Tony Heller: Is the global temperature record credible?

Posted: May 26, 2017 by tallbloke in Analysis, Dataset, satellites, Surfacestation, Temperature

Tony Heller, AKA Steve Goddard, has this new video up on youtube. It raises important questions about the way the global temperature record has changed over time.

It looks like there are important issues that are not accounted for by ‘official’ descriptions of ‘adjustment’ procedures.

josh-adjustocene

Comments
  1. Lance Wallace says:

    Too bad that there is an elementary error here–the 1.5-degree rise was based on the 2017 graph and includes the years from 1880-2017. The 2001 graph (0.5-degree rise) ends in 2001. The factor of 3 is thus a comparison of apples and oranges. More like a factor of 2 when the cutoff year is 2001 in both graphs, which itself makes the point sufficiently well. The video should be redone to correct this error, otherwise it gains no traction.

  2. richardscourtney says:

    Tallbloke:

    The subject of the video needs publicity but is not news.

    Please read this.
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/memo/climatedata/uc0102.htm

    As you can see from the link, Hansard records that the submission was obtained and is on record with the UK Parliamentary Select Committee. However, there is no record in Hansard of the Select Committee making any consideration of the submission, and this is surprising when the submission directly addresses the issue the Select Committee claimed to be addressing.

    Richard
    richardscourtney@aol.com

  3. oldbrew says:

    Temperatures did go up in the 80’s and 90’s. But there’s not much else of note to report, despite the constant wailings of climate alarmists, and eliminating the 1945-75 cooling is an obvious indicator of foul play in the ‘official’ stats.

  4. tallbloke says:

    Lance, yes, I spotted the same error, and agree it needs addressing.

  5. JohnM says:

    – Look closely at the graph from 1974 and you’ll find that the earliest portion is labeled “Northern hemisphere only” and the zero point on the graph looks like about 1900, which doesn’t make it comparable to data based on 1961-1990 averages.
    – Coverage in 1900 was poor, in fact it was poor until about 1950, as data fom the CRU’s website will show you.
    – Different but similar patterns in some of the NASA/GISS graphs? Look closely at the graphs and you’ll see that some are smoother than others, meaning that the period for smoothing was longer.
    – Different NASA/GISS graphs for 1945 to 1980? Check firstly the smoothing then check closely to see exactly what data is plotted. Temperatures in the he Northern Hemisphere fell but temperatures in the Southern Hemisphere increased slightyl. Plot the first and the line will go down, plot the global average temperature and the graph will be flatter.
    – Collusion between the 4 agencies? No, merely the use of the same data as provided by national meteorological services. That’s the only data available so of course the graphs are going to be similar, varied only due to the technique the agencies use.
    * There are plenty of problems with the data, especially prior to 1960, but the issues raised by Tony are not the major ones.

  6. Genevieve says:

    Foul play is the name of the game. The problems with the data have gotten much worse under the watch of NASA GISS. Heads should roll.

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