Comments on: Example #3 of the Need for Replication: Temperature Station Adjustments http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/12/example-3-of-the-need-for-replication-temperature-station-adjustments.html Tue, 07 Sep 2010 01:25:04 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Jeff http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/12/example-3-of-the-need-for-replication-temperature-station-adjustments.html/comment-page-1#comment-6620 Jeff Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:08:23 +0000 http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1581#comment-6620 I have started to randomly choose GISS sites and tabulate/chart the adjustments made between the raw and homogonized data. So far my results have been quite revealing .... wherever I have seen serious adjustments I have seen what I call the stairway to heaven. Older dates are adjusted down farther and newer records are not adjusted at all. Or old records are adjusted up slighly and newer records are adjusted up more. So far I have not seen a single instance of an UHI adjustment, in fact most adjustments are the exact opposite. I have yet to see any sort of station move adjustment or shift in the sites I have reviewed. I am going to be publishing my findings at www.harlemghost.blogspot.com ... I have started to randomly choose GISS sites and tabulate/chart the adjustments made between the raw and homogonized data. So far my results have been quite revealing …. wherever I have seen serious adjustments I have seen what I call the stairway to heaven. Older dates are adjusted down farther and newer records are not adjusted at all. Or old records are adjusted up slighly and newer records are adjusted up more. So far I have not seen a single instance of an UHI adjustment, in fact most adjustments are the exact opposite.
I have yet to see any sort of station move adjustment or shift in the sites I have reviewed. I am going to be publishing my findings at http://www.harlemghost.blogspot.com …

]]> By: preeninaw http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/12/example-3-of-the-need-for-replication-temperature-station-adjustments.html/comment-page-1#comment-6514 preeninaw Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:47:12 +0000 http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1581#comment-6514 LiafReifetred <a href="http://avs5edmzhssk.com" rel="nofollow">rfbf</a> LiafReifetred
rfbf

]]> By: Norman Webb http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/12/example-3-of-the-need-for-replication-temperature-station-adjustments.html/comment-page-1#comment-6469 Norman Webb Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:44:26 +0000 http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1581#comment-6469 I just downloaded the data from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/index.shtml Data pre 1940 comes from the darwin post office and post 1940 comes from the darwin airport If i get the time I will play with the data to see what gives I just downloaded the data from
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/index.shtml

Data pre 1940 comes from the darwin post office and post 1940 comes from the darwin airport

If i get the time I will play with the data to see what gives

]]> By: Max http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/12/example-3-of-the-need-for-replication-temperature-station-adjustments.html/comment-page-1#comment-6459 Max Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:52:21 +0000 http://www.climate-skeptic.com/?p=1581#comment-6459 I am always astounished. I think they fixed it so that there is no discontinuiety between pre-1940 and post-1940 data. However, one might demand why they had to change the temperatures after and not before that date? I'd rather they would argue from the discontinous line, because then everyone can compare the arguments to the real thing. Yes, we can't travel back in time, but perhaps this is also a signal for data quality and that we should use more recent data. Of course, then we have the problem that the short time span we have with high quality data gives us no tools to evaluate "global warming"... I am always astounished. I think they fixed it so that there is no discontinuiety between pre-1940 and post-1940 data. However, one might demand why they had to change the temperatures after and not before that date? I’d rather they would argue from the discontinous line, because then everyone can compare the arguments to the real thing.

Yes, we can’t travel back in time, but perhaps this is also a signal for data quality and that we should use more recent data. Of course, then we have the problem that the short time span we have with high quality data gives us no tools to evaluate “global warming”…

]]>