date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:45:10 +0100 from: Thomas Crowley subject: Re: Fwd: Re: contribution to RealClimate.org to: P.Jones@uea.ac.uk 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 rbradley@geo.umass.edu ----- >> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:17:18 -0400 >> From: "raymond s. bradley" >> Reply-To: "raymond s. bradley" >> Subject: Re: contribution to RealClimate.org >> To: Thomas Crowley >> Cc: mann@psu.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.