The Sound Of Settled Science

Via Cjunk, a story I've been planning to feature for some time. "Disappeared" - The Case Of The Vanishing Thermometers

In Canada the number of stations dropped from 600 to 35 in 2009. The percentage of stations in the lower elevations (below 300 feet) tripled and those at higher elevations above 3000 feet were reduced in half. Canada’s semi-permanent depicted warmth comes from interpolating from more southerly locations to fill northerly vacant grid boxes, even as a pure average of the available stations shows a COOLING. Just 1 thermometer remains for everything north of latitude 65N – that station is Eureka. Eureka according to Wikipedia has been described as “The Garden Spot of the Arctic” due to the flora and fauna abundant around the Eureka area, more so than anywhere else in the High Arctic. Winters are frigid but summers are slightly warmer than at other places in the Canadian Arctic.

In case you missed that: "Just 1 thermometer remains for everything north of latitude 65N – that station is Eureka."

The Chiefio recounts how Canadian thermometers were "taken out and shot".

Here we see the typical thermometers spreading out with modernity, until 2009. Something strange happens then. When numbers in averages change by a lot, we must look at detail. What does the detail of the last two decades look like?

It's a lengthy analysis, but if your name rhymes with "Lorrie Goldstein" or "Terence Corcoran", I suspect you'll find it a useful one.

Updates:

James Delingpole picks up the story.

And in the comments, another summary by cinyc;

I've been following computer programmer "Chefio" E.M. Smith's analysis of the GHCN (Global Historical Climate Network) thermometer purge for a while. GHCN is a global temperature database complied by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Peter O'Donnell is correct - Chefio is talking about how Canadian thermometers have been recently removed from that database, not any database maintained by the Canadian government. The thermometers still exist - but for whatever reason, NOAA doesn't include them. The GHCN database is used in the GIStemp model of the supposed global temperature anomaly - one of three such models that, when run, show the earth is warming. GIStemp is maintained by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (which explains the name - short for GISS temperature). Chefio has painstakingly reviewed the GIStemp source code to try to figure out exactly how it computes its global temperature anomaly. Chefio's basic overview of the program is here and more technical overview of the program is here. FORTRAN programming is WAY above my pay grade - but Chefio explains the GIStemp program in such a way that his explanation should be replicable by any programmer who understands it. Chefio's main thesis is that - for whatever reason - the GHCN database has been purging thermometers within the past two decades. The "missing" thermometers were supposedly used to construct the baseline against which global warming is measured, but aren't being used today. Perhaps not so coincidentally, the "missing" thermometers are largely at higher elevations and higher latitudes. If there's systemic bias in the thermometer purge, it likely biases the ultimate result. For example, all Bolivian thermometers have been dropped since the 1990s. Bolivia is a land-locked, largely high-altitude country in the Andes of South America. If Bolivian thermometers are missing from the data, GIStemp will extrapolate the supposed temperature at Bolivia's latitude and longitude from nearby stations. If the nearest stations are near sea level in the Amazon or at the beach (cold, lonely Andean thermometers want to vacation in warmer climates, too!) GIStemp will think the temperature in Bolivia has risen dramatically. And - surprise! Bolivia often shows up as dark red (warming) on GIStemp's anomaly maps. Like in Canada, the "missing" Bolivian thermometers DO exist. But, according to Chefio, NOAA doesn't include them in the GHCN database because they are compiled after the monthly deadline to be included in it. (So why not add last month's data next month? any logical person would ask.) Chefio thinks that because GIStemp is comparing apples to oranges in a systemically biased way, it is likely overstating the global temperature anomaly - i.e. the extent of global warming. By how much? I don't think he knows yet worldwide, but he's done estimates in some areas.

Posted by Kate at January 16, 2010 11:46 AM

