NASA GISS rising temperature reports may be invalidated by satellite data.
Please first visit the previous post where this was identified. Above and below I have expanded upon the relative comparison. This shows that for latitudes between the South Pole and 65S, a commonly used satellite resource indicates a significant drop in temperature over several recent decades. In contrast, for the same latitudes, the NASA GISS resource which I call NGT, suggests rising temperatures over the same time frame.
The featured image gives NASA GISS a handicap because I eliminated three major dips in temperature recorded by ECMWF. Here is the same comparison with those years of temperature minima included for the black dotted trend line. For this focus on the trend lines, the chart is still truncated before the actual minima values, all lower than -26 deg C, are reached.
Both NASA GISS and ECMWF cannot be right, but NGT (NASA GISS) is only based on scattered surface measurements. The ECMWF resource in comparison provides a 24/7 continuous web of coverage for the entire planet, at relatively high resolution, for many decades now. And it is highly validated against vast numbers of accepted surface observations.
The potential invalidation of NASA GISS representations of globally – rising temperatures could be important, because almost every official representation concerning climate change hangs on this beanpole. Here are examples:
This NASA GISS version of the Hockey Stick is accordingly not supported by the satellite data.
You’d have to ask others why this routine comparison was never conducted before. The attention to standard quality assurance (QA) best practices might have room for improvement at NASA GISS specifically. This deficiency is shared by many, and for that matter, I’m surprised it took me so long to get around to comparing. Even other skeptical forays by Macintyre, Watts, Goddard (alias), Curry and more including a few I worked with once, never apparently included the routine exercise of comparing pieces of NASA’s temperature time series product to a global dataset that had itself already been validated countless times. Sure many of them nosed around the surface of the Northern Hemisphere (NH). Related interpretations are their problem, because it makes perfect sense to me why the NH can naturally warm even as the other 2/3 of the planet does not. Even as the lower 3rd (give or take) naturally cools.
The previous generation of climate skeptics had their favored nuts to crack, yet none actually invalidated NASA GISS temperature records. I was only seeking to round out my own work in progress by comparing to records including those of NASA GISS. But I just may have invalidated their work. Those who think the work hasn’t been invalidated, should submit their QA-free and satellite-challenged notions to a peer science journal.
5947total visits,1visits today
