Monday, April 30, 2012

3650.txt

date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:45:10 +0100
from: Thomas Crowley <thomas.crowleyatXYZxyzac.uk>
subject: Re: Fwd: Re: contribution to RealClimate.org
to: P.JonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk

<x-flowed>
Quoting P.Jones@uea.ac.uk:

Phil,

I will do that, but there seem to be two problems:

1) why would it all happen in 1997-98? its hard to believe that many
new drifters were deployed, starting just that year.

2) there are examples of abrupt shifts in other parts of the time
series - why should this be especially suspect?

thanks for any additional help on this, tom

> Tom,
> The issue Ray alludes to is that in addition to the issue
> of many more drifters providing measurements over the last
> 5-10 years, the measurements are coming in from places where
> we didn't have much ship data in the past. For much of the SH
> between 40 and 60S the normals are mostly made up as there is
> very little ship data there.
> Whatever causes the divergence in your plot it is down to
> the ocean.
> You could try doing an additional plot. Download from
> the CRU web site the series for SH land. It doesn't matter if
> is from CRUTEM3 or CRUTEM3v (the former would be better). If that
> still has the divergence, then it is the oceans causing the
> problem. What you're seeing is too rapid to be real.
>
> Cheers
> Phil
>
>>
>> Phil, do you have any comments with respect to either my note sent
>> yesterday to RealClimate.org, or Ray's query below? just want to make
>> sure I touch the appropriate bases before I send it back to RCO.
>>
>> thanks in advance for any help, with regards, tom
>>
>> ----- Forwarded message from rbradleyatXYZxyz.umass.edu -----
>> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:17:18 -0400
>> From: "raymond s. bradley" <rbradleyatXYZxyz.umass.edu>
>> Reply-To: "raymond s. bradley" <rbradleyatXYZxyz.umass.edu>
>> Subject: Re: contribution to RealClimate.org
>> To: Thomas Crowley <thomas.crowleyatXYZxyzac.uk>
>> Cc: mannatXYZxyz.edu
>>
>> Hi Tom,
>> The Easterling & Wehner preprint is attached. It would be good if
>> you could expand your comment to include some reflections on this.
>> One cautionary note--talking to Phil Jones last week, he mentioned
>> that the recent addition of SH buoy data has added data from areas of
>> the globe hitherto undersampled; it may have "suppressed" the ocean
>> area warming relative to land. You might contact Phil to see if the
>> rapid warming in land, but not ocean, has anything to do with
>> that. I'm always a bit nervous about the ever-changing database of
>> obserevational records, particularly with the expansion of the
>> network using automated instruments. It may turn out not to be a
>> relevant factor to your post, but something to ponder, nevertheless...
>> Ray
>>
>> At 11:48 AM 4/13/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Mike and Ray,
>>>
>>> attached is a contribution to your website about trends in global
>>> temperatures.
>>> I realize that you often do not have outsiders comment, but as I
>>> explain in my note, the results I show are quite striking and
>>> illustrated in a different way than some (many?) may have seen.
>>>
>>> Since the figure illustrates something of wide interest, I hope you
>>> can make an exception to your normal rules.
>>>
>>> With regards, Tom
>>>
>>> --
>>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
>>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>>
>> --
>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>



--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.


</x-flowed>

No comments:

Post a Comment