Sentences with phrase «by gistemp»

The acceleration within the CO2 rise and the rising SAT measured by GISTEMP are both remarkably good for a linear fit over the period 1975 - to - date.

By GISTEMP, it's only 2 of the most recent 30 that miss out on the top 30.

At first I thought I could use the v2.inv file supplied by GISTEMP, but the GHCN station identifiers for the contiguous US have changed (so that they're based on their USHCN station identifiers — probably a good thing).

By using night marine air temperatures to normalize all sea data Huang effectively transferred the tas tend to tos for ERSSTv4 (NOAA's ocean temp index used by GISTEMP).

Figure 2 shows the number of station records available for each month in both the existing GHCN - Monthly data (used as the basis for reconstructions by GISTemp / NCDC / CRUTEM) and the new Berkeley data.

The 1200 km range used by GISTemp was determined emprically to give the best balance between correlation between stations and area of coverage.

Each 2º by 2º grid is approximately 200 x 200 km, much less than the 1200 km averaging radius used by GISTemp.

For example, here are the stats on stations used by GISTemp.

As explained in Part 1A and Part 1B, the 1200 km area weighting scheme used by GISTemp is based on the known and observed phenomena of Teleconnection; that climates are connected over surprisingly long distances.

Not exact matches

The NASA results, calculated by Goddard Institute for Space Studies are published monthly on the NASA / GISS website (GISTEMP).

The 2015 temperatures continue a long - term warming trend, according to analyses by scientists at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York (GISTEMP).

HadCRUT corrections by Thompson 2008, GISTEMP corrections by Real Climate.

The high anomalies up in the Arctic continue for a third month in GISTEMP and the question of the maximum Arctic Sea Ice Extent is surely now only by how much this freeze season will be below the record low set in 2017.

Taking a longer perspective, the 30 year mean trends aren't greatly affected by a single year (GISTEMP: 1978 - 2007 0.17 + / -0.04 ºC / dec; 1979 - 2008 0.16 + / -0.04 — OLS trends, annual data, 95 % CI, no correction for auto - correlation; identical for HadCRU); they are still solidly upwards.

# 10 Paul «One thing that seems potentially new and interesting from their results (and that I haven't seen many comments on) is the fact that their global record goes back about 50 more years than CRU and 80 more years than GISTEMP by starting with the year 1800.

By coincidence, yesterday was also the scheduled update for the GISTEMP July temperature release, and because July is usually the warmest month of the year on an absolute basis, a record in July usually means a record of absolute temperature too.

One of our Google Summer of Code students is working on making a faster and more user - friendly ccc - gistemp; one of the others is working on a new homogenization codebase (with input from Matt Menne, Claude Williams, and Peter Thorne), and the third is working on a web - facing common - era temperature reconstruction system (mentored by Julien Emile - Geay, Jason Smerdon, and Kevin Anchukaitis).

One thing that seems potentially new and interesting from their results (and that I haven't seen many comments on) is the fact that their global record goes back about 50 more years than CRU and 80 more years than GISTEMP by starting with the year 1800.

The reluctance of GISTEMP to follow HADCRUT and publish offsets for monthly data rather than just an offset for the annual data might be overcome by publishing monthly offsets relative to the annual figure.

GISTEMP could make this explicit by publishing the same information relative to zero rather than relative to 14.0 C.

In NOAA analysis, 2014 is a record by about 0.04 ºC, while the difference in the GISTEMP record was 0.02 ºC.

Thus there are now two surface temperature data sets with global coverage (the GISTEMP data from NASA have always filled gaps by interpolation).

NASA GISS has always filled the data gaps by interpolation, albeit with a simpler method, and accordingly the GISTEMP data show hardly a slowdown of warming.

Fig. 1 (b) shows that the anomaly between observations and the CMIP5 mean temperature response to cumulative emissions is halved by repeating the Millar analysis with the GISTEMP product instead of HadCRUT.

Plotting these temperatures as anomalies (by removing the mean over a common baseline period)(red lines) reduces the spread, but it is still significant, and much larger than the spread between the observational products (GISTEMP, HadCRUT4 / Cowtan & Way, and Berkeley Earth (blue lines)-RRB-:

The range is given by the spread of values from ERA - Interim, JRA - 55, GISTEMP, HadCRUT4, a version of HadCRUT4 infilled by kriging from Cowtan and Way, and NOAAGlobalTemp, processed as discussed here, and discussed further below.

SORRY, Re my post above to Bob Tisdale The link I intended suggesting dodgy GIStemp numbers was this: GISStimating 1998, by Steve Goddard https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/29/gisstimating-1998/ See the video....

Posts at RealClimate (here) and at SkepticalScience (here) looked on the paper as the second coming of... errr... Hansen's GISTEMP maybe, saying Cowtan and Way (2013) proved the UKMO HADCRUT4 data underreports by half the warming of global surface temperatures since 1997.

The tool / website will promote the goals of the Climate Code Foundation by providing an intuitive and informative interface exposing the GISTEMP data at a level comprehensible and usable for anyone from lay persons with a vague interest in climate change to climate scientists.

However, the impact of coverage bias is pretty clear; it can be seen by simply looking at a coverage and anomaly map as we did here, or by assessment of coverage bias using GISTEMP, or by the less valid but independent assessment using UAH.

Let us therefore compare satellite data (UAH6.0) with surface data (GISTEMP Land / Ocean) measured for the Southern Hemisphere (SH), from 1979 till 2015: You hopefully see like me a good correlation between the two, shown by both linear estimates and 60 month running means.

This guest post is written by Filipe Fernandes, one of our Google Summer of Code students, who is working on our ccc - gistemp project.

GIStemp fabricates numbers by repeated application of «the reference station method» where one site can change the history of another site from 1000 km to 1500 km away.

Similarly, NASA GISTEMP is largely based on the same data sets used by NOAA GlobalTemp.

The NASA GISTEMP record is the most detailed of the four datasets, with grid boxes two degrees longitude by two degrees latitude.

The GISTEMP analysis was not affected by this error, i.e. none of the results, tables, maps, graphs about global or regional means changed.

I calculated this by using GISTemp to calculate temperature anomalies for grids around the world for 1900 to 2010, using consecutively land only data, ocean only data and combined land & ocean data.

After some recent tweaks by me to the ccc - gistemp sources it is now possible to run a pipeline of the GISTEMP process with some of the steps ogistemp sources it is now possible to run a pipeline of the GISTEMP process with some of the steps oGISTEMP process with some of the steps omitted.

«2014 * is * the warmest year in the GISTEMP, NOAA and Berkeley Earth analyses,» he said, referring to different data sets kept by different groups of scientists, including the one kept by his center and known as «GISTEMP.»

By the way, I am talking of actual temperature measurements here and am excluding the sharp peak in GISTEMP at the beginning of 1998 which gives it a boost of 0.07 degrees.

So, GISTemp is down 0.045 C since July 1998 taking into account the most important natural factors we know about (not up 0.24 C as predicted by the IPCC).

The gridded temperature values computed by ccc - gistemp can be overlaid on the map by selecting a source — ocean, land, or mixed.

The reason there's «much traffic for woodfortrees» is that it's by far the best online tool for looking at GISTEMP etc. from a great variety of perspectives.

Curios thing about forensics, if Hansens GISTEMP data was being done by a forensics lab and presented as - is, it would most certainly be thrown out of evidence for lack of chain if custody, lack of documentation, and random adjustements that skew the data.

Since (using GISTEMP) global temperatures went up by about 0.5 C during this period, one would say that natural variability and anthropogenic forcing each accounted for about 0.25 C of warming.

And and an... (Canada is interesting because the basic data do show a cooling trend, yet GIStemp makes this nice rosy red somehow... but I digress...) The basic story told by the thermometers is that they move.

GIStemp is a filter that TRIES to remove the data biases and is overwhelmed by the massive bias.

The polar coverage of GISTEMP arises mainly from the fact that GISTEMP allows each weather station to contribute to an area of radius 1200 km around the station - this distance was determined by examining how temperature changes with distance in regions with good coverage (see Of Averages and Anomalies - Part 1B).

There are three main global land / ocean surface temperature series, produced by NOAA's National Climate Data Center (NCDC), NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISTemp), and the UK's Hadley Center (HadCRUT).

The graph is based on ERA - Interim and four other datasets: JRA - 55 produced by the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA), GISTEMP produced by the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), HadCRUT4 produced by the Met Office Hadley Centre in collaboration with the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, and NOAAGlobalTemp produced by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).