that the debate over the adjustments misses the bigger picture.

“Since we broke the [temperature] record by a full degree Fahrenheit [relative to 1998] this year, the adjustments are relatively minor in comparison,”

“I think climate contrarians are doing what Johnny Cochran did for O.J. Simpson — finding anything to object to, even if it obscures the big picture. It’s like they keep finding new ways to say the ‘glove doesn’t fit’ while ignoring the DNA evidence.”

Hottest year ever? Skeptics question revisions to climate data | Fox News

Nothing could be further from the truth. As of 1999, NASA showed that 1934 was more than one degree (Fahrenheit) warmer than 1998, and that 1921, 1931 and 1953 were all warmer than 1998.

ScreenHunter_391 Jan. 10 18.18

NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Whither U.S. Climate?

(The GISS website is dead – use the link…

View original post 422 more words

  1. Roger Andrews says:

    The sands aren’t shifting. It’s the same-old-same-old. NOAA has been fudging the US records for over a decade and the fudge has already been exposed dozens of times. And since NOAA got the ball rolling NIWA has fudged the New Zealand records, the Australian BuMet has fudged the Australian records and BEST and GHCN v3 have fudged just about everything and these fudges have all been exposed too. But the “hottest year on record” headlines keep coming.

    What we need isn’t more exposes, but different headlines. Like “Super-Hot 2012 Still Only The Fourth Warmest Year” or “1934 Still the Hottest Year on Record” (and the droughtiest too). How about a Talkshop press release?

  2. oldbrew says:

    Even the NOAA will struggle to massage the Alaska data. Alaska is 20% of the size of the continental USA. A local newspaper reports:

    ‘In the first decade since 2000, the 49th state cooled 2.4 degrees Fahrenheit.’

    The linked science paper points to changes in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) as the main reason for the drop. The Pacific being the largest ocean, it seems a good bet we haven’t heard the last of this kind of change. The science paper also makes a point of saying:

    ‘CO2, which increases semi-exponentially, cannot be the source of the observed cooling, as the opposite effect would be expected’.