Satellite Temp. Homoginization Using GISS

RSS and UAH have differing 30 year trends which lie outside my calculated measurement error for the data. Subtraction of the two measures leaves a step located at about 1992. Since they both use the same dataset, the question becomes. Which series is right?

After reading several papers and some short emails to some smart people, I have come to understand the bulk of the trend difference to this single step point in the data which corresponds to the time when satellite NOAA-12 began adding data into the trend.

Below is a graph of the RSS-UAH data where the step is quite visible. The flatness of the slope on either side fo the step is a good indicator that most of the data is in good agreement between the satellite processing algorithms.

The graph below is a plot of the raw data and a filtered difference and the overall trends of the data. You can see the trends are crossed and divergent.

Sea Ice Area or Extent?

In my last post I made a mistake in processing the data files through excel. I mixed the area and anomaly data around and accidentally posted an Ice Area anomaly. Something I have never seen before but is likely around.

While I am entirely at fault, my previous post isn’t entirely wrong because I was using the Cryosphere page from University of Illinois which shows Area anomaly below but shows the extent curves. Click on the picture to go to the cryosphere page.

This is the hemispheric ice area plot from UIUC.

Here is my bootstrap National Snow Ice Data Center plot of ice AREA.

There is a small difference between these graphs. If you look at the first year on record, the peak maximum in the NSIDC data (graph above) is lower than subsequent peaks. This is differennt from the peaks in the IUIC graph which have been adjusted to have a stronger downslope. I will request the data for this plot from the IUIC guys again but it clearly is another adjustment in favor of AGW,

Well what’s the difference between extent and area. From the NDSIC web page.

total ice extent is computed by summing the number of pixels with at least 15 percent ice concentration multiplied by the area per pixel.

Total ice-covered area is defined as the area of each pixel with at least 15 percent ice concentration multiplied by the ice fraction in the pixel (0.15-1.00).

So Area includes the amount of ice in each pixel, extent just includes the area of pixels with Ice. It seems to me that Area would be a better measure of the amount of ice in the hemisphere but the extent anomaly (which has a much stronger downslope) is often used.

Mann 08 The Missing Data

On September 5, 08, on the Mann site for the creation of the hockey stick Michael Manns published data used to generate his latest hockey stick paper showed 1357 series. His final paper referenced only 1209 with no mention of why the original series weren’t used. I have obtained a copy of the original data by a link at Climate Audit and decided to plot it here.

Global Warming – Cookin’ the Books

This paper is about how the hockey stick temperature graph was invented through bad science and continues to get worse.

I started this blog because I wanted to use my science background to  add my two cents about things which were bothering me in the news.  I couldn’t take it all out on my family after all.  At first my posts were intended to demonstrate how the anthropogenic global warming guys were hyping the data and I quickly found at its roots of a massive network of government organizations who’s survival and continued power depend on man made global warming to survive.  As I got deeper I found that it is actually more than a hundred billion dollar industry now and expanding rapidly.

Arctic Ice Grew in 2008 – AGW What they don’t want you to know.

Ok, I exposed the false reporting of the media in my previous post HERE but it didn’t help me feel better. This immoral reporting and junk science deserves a full on rant.

The Arctic ice has GROWN from last year not shrunk. It is BIGGER not smaller, LESS polar bears are swimming not that it matters. We just didn’t have our polar bear RADAR activated yet.