Thursday, May 10, 2012

4107.txt

cc: Gavin Schmidt <gschmidtatXYZxyzs.nasa.gov>, Stefan Rahmstorf <rahmstorfatXYZxyzan-klima.de>
date: Fri May 30 08:48:01 2008
from: Phil Jones <p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Thompson et al paper]
to: mannatXYZxyz.edu

Mike, Gavin, Stefan,
Too much on to get involved with this much further.

[1]http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/case-against-climate-change-disc
redited-by-study-835856.html
This is roughly what an adjustment would look like. The newspaper drew this from
a brief discussion with me. It will likely be less than this later in the 1950s. I expect
little adjustment after about 1955, with the maximum of about 0.2 in the period
from Aug 45 to about 1950, then reducing to near zero in about 1955.
As for a timeline, the first time Dave Thompson contacted me was 8 Nov 2007.
McIntyre has been talking about the SSTs for a while - back to 2005, but he makes
all the wrong assumptions. He seems at last to have realized that the SST is
potentially the weakest part of the global T record - only because it dominates
area-wise and you have to make assumptions about the types of buckets/intakes
and hull sensors and then the mixes between the main two types buckets/intakes.
He and Pielke Jr make the wrong assumption about the buckets after WW2 as well.
The buckets used then were double insulated and some made of rubber so they
don't have the large adjustments needed for canvas buckets from the 1930s earlier.
The other aspect which he's not realized is that adjusted SST has to agree
approximately with the MAT or the NMAT. There is work going on at the
Southampton Oceanography centre to try and use the daytime MAT, to increase
the sample numbers, and also to address the greater diurnal range issues
with MAT (sampling issues) as opposed to the very much smaller diurnal range in SST. All
this needs to be done without consideration of the land record.
Remember the land isn't going to change. The SST adjustment needed in
Aug 45 is a maximum of 0.3, so only 0.2 in the global combined, and it
will diminish to zero by 1960 at the latest and to all intents and purposes by 1955.
The News and Views item was good, but it gets confused at the end with the
early 1940s mentioned as being too warm. Maybe this will get reduced when
the 200,000 extra British SSTs have been added into ICOADS. ICOADS hopes
to eventually do an obs by obs adjustment.
By the way you can reproduce what Dave Thompson did with the tropical
Pacific SST record, by using a 36-month smoothed record of the SOI.
As you say - the most important point in all this is they have missed the point
about SSTs now - at least since 2000. Dick Reynolds reckons this is about 0.1 deg C
now. The issues with both the 1945-55 and 2000- periods is that the adjustments have
to be made spatially and seasonally, when they are done.
Bottom line in all this is that a smoothed land record is the robust feature in all this.
Cheers
Phil
At 22:03 29/05/2008, Michael Mann wrote:

Hi Phil,
Let us know if you think you might be disposed towards doing an RC guest article on this
within the next week dealing w/ the various issues here. Gavin and I could certainly
help.
thanks in advance for getting back to us when you have the chance,
mike
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Thompson et al paper
Date: 29 May 2008 16:28:04 -0400
From: Gavin Schmidt [2]<gschmidt@giss.nasa.gov>
To: Michael E. Mann [3]<mann@psu.edu>
References: [4]<48347423.4010409@meteo.psu.edu>
[5]<200805220828.m4M8Sh85467134@tr10n05.aset.psu.edu>
[6]<4835B1EF.2080404@meteo.psu.edu>
[7]<1212073337.7985.2391.camel@isotope.giss.nasa.gov>
[8]<483F1131.6020207@meteo.psu.edu>
yes. The pielke plot is completely bogus - first off he is correcting
all data (not just ocean), is assuming that the bucket correction is
uniformly spread, ignores the fact that the '90%' number that McIntyre
came up with is just a statement about what is in the ICOADS meta-data
(most temperature measurements are listed as unknown) not what is
actually known about the fleets (i.e. US ships are all intakes whether
it is listed specifically or not), etc.... This is better said coming
from Phil though. The figure here:

[9]http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/453601a-f1.2.jpg

should indicate that the UK effect is only likely to affect 1945-1955 -
after that the mass of other data is going to be dominant.

Gavin

On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 16:25, Michael Mann wrote:
>
> It occurs to me that the McIntyre/Pielke argument (and supporting plot
> )most be completely bogus for one obvious reason. NH land temperature
> is completely unimpacted by this whole issue, and it has risen more
> dramatically than SST in recent decades. So if the downward
> correction were really so substantial, it would imply a completely
> unphysical increase in the land-ocean SST contrast in recent decades,
> no?
>
> m
>
> Gavin Schmidt wrote:
> > If there is an wildly inappropriate exaggeration to be made, you know
> > who will make it:
> >
> > [10]http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/001445does_the_ipccs_ma
in.html

> >
> > Phil, I suggest that you (as in HadISST/CRU) will need to have a better
> > estimate of the adjustment necessary available soon otherwise this is
> > going to spread. "Nature" abhors a vaccuum....
> >
> > Gavin
> >
> > On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 13:48, Michael Mann wrote:
> >
> > > p.s. Phil--here's an antidote to the Canada Free [w/ its facts] Press
> > > article, also just out:
> > > [11]http://www.miller-mccune.com/article/348
> > >
> > > feel free to distribute far and wide!
> > >
> > > mike
> > >
> > > Phil Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mike, Gavin,
> > > > OK - as long as you're not critical and remember the embargo.
> > > > I'll expect Nature
> > > > will be sending the paper around later today to the press embargoed
> > > > till the middle
> > > > of next week.
> > > > Attached is the pdf. This is the final one bar page and volume
> > > > numbers. Also
> > > > attached is our latest draft press release. This is likely OK
> > > > except for the last paragraph
> > > > which we're still working on. There will also be a News and Views
> > > > item from
> > > > Dick Reynolds and a Nature news piece from Quirin Schiermeier. I
> > > > don't have either
> > > > of these. I did speak to Quirin on Tuesday and he's also spoke to
> > > > Dave and John.
> > > > It took me a while to explain the significance of the paper. I
> > > > hope to get these later
> > > > two items before I might have to do any interviews early next week.
> > > > We have
> > > > a bank holiday on Monday in the UK. The press release will go out
> > > > jointly from
> > > > the Met Office and UEA - not sure exactly when.
> > > > Potentially the key issue is the final Nature sentence which
> > > > alludes to the probable
> > > > underestimation of SSTs in the last few years. Drifters now
> > > > measuring SSTs dominate
> > > > by over 2 to 1 cf ships. Drifters likely measure SSTs about 0.1 to
> > > > 0.2 deg C cooler
> > > > than ships, so we could be underestimating SSTs and hence global T.
> > > > I hope Dick
> > > > will discuss this more. It also means that the 1961-90 average SST
> > > > that people use
> > > > to force/couple with models is slightly too warm. Ship-based SSTs
> > > > are in decline - lots
> > > > of issues related to the shipping companies wanting the locations
> > > > of the ships
> > > > kept secret, also some minor issues of piracy as well. You might
> > > > want to talk to Scott Woodruff
> > > > more about this.
> > > > A bit of background. Loads more UK WW2 logs have been digitized
> > > > and these will
> > > > be going or have gone into ICOADS. These logs cover the WW2 years
> > > > as well
> > > > as the late 1940s up to about 1950. It seems that all of these
> > > > require bucket corrections.
> > > > My guess will be that the period from 1945-49 will get raised by up
> > > > to 0.3 deg C for the
> > > > SSTs, so about 0.2 for the combined. In digitizing they have
> > > > concentrated on the
> > > > South Atlantic/Indian Ocean log books.
> > > >
> > > > [12]http://brohan.org/hadobs/digitised_obs/docs/ and click on SST to
> > > > see some comparisons.
> > > > The periods mentioned here don't seem quite right as more later
> > > > 1940s logs have also been
> > > > digitized. There are more log books to digitize for WW2 - they
> > > > have done about half of those
> > > > not already done.
> > > >
> > > > If anyone wonders where all the RN ships came from, many of those
> > > > in the S. Atlantic/indian
> > > > oceans were originally US ships. The UK got these through the
> > > > Churchill/Roosevelt deal in 1939/40.
> > > > Occasionally some ships needed repairs and the UK didn't have the
> > > > major parts, so
> > > > this will explain the voyages of a few south of OZ and NZ across
> > > > the Pacific to Seattle
> > > > and then back into the fray.
> > > >
> > > > ICOADS are looking into a project to adjust/correct all their log
> > > > books.
> > > >
> > > > Also attaching a ppt from Scott Woodruff. Scott knows who signed
> > > > this!
> > > >
> > > > If you want me to look through anything then email me.
> > > >
> > > > I have another paper just accepted in JGR coming out on Chinese
> > > > temps
> > > > and urbanization. This will also likely cause a stir. I'll send you
> > > > a copy when
> > > > I get the proofs from AGU. Some of the paper relates to the 1990
> > > > paper
> > > > and the fraud allegation against Wei-Chyung Wang. Remind me on this
> > > > in
> > > > a few weeks if you hear nothing.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Phil
> > > >
> > > > PS CRU/Tyndall won a silver medal for our garden at the Chelsea
> > > > Flower Show -
> > > > the theme of the show this year was the changing climate and how it
> > > > affects gardening.
> > > > Clare Goodess was at the garden on Tuesday. She said she never
> > > > stopped
> > > > for her 4 hour stint of talking to the public - only one skeptic.
> > > > She met the environment minister.
> > > > She was talking about the high and low emissions garden. The
> > > > minister (Phil Woolas)
> > > > seemed to think that the emissions related to the ability of the
> > > > plants to extract
> > > > CO2 from the atmosphere! He'd also not heard of the UHI! Still
> > > > lots of education
> > > > needed.
> > > >
> > > > PPS Our web server has found this piece of garbage - so wrong it is
> > > > unbelievable that
> > > > Tim Ball wrote a decent paper in Climate Since AD 1500. I sometimes
> > > > wish I'd never
> > > > said this about the land stations in an email. Referring to Alex
> > > > von Storch just
> > > > shows how up to date he is.
> > > >
> > > > [13]http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3151
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At 20:12 21/05/2008, Michael Mann wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Phil,
> > > > >
> > > > > Gavin and I have been discussing, we think it will be important
> > > > > for us to do something on the Thompson et al paper as soon as it
> > > > > appears, since its likely that naysayers are going to do their
> > > > > best to put a contrarian slant on this in the blogosphere.
> > > > >
> > > > > Would you mind giving us an advance copy. We promise to fully
> > > > > respect Nature's embargo (i.e., we wouldn't post any article until
> > > > > the paper goes public) and we don't expect to in any way be
> > > > > critical of the paper. We simply want to do our best to help make
> > > > > sure that the right message is emphasized.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks in advance for any help!
> > > > >
> > > > > mike
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Michael E. Mann
> > > > > Associate Professor
> > > > > Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
> > > > >
> > > > > Department of
> > > > > Meteorology
> > > > > Phone: (814) 863-4075
> > > > > 503 Walker
> > > > > Building
> > > > > FAX: (814) 865-3663
> > > > > The Pennsylvania State University
> > > > > email: [14]mann@psu.edu
> > > > > University Park, PA 16802-5013
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [15]http://www.met.psu.edu/dept/faculty/mann.htm
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Prof. Phil Jones
> > > > Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
> > > > School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
> > > > University of East Anglia
> > > > Norwich Email [16]p.jones@uea.ac.uk
> > > > NR4 7TJ
> > > > UK ---------
-------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > >
> > > >
> > >


--
Michael E. Mann
Associate Professor
Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)

Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075
503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663
The Pennsylvania State University email: [17]mann@psu.edu
University Park, PA 16802-5013

[18]http://www.met.psu.edu/dept/faculty/mann.htm


Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

No comments:

Post a Comment