It turns out it was a release of a publication…… or a release of a pre-publication. For those unfamiliar, some of this was a poke in the eye for some past actions of others.
The pre-release of this paper follows the practice embraced by Dr. Richard Muller, of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project in a June 2011 interview with Scientific American’s Michael Lemonick in “Science Talk”, said:
“I know that is prior to acceptance, but in the tradition that I grew up in (under Nobel Laureate Luis Alvarez) we always widely distributed “preprints” of papers prior to their publication or even submission. That guaranteed a much wider peer review than we obtained from mere referees.”
I don’t wish to detract, (as if I could) from WUWT’s discussion thread. But, we’ve all been anticipating this announcement and so now we can move beyond speculation and actually discuss what was stated in the paper/press release.
What I really like about all of this is the diversity of expertise this group brings to the table. Most of us are familiar with these people….. Anthony Watts of California, Evan Jones of New York, Stephen McIntyre of Toronto, Canada, and Dr. John R. Christy from the Department of Atmospheric Science, University of Alabama, Huntsville. There are additional co-authors who will be named later.
This is a multi-disciplined group, which adds to the legitimacy of their work. Before commenting on the specifics of the information, please read the material provided by Anthony.
The paper in draft form: Watts-et-al_2012_discussion_paper_webrelease (PDF)
The Figures for the paper: Watts et al 2012 Figures and Tables (PDF)
It should also be noted that he’s going to provide more information later today.
Well sited stations, using a localized Class 4 (the most common class) baseline show a trend that is 0.09°C per decade lower than poorly sited stations for raw mean temperature trends.
As to commenting on the generalities, implications, and events….. feel free.
suyts space 
It was worth the wait – for me.
Lol, well, yeh, we had a hoot with the speculation page!
Yes! Thank you very much for hosting it. 🙂
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings and commented:
GETTING THE NEWS OUT
Not even a mention of the Ipcc plan to nuke Greenland.
That proves I was right !
If they had eliminated that possibility, it would be there in black and white .
Seriously though, is this a real bombshell that will shake loose some dead wood ?
Well, it should be, but I’m not sure it will be.
It just seems very technical and dry and 10ths of a degree and all. ( even though its doubled )
I understand that it is a scientific endeavor, but since I read S. Goddard I am not surprised that the temperature data is fudged.
Will the lemmings finally get that it is fudged from this ?
I don’t think so.
It is my experience that those who say they “believe the scientists” are the ones who cannot name any of the scientists they believe.
It is going to take some MASS recantations of famous Kookoos ( LoL)
to turn the titanic around.
Yes, it’s exceptionally long for a typical climate submission. But, I expect that it would be parred down in some areas and expanded in others before all is said and done.
I think it will break through eventually, but we’ll hear some wailing an gnashing of the teeth for a while.
And, you’re right, this confirms what Steve has been demonstrating all along. The use of a homogenized temp data set is where much of the difficulties lie.
They are saying, basically that SAT is FUBAR. GISS even admits that in their Q and A.
Just to show what a sport I am I will down load and read the paper
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2012/07/29/comments-on-the-game-changer-new-paper-an-area-and-distance-weighted-analysis-of-the-impacts-of-station-exposure-on-the-u-s-historical-climatology-network-temperatures-and-temperature-trends-by-w/
Lol, well, clearly I like my simple refutation of Muller better, but that’s more detailed. 😀
The fact that Muller claims that his data affirms anything going back 250 years invalidates the rest of his gibberish.
Yep! Yep!
At Ms Curry’s Blog 🙂
http://judithcurry.com/2012/07/29/a-new-release-from-berkeley-earth-surface-temperature/
[“So, in the spirit of magnanimity in total crushing victory I would urge readers of this blog not to crow too much about the devastating blow Watts’s findings will have on the Guardian’s battalion of environment correspondents, on the New York Times, on NOAA, on Al Gore, on the Prince of Wales, on the Royal Society, on Professor Muller, or on any of the other rent-seekers, grant-grubbers, eco-loons, crony capitalists, junk scientists, UN apparatchiks, EU technocrats, hideous porcine blobsters, demented squawking parrots, life-free loser trolls, paid CACC-amites and True Believers in the Great Global Warming Religion.
That would be plain wrong.’]]
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100173174/global-warming-yeah-right/
Delingpole has a way with words!!
Uh huh 🙂
http://www.examiner.com/article/devasting-blow-to-temperature-records-u-s-temp-trends-spuriously-doubled
[ “Other findings by Mr. Watts et al include, but are not limited to:
· Statistically significant differences between compliant and non-compliant stations exist, as well as urban and rural stations.
· Poorly sited station trends are adjusted sharply upward, and well sited stations are adjusted upward to match the already-adjusted poor stations.
· Well sited rural stations show a warming nearly three times greater after NOAA adjustment is applied.
· Urban sites warm more rapidly than semi-urban sites, which in turn warm more rapidly than rural sites.
· The raw data T-mean trend for well sited stations is 0.15°C per decade lower than adjusted T-mean trend for poorly sited stations.
· Airport USHCN stations show a significant differences in trends than other USHCN stations, and due to equipment issues and other problems, may not be representative stations for monitoring climate.”]
[” Anthony Watts delivers devastating scientific blow to Muller’s claims: ‘New analysis demonstrates that reported 1979-2008 U.S. temp trends are spuriously doubled’
http://www.climatedepot.com/
In a minute, I’ll show where I think the fight is headed. 🙂
Sharing with all -*POPCORN* [ In my case crackers and cheese ]
JoSH…. ha ha ha ha
Lol, nice one!
“And thereby potentially invalidates possibly thousands of papers in many other fields that relied on those data sets. Yes, tectonic.”
Well, I guess I was wrong. Anthony would cancel a vacation to deliver a paper. Now, that’s dedication.
🙂 His timing was flawless
Lol, like I said, he’s poking Muller in the eye for how Muller rolled out his conclusions. It makes me chuckle.
LOL, I stocked up on popcorn. This is one of those situations where you don’t want to run out.
I was wrong too…I thought a paper wouldn’t be enough. But I think it was the combination of the paper being “right there” and the BEST press release this week…both were needed for this final push to be made now.
-Scott
Oh, this won’t have as big effect as we would wish.
Right now, as we speak, ruminations, brainstorm-alations, cogitations, percolations, deliberations, and, of course, exchange of emails, are being had right now in global warming circles. They’ll knit-pick, downplay, ride off, deemphasize, and even whitewash and demonize this work. By time they get through with it they’ll say “Nothing to see here folks” and shout cock-a-doodle-doo!
I’m sure they will try………. BUT I don;t think they will be able to dismiss
Personally, I think any effort to dismiss…… Will lose them followers
This will be harder for them to ignore for a couple of reasons. One, skepticism continues to reach more and more people. And, two, the paper contains a couple of direct challenges which must be answered. Most notably their findings about how NOAA is handling the temps
ABSOLUTELY!!!!
HERE IS THE MONEY KEY:
“And thereby potentially invalidates possibly thousands of papers in many other fields that relied on those data sets. Yes, tectonic.”
Well, there’s a lot of “ifs” and “buts” along the way. Initially, it will be ignored. …. but then…. we’ll see.
Don’t underestimate the abilities of Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, et al to turn t-bone steak into elementary school paste.
If you think I’m wrong have a look at Gavin Schmidt in action:
Oh, no doubt. This won’t be a slam dunk by any means. These guys will unleash every trick in the book and make more up as they go along.
Hmmmm I’ve actually debated Mr Schmidt . When he found out his answers were copy pasted [Not by me ] to a blog that showed-up on search engines…………….. He disappeared….and stopped answering at RC
What RC – AGW’ERS have to contend with is the WMO and it’s recommendations used by team WUWT
How were you able to debate at RC without being censored? Usually debates never take place there because “skeptic” comments don’t get past moderation.
I was debating someone at CAF – Who was a semi /member of RC.
Actually, she was seen as no threat to RC.
She copied my debate to her… and posted at RC – then pasted Mr Schmidts answers – and back and forth.
The debate was on CO2 atmospheric residual time.
I have no doubt that that part of the debate that showed-up on RC – is now deleted……
BUT CAF isn’t controlled by RC and the debate showed – up in search engines 🙂
Sneakie huh.
What’s CAF?
Catholic Answers Forum
Speaking of Catholic……
I’m not Catholic but I like the show on EWTN, The World Over with Raymond Arroyo. I stop on that show when I’m surfing. Every once in a while it’s interesting.
IS that what this was about ?
Cutting off Muller ?
So I am following you guys around, a bit, and I see this graph.
Now I don’t know what Dr. Curry is trying to prove with the graph. ( not a regular there)
But to me it just shows the clear 1.5 degree adjustment being applied to everything recent.
That is why the entire curve is so smoothly redistributed.
And if supposedly smart and wise people do not question this sharply, in detail, and with some determination they ( Them, you know) will just trash the actual records leaving nothing but the fiction. v3.
Keep at ’em Suyts !
And Watts.
And Goddard.
Hey! Don’t leave me out 🙂
Keep at ’em Kim2000 !
I;m a kid and I’ve been debating AGW over 4 years now 🙂
Lol, well, that was the timing part. Recall Muller and a few others have played some dirty tricks on Anthony in the past. Turn about is fair play. Muller released his stuff early back when .
I’m pretty sure this was in the works for quite awhile…..BUT yeah it was a poke in Mullers eye…
BEST out one day – and debunked THAT same day
I believe this is what Dana1981 etc will have to charge
World Meteorological Organization Commission for Instruments and Methods of Observation, Fifteenth session, (CIMO-XV, 2010) WMO publication Number 1064, available online at: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/CIMO/CIMO15-WMO1064/1064_en.pdf
Yeh, it’s an ISO standard! How cool is that!
THAT is the first thing Gavin, Mann, Dana, Hansen,Jones will have to defeat – NOT TEAM WUWT
Kim:
They have other “Evidence to support their claims and this is a minor thing that means very little. The Model results are more important that any real world measurements. 😉
Ha Ha ha ha 🙂
After reading I concluded the surface temperature records are still SNAFU! This just scratches the surface of the surface temperature problems.
Yeh, they mention there’s more to be done.
Again I plead to being an ignorant layman.
But, I think the onion can be peeled again. ( I think there is a more raw record )
And that is going to leave very little warming to fight about.
Lol, timing the comments…… scroll down.
Yeppers!!!
We should also note, as Steve Goddard does, the start time , 1979, was a particularly cold year. http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/07/29/raw-ushcn-daily-data-shows-0-11-c-warming-per-decade-since-1979/
Using other start times, it is likely no warming would be detected, as Steve demonstrates.
Mr Goddard does a good job at climate history stuff
Yes, he does. One of the reasons I started blogging with regularity was to provide a complement to Steve’s posts.
Looking at that graph you can see the Super El Nino of 1998 made things warmer for a few years.
This graph
Sure looks that way.
If that amount of heat was released from the Pacific, and if a decrease of solar activity, in general, is happening, the earth would be heading into a time of cooling, not warming, regardless of what co2 is doing.
I think, if and when our thermometers ever get cleaned up, they would show a general flat line to decreasing trend.
agree
Click to access TWTW%20-%207-28-12.pdf
The Week That Was
Junk Science
[“Not Muller’s BEST day: U.S. Temperature trends show a spurious doubling due to NOAA station siting problems and post measurement adjustments”]
http://junkscience.com/2012/07/29/not-mullers-best-day-u-s-temperature-trends-show-a-spurious-doubling-due-to-noaa-station-siting-problems-and-post-measurement-adjustments/
He’s getting beat upon…..
Check out this comment at WUWT…..http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/29/press-release-2/#comment-1047218
Even the warmists are on him.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooo
Now, that was a kick in the chops!
Lol, yeh, it must suck to be disliked by everyone.. No wonder he teamed with Mosh.
Personally, I think it serves him fine 🙂
Yeah, big Muller got his hat
Find out where it’s at
And it’s not hustlin’ people strange to you
Even if you do got a two-piece custom-made pool cue
Yeah you don’t tug on Superman’s cape
You don’t spit into the wind
You don’t pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger
And you don’t mess around with Slim
Until all the politicians of the world that support the hypothesis of dangerous climate change are not around any more then nothing will change. How many politicians have you ever heard saying they got such a big issue wrong? I have never heard of that happening. It would be the equivalent of Obama right now saying the stimulas was a bad idea. Even if Obama did realise his mistakes he would never admit it. The next crop of politicians are not likely to completely abandon their predeccessors beliefs either just slowly moderate them. I do believe though that the move is in the right direction now but will take years and years for it to be forgotten about.
I view it as an issue like the ozone layer. It’s a slow and torturous death of the issue, but, almost no one talks about it anymore.