« Cool! | Main | Paid Expert Disses Unpaid Experts »

idl_cruts3_2005_vs_2008b.pdf and Hockey Sticks

AJStrata has been looking at idl_cruts3_2005_vs_2008b.pdf from the CRU archive which fell out of the æther at the weekend.

It contains 155 graphs showing the raw global temperature measurements and ‘trends’ for every country from 1900 though today. It contains two version of the CRU ‘processing’ – one from 2005 and one from 2008. What is just amazing from this ‘raw’ data is the realization that many areas of the Earth are not showing a huge upswing in temperature. The raw data paints a completely different picture than the final ‘results’ we see in Al Gore’s charts.

(As I'm from the UK I have put the UK charts in here)

... there are 4 graphs for the 4 seasons CRU uses to derive an annual global index (the NCDC level chart). MAM in the upper left panel stands for March-April-May, the next panel is June-July-August (JJA), etc. The purple data is the 2008 version of the data series, and the black line is the 2005. The dashed horizontal line is the mean for that country for that season: red is for the CRU 2008 version and black is for CRU 2005....

There is a lot to learn from this data, and how it correlates to other events or conditions. But what is clear to me now is there was probably no way to create a hockey stick from this CRU data alone. Which is why we have things like bristle cones and magic larches in Russia to create the mirage of global warming.

idl_cruts3_2005_vs_2008b.pdf is available here if you haven't already got your own copy. It is a very large file, 1923kb, and makes my server puff, so please be kind and spread the love around a little.


Actually, what you're showing here is a pretty serious upswing - in every group except the the winter months there is a highly significant trend towards increasing temperature. And let's not forget that this is over a single century. On the scale of the historic proxy data (tens of thousands of years), that is a very sharp upswing. Hence, the "hockey-stick curve", much beloved of both climate change camps.

You know, having worked for a british company for a few years, I almost put those charts up, but decided to go with one from the mainland. Now if they would only put on honest error bars we could all calm down and realize it is just another normal year here on planet Earth.

Cheers, AJStrata

James, you are not looking at the graphs correctly. First off there are no error bars on the trend line or the yearly data. Second, the yearly data shows variability that is much broader than the 0.5°C (max) increase from the 40's to the 2000's.

What you need to do is go look at the alarmist's charts to see how they have recreated reality

"the yearly data shows variability that is much broader than the 0.5°C (max) increase from the 40's to the 2000's."

Temperature goes up and down by more than .5 degrees from hour to hour, day to day, and year to year. This has nothing to do with the long term upward trend in mean temperatures, although it is obviously harder to detect a slow change in a noisy signal.

The same applies to detecting changes in sea level.

You might prefer to wait a few decades to see what happens.

Post a comment