Climate change sceptics suffer blow as satellite data correction shows 140% faster global warming
New research 'substantially undermines' claims that satellite data proved the Earth was not warming as quickly as thought, Dr Zeke Hausfather says

Climate change deniers and sceptics have long pointed to satellite data showing lower temperatures than those recorded on the ground.

However, new research has found an explanation for this apparent discrepancy.

The orbit of satellites around the Earth gradually decays over time due to friction in the Earth’s atmosphere and this gradually changes the time they pass over any one spot and this obviously has a significant effect on the temperature.

Using information from the satellites, the scientists, Dr Carl Mears and Frank Wentz, of Remote Sensing Systems, a California-based research company, developed a new method of correcting for the changes.

And what they found was startling.

The rate of warming was about a third higher at 0.174 degrees Celsius per decade between 1976 and 2016, compared to 0.134C per decade.

Writing in the Journal of Climate, the scientists said: “The changes result in global-scale warming … about 30 per cent larger than our previous version of the dataset.

“This change is primarily due to the changes in the adjustment for drifting local measurement time. The new dataset shows more warming than most similar datasets constructed from satellites or radiosonde [weather balloon] data.”

In an article on the Carbon Brief website about the new research, data scientist Dr Zeke Hausfather said it showed an even faster rate of warming since 1998 – at nearly 140 per cent – than previous satellite-based studies.

“Climate sceptics have long claimed that satellite data shows global warming to be less pronounced that observational data collected on the Earth’s surface,” he said.

“This new correction to the … data substantially undermines that argument. The new data actually shows more warming than has been observed on the surface, though still slightly less than predicted in most climate models.”

Dr Hausfather explained the problem with interpreting climate data from satellites due to their subtly changing orbit.

“As these satellites circle the Earth, their orbits slowly decay over time due to drag from the upper atmosphere,” he wrote.

“While the satellites are designed to fly over the same spot on the Earth at the same time every day – a precondition to accurately estimating changes in temperatures over time – this orbital decay causes their flyover time to change.

“Some satellites have fairly large orbital drifts, going from measuring temperatures at 2pm to 6pm or 8pm.

“Since the temperature changes since 1979 are on the order of 0.6C or so, it is relatively easy for bias, due to changing observation times, to swamp the underlying climate signal.”

Surface temperature records, Dr Hausfather added, “all tend to agree quite closely with each other, despite different groups using different datasets”.

“Unlike the satellite temperature record, where only a few satellites are measuring temperatures at any given point of time, there is a large amount of redundancy in surface temperature observations, with multiple independent sets of data producing consistent results,” he said.

“Therefore, it is not too surprising that corrections to problems with satellite data would move them closer to surface records.”


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-sceptics-satellite-data-correction-global-warming-140-per-cent-zeke-hausfather-a7816676.html

Good find!

The Abstract:

Quote:

Abstract Temperature sounding microwave radiometers flown on polar-orbiting weather satellites provide a long-term, global-scale record of upper-atmosphere temperatures, beginning in late 1978 and continuing to the present. The focus of this paper is a lower-tropospheric temperature product constructed using measurements made by the Microwave Sounding Unit channel 2, and the Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit channel 5. The temperature weighting functions for these channels peak in the mid to upper troposphere. By using a weighted average of measurements made at different Earth incidence angles, the effective weighting function can be lowered so that it peaks in the lower troposphere. Previous versions of this dataset used general circulation model output to remove the effects of drifting local measurement time on the measured temperatures. In this paper, we present a method to optimize these adjustments using information from the satellite measurements themselves. The new method finds a global-mean land diurnal cycle that peaks later in the afternoon, leading to improved agreement between measurements made by co-orbiting satellites. The changes result in global-scale warming (global trend (70S-80N, 1979-2016) = 0.174 C/decade), ~30% larger than our previous version of the dataset (global trend, (70S-80N, 1979-2016) = 0.134C/decade). This change is primarily due to the changes in the adjustment for drifting local measurement time. The new dataset shows more warming than most similar datasets constructed from satellites or radiosonde data. However, comparisons with total column water vapor over the oceans suggest that the new dataset may not show enough warming in the tropics.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0768.1

And of course they have never done revisions before to account for drift. ;D ;D ;D ;D

Show us where?

bwahahahahahaha! As if!  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

http://www.weatherzone.com.au/news/tough-conditions-for-getting-out-of-bed-this-morning/526553

Tough conditions for getting out of bed this morning
Joel Pippard, Sunday July 2, 2017 - 10:05 EST

Locations across southeastern Australia have woken up to another freezing cold morning, breaking records across Victoria and New South Wales.

Bairnsdale (-5.4C), Latrobe Valley Airport (-4.4C) and Viewbank (-2.8C) have all froze through their coldest morning in 38, 34 and 19 years of records respectively.

Across the border, Canberra recorded its coldest pair of mornings since 1971 with -8.7 degrees on Saturday and -8.2 degrees on Sunday. Nearby Goulburn saw its third coldest minimum on record with a mind-numbing -10.4 degrees on Sunday. This was a substantial 11 degrees below the average July temperature of 0.5C.

Throughout NSW and VIC, 24 locations had their coldest July morning on either Saturday or Sunday in at least 10 years. Most notably Deniliquin saw its coldest morning in 110 years with the mercury plummeting down to -5.6C on Saturday.

As a cold front starts to sweep across VIC this evening, overnight temperatures will be warmer than this weekend, due to increased winds. However, much of NSW will only be a few degrees warmer. Might be worth leaving your extra blanket on your bed for the start of the working week.

- Weatherzone

© Weatherzone 2017




coldest morning in 38, 34 and 19 years of records respectively.



Deniliquin saw its coldest morning in 110 years


I want an apology from Jovial.

More than half of Melbourne suburbs well below zero last night:


http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Low_temperatures_below_zero_in_Melboune.jpg

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2017 at 6:57pm:

Show us where? bwahahahahahaha! As if!

"D Orbital Decay +0.10 1998, Christy et al 2000"

https://downloads.globalchange.gov/sap/sap1-1/sap1-1-final-all.pdf
;)

Very good. How does that compare to the current paper?

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2017 at 7:56pm:

Very good. How does that compare to the current paper?

Hey. I merely showed it was being done. Back to 1998, in fact. It is not a new thing. ;)

I guess their next trick will be to try against the radiosonde data again. ;)

Two papers said the same thing? Must be something to it then and there is no slowdown/hiatus etc in global warming.  ;)

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2017 at 8:57pm:

Two papers said the same thing? Must be something to it then and there is no slowdown/hiatus etc in global warming.  ;)

From a US Government website. You are just a denier. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2017 at 8:57pm:

Two papers said the same thing? Must be something to it then and there is no slowdown/hiatus etc in global warming.  ;)

Its basically lee's only trick. Produce a paper that supports AGW, then try and twist it to somehow support his argument while ignoring the conclusions of the articles he tries to use to justify his positions.

..

---

..

---

Pho Huc wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2017 at 5:30am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 2nd, 2017 at 8:57pm: Two papers said the same thing? Must be something to it then and there is no slowdown/hiatus etc in global warming.  ;) Its basically lee's only trick. Produce a paper that supports AGW, then try and twist it to somehow support his argument while ignoring the conclusions of the articles he tries to use to justify his positions.

Yes, I thought it was funny he quoted a paper.

I stated the conclusions the paper came to.

Lees said that the paper didn’t say that.

:D :D :D

mothra wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2017 at 5:03am:

Climate change sceptics suffer blow as satellite data correction shows 140% faster global warming New research 'substantially undermines' claims that satellite data proved the Earth was not warming as quickly as thought, Dr Zeke Hausfather says Climate change deniers and sceptics have long pointed to satellite data showing lower temperatures than those recorded on the ground. However, new research has found an explanation for this apparent discrepancy. The orbit of satellites around the Earth gradually decays over time due to friction in the Earth’s atmosphere and this gradually changes the time they pass over any one spot and this obviously has a significant effect on the temperature. Using information from the satellites, the scientists, Dr Carl Mears and Frank Wentz, of Remote Sensing Systems, a California-based research company, developed a new method of correcting for the changes. And what they found was startling. The rate of warming was about a third higher at 0.174 degrees Celsius per decade between 1976 and 2016, compared to 0.134C per decade. Writing in the Journal of Climate, the scientists said: “The changes result in global-scale warming … about 30 per cent larger than our previous version of the dataset. “This change is primarily due to the changes in the adjustment for drifting local measurement time. The new dataset shows more warming than most similar datasets constructed from satellites or radiosonde [weather balloon] data.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-sceptics-satellite-data-correction-global-warming-140-per-cent-zeke-hausfather-a7816676.html

This is like an endless re-run of the Groucho Marx quip ("These are my principles - but if you don't like them, I have others") :

These are our satellite data and computer models but if they don't convince you, we have others.


The 'current truth' is constantly updated, revised, corrected, adjusted - in a word, manipulated.

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2017 at 9:15am:

Yes, I thought it was funny he quoted a paper. I stated the conclusions the paper came to. Lees said that the paper didn’t say that.

Direct quotes needed.We know how reading comprehension, of yours, is lacking.;)

"New research 'substantially undermines' claims that satellite data proved the Earth was not warming as quickly as thought, Dr Zeke Hausfather says"

The bloke who recently wrote a paper about the ocean data. He found that buoys were reading cooler than the ships data, and adjusted the buoy data up. Because apparently it was a "cooling bias" with the buoys not a warming bias from travelling through ships engine rooms. ;)

Frank wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2017 at 11:50am:

mothra wrote on Jul 2nd, 2017 at 5:03am: Climate change sceptics suffer blow as satellite data correction shows 140% faster global warming New research 'substantially undermines' claims that satellite data proved the Earth was not warming as quickly as thought, Dr Zeke Hausfather says Climate change deniers and sceptics have long pointed to satellite data showing lower temperatures than those recorded on the ground. However, new research has found an explanation for this apparent discrepancy. The orbit of satellites around the Earth gradually decays over time due to friction in the Earth’s atmosphere and this gradually changes the time they pass over any one spot and this obviously has a significant effect on the temperature. Using information from the satellites, the scientists, Dr Carl Mears and Frank Wentz, of Remote Sensing Systems, a California-based research company, developed a new method of correcting for the changes. And what they found was startling. The rate of warming was about a third higher at 0.174 degrees Celsius per decade between 1976 and 2016, compared to 0.134C per decade. Writing in the Journal of Climate, the scientists said: “The changes result in global-scale warming … about 30 per cent larger than our previous version of the dataset. “This change is primarily due to the changes in the adjustment for drifting local measurement time. The new dataset shows more warming than most similar datasets constructed from satellites or radiosonde [weather balloon] data.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-sceptics-satellite-data-correction-global-warming-140-per-cent-zeke-hausfather-a7816676.html This is like an endless re-run of the Groucho Marx quip ("These are my principles - but if you don't like them, I have others") : These are our satellite data and computer models but if they don't convince you, we have others. The 'current truth' is constantly updated, revised, corrected, adjusted - in a word, manipulated.

Yes. Because it is science. it's the process of trying to find coherent answers to questions. Like the question so often raised by climate sceptics about why there was a mismatch between surface and satellite temperature records.
Isn't it great that someone sat down and studied the data and came up with a plausible explanation for the disparity, and even had the manners to do it in a peer reviewed paper allowing anyone to examine the methodology and conclusions.
I'm really sorry for the people who thought the satellite data supported an non-AGW opinion, It's a shame that it just ended up being even more science supporting AGW.
It's also a shame none of the intellectual giants on the denialist side managed to come up with an credible study that provided an alternate explanation for the disparity, but I guess that's no reflection on the "scientific" rigor behind the movement.

Pho Huc wrote on Jul 4^th, 2017 at 5:13am:

It's also a shame none of the intellectual giants on the denialist side managed to come up with an credible study that provided an alternate explanation for the disparity, but I guess that's no reflection on the "scientific" rigor behind the movement.

But I've already shown they knew and adjusted for satellite drift. Now they are doing another adjustment because the previous ones weren't good enough. ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Jul 4^th, 2017 at 11:22am:

Pho Huc wrote on Jul 4th, 2017 at 5:13am: It's also a shame none of the intellectual giants on the denialist side managed to come up with an credible study that provided an alternate explanation for the disparity, but I guess that's no reflection on the "scientific" rigor behind the movement. But I've already shown they knew and adjusted for satellite drift. Now they are doing another adjustment because the previous ones weren't good enough. ;D ;D ;D ;D

You don't know what you've shown  ;)

Pho Huc wrote on Jul 4^th, 2017 at 5:13am:

Frank wrote on Jul 3rd, 2017 at 11:50am: This is like an endless re-run of the Groucho Marx quip ("These are my principles - but if you don't like them, I have others") : Yes. Because it is science.

You are ridiculous.

Frank wrote on Jul 5^th, 2017 at 10:26pm:

Pho Huc wrote on Jul 4th, 2017 at 5:13am: Frank wrote on Jul 3rd, 2017 at 11:50am: This is like an endless re-run of the Groucho Marx quip ("These are my principles - but if you don't like them, I have others") : Yes. Because it is science. You are ridiculous.

You are the ridiculous one: tools were invented by mankind to rise above the apes and they work by manipulation.

This is how the industrial revolution came to make your idols rich... Your whole comfortable world exists because tools were manipulated and thus constantly improved.

I repeat: you are the one who is utterly ridiculous and the Internet never forgets  ;D ;D ;D ;D  ;)