Uninsulated Buckets A CA reader emailed me, observing that there may be relevant differences in insulated and uninsulated buckets in the post-World War 2 period, which could easily affect adjustment schedules. This makes a lot of sense to me and might reconcile a few puzzles and opening others. Let’s say that the delta between engine […]
After unveiling the Hadley Center adjustment error that has been used in all temperature compilations for the past 20 years, Phil Jones stated: Climate scientists should think about data quality more often, says Jones, so that there is no opportunity for incorrect data to sow seeds of doubt in people’s minds about the reality of […]
Judith Curry writes: we are obviously interested in the implications of this SST issue for hurricanes.
Thompson et al 2008, writing in Nature, assure their readers, the data before ~1940 and after the mid-1960s are not expected to require further corrections for changes from uninsulated bucket to engine room intake measurements Is there a shred of evidence to support this assertion? There is convincing evidence otherwise – evidence already reported here. […]
In an article in Nature today by Thompson, Kennedy, Wallace and Phil Jones claim: Here we call attention to a previously overlooked discontinuity in the record at 1945, Well, folks, the discontinuity may have been overlooked by Hadley Center, CRU, NOAA and NASA and by the stadiums of IPCC peer reviewers, but it wasn’t overlooked […]
An interesting post by regular CA commenter David Smith at Anthony Watts on his results quantifying local microsite effects on a thermometer placed near a parking lot. Interesting to compare this with efforts of Jones, Parker, Peterson etc. to “prove” that site effects don’t matter.
Radiosonde trends are back in the news. A few days ago, on May 24, 2008, Realclimate reviewed three recent papers: Lanzante and Free (J Clim 2008), Haimberger et al (J Clim 2008) and Sherwood et al 2008, adding a note with the even more recent Allen and Sherwood (2008.) Peter Thorne of Hadley Center stated […]
I examined the “In Press” and “Accepted” citations in IPCC AR4 Second Draft Chapter 6 to verify whether Wahl and Ammann 200x had received unusual and special treatment. It definitely did; it’s surprising how much so. There was also a very interesting tendency for IPCC Authors to bend the rules in their own favor.
In a previous post, I’ve observed some oddities in connection with the dating of Wahl and Ammann 2007 and with Schneider’s obfuscation when asked to explain how an article supposedly accepted on March 1, 2006 could cite an article that had not even been submitted until August 2006. (BTW, I note that Journal of Climate […]
This is the title of a famous Sherlock Holmes story and not intended as a slight to any individual. Take a look at the Review Comments for AR4 Second Draft Chapter 6 online here. While I was reviewing these comments, I noticed that there are no reported comments on chapter 6 from Caspar Ammann, one […]
Climate Audit 