RSS pointed out a significant error in UAH's temperature analysis caused by a failure to accurately correct for the effects
of orbital decay on observations across multiple satellites.
Not exact matches
On April 30, if all goes well, after running out
of fuel to fight off
orbital decay NASA's long - running MESSENGER spacecraft will end its mission to Mercury by crashing into the planet's surface at nearly 4 kilometers per second.
But only the lucky binaries seem to have planets that orbit them; some stellar binaries that lack orbiting bodies have a different third party — a distant star that's so massive, its gravitational fluxes actually change the orbit
of the stellar binary, causing the two stars to shrink together in a process called
orbital decay.
Combining optical data taken during the outburst
decay, we obtain an
orbital period
of 2.414 ± 0.005 h, in perfect agreement with the value previously measured from X-ray dips.
The different Q values also allow the planets to re-align their orbits with the spin
of the star (so that the
orbital plane is perpendicular to the star's spin axis) on a timescale shorter than the
orbital period
decay, thus explaining why there are many «aligned» hot Jupiters.
The ``... uneven spatial distribution, many missing data points, and a large number
of non-climatic biases varying in time and space» all contribute inaccuracies to to the global temperature record — as do errors in
orbital decay corrections, limb - corrections, diurnal corrections, and hot - target corrections, all
of which rely on measurements (+ - inherent errors), in the satellite temperature records.
(
Orbital forcing doesn't have much
of a global annual average forcing, and it's even concievable that the sensitivity to
orbital forcing as measured in terms
of global averages and the long - term response (temporal scale
of ice sheet response) might be approaching infinity or even be negative (if more sunlight is directed onto an ice sheet, the global average albedo might increase, but the ice sheet would be more likely to
decay, with a global average albedo feedback that causes warming).
Although there have been minor errors in calculations, such as early failure to adjust for
orbital decay of the satellites, once recognized, the data have been quickly adjusted, as is expected in rigorous science.
Those Bond Events appear to be recurrent pseudo cycles
of a 4300 to 5500 year
decay recurrences for a 23K year
orbital cycle
of perturbations.
«Changes in the CO2 and CH4 content have played a significant part in the glacial - interglacial climate changes by amplifying, together with the growth and
decay of the Northern Hemisphere ice sheets, the relatively weak
orbital forcing»
The
orbital decay effect was discovered by Wentz around 1997 which induced a spurious cooling effect on one
of our microwave satellite products (lower troposphere) but not the others.
Such an assessment should involve a detailed analysis
of the sensitivity
of global - mean temperatures derived from these three different measurement systems to the various choices made in the processing
of the raw data — e.g., corrections for instrument changes, adjustments for
orbital decay effects in the satellite measurements, and procedures for interpolating station data onto grids.
«John Christy, the originator and keeper
of the satellite data, has demonstrated that, even after accounting for the
orbital decay noted by Wentz and Schnabel, there remains no significant warming in the satellite record.»
Given that the radiation reaches the satellite sensors having travelled through a warming lower atmosphere and cooling stratosphere, that bias exists between the various sensors, issues with
orbital decay, and a host
of other obstacles, there's a lot
of careful and painstaking analysis required, and much that can go wrong.
err tony satillites change position (
orbital decay) they change time
of observation (drift) and the sensor changes with different platforms.
AQUA has a self - correcting propulsion system, so the UAH annual cycle, and the cyclic component
of UAH - RSS divergence, can not be the result
of differing methods
of correction for diurnal drift resulting from
orbital decay.
Wentz and Schabel 1998 found that UAH didn't account for
orbital decay of the satellites, which resulted in a spurious cooling trend.