Section 4.5 Responses

4. It is alleged that there has been an improper bias in selecting and adjusting data so as to favour the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis and details of sites and the data adjustments have not been made adequately available It is alleged that instrumental data has been selected preferentially to include data from warmer, urban in contrast to rural sites; that the rationale for the choice of high/low latitude sites is poor; and that the processes by which data has been corrected, accepted and rejected are complex and unclear.


 5. To what extent have different procedures for data of different vintages and different sources been unified?

3 Responses to “Section 4.5 Responses”

  1. jimchip Says:


    From: Susan Solomon
    Subject: Re: urban heat island – since 1950? or since 1900
    Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:23:13 -0600
    Cc:, “Phil Jones”

    >> Kevin,
    >> Thanks for thinking about this. Based on the chapter referencing
    >> Brohan and explicitly saying 1900 regarding the 0.006/decade figure
    >> which is what is used as the bottom line, I wonder if this is a typo
    >> and since 1950 should perhaps be since 1900 in your ES.
    >> The same thing occurs in the TS, and I am checking page proofs for
    >> that which is why I got to wondering and checked back in chapter 3,
    >> where I found this conundrum. If it is correct as 1950, fine, but
    >> it doesn’t look like that to me.
    >> I’ll wait to hear from Phil, hopefully tomorrow.
    >> bests,
    >> Susan

    At 4:30 PM +0100 4/10/07, wrote:
    > Susan, Kevin,
    > See attachment, I realise this is an important issue,
    >as this wil be one of the areas the skeptics will go over
    > with a fine toothcomb. I’m happy either way – either
    > with the since 1950 or without. I’ve explained why it is
    > there.

  2. jimchip Says:


    From: “Kevin Trenberth”
    Subject: Re: urban heat island – since 1950? or since 1900
    Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 20:24:35 -0600 (MDT)

    seems like we should do the same if we can in our galley proof.

    > Phil
    > Thanks for your reply. I have removed the
    > ‘since 1950’ from the TS. That was taken from
    > your ES but in view of this discussion I think
    > the reader needs to go to the chapter.

  3. Jimchip Says:

    1086722406.txt Updating Russian Temp data…NO!

    From: Keith Briffa
    Subject: Fwd: Re: Russian daily data
    Date: Tue Jun 8 15:20:06 2004

    From: Dale Patrick Kaiser
    To: Keith Briffa
    Subject: Re: Russian daily data
    Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 10:31:02 -0400
    User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3
    X-UEA-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
    X-UEA-MailScanner: Found to be clean
    Dear Keith,
    I wish I could say that updating the Russian data is on the front burner for
    us right now, but I’m afraid it’s not. I’m having to plan some proposals and
    have been pulled off part of my normal CDIAC work for about 6 months to work
    on a special project. And in our small group, I’m the only climate guy (and
    the one that has done the Russian work thus far). Thus, the first suggestion
    I have is to discuss the data with NCDC; perhaps the best person to start
    with would be Pasha Groisman. Years ago, when I did the Russian work, the
    data were actually transferred from Russia to NCDC and then on to us, so I
    wouldn’t be surprised if NCDC was holding updated data or at least could get
    ahold of data relatively easily. Perhaps you’ve already corresponded
    directly w/Slava Razuvaev or one of his colleagues at RIHMI-WDC? I’m afraid
    it’s been quite a while since I’ve spoken w/Slava.
    Wait, maybe there is another way…. I’ve just remembered about NCDC’s Global
    Daily Climate Network:
    I have not learned much about these holdings, but if you check it out perhaps
    they’ve incorporated more recent data daily into this database for the FSU.
    I sure hope so.
    I’m sorry that I cannot be of more help at this time. With any luck CDIAC can
    turn its attention to updates of these data in 2005.
    On Friday 04 June 2004 7:18 am, you wrote:
    > Dear Dale
    > sorry to contact you out of the blue , but Phil Jones suggested I check
    > with you about the status of daily temperature (and possibly precipitation)
    > data for Russia that I believe you and colleagues might be planning to
    > update. I work with tree-ring data in Northern Russia and we are
    > particularly interested in looking at growing season and snow lie changes
    > in recent years that may be influencing the growth rates of trees and the
    > position of the tree line . We are especially interested in data for the
    > Yamal Peninsula ,Taimyr and Indigirka (though we would also like to explore
    > snow lie changes over the whole of northern Siberia eventually). Is there
    > any chance of getting updated data for these initial regions in the near
    > term , and perhaps the wider area eventually? We would be really grateful
    > for any help in this regard.
    > Very best wishes and thanks for your help
    > Keith

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: