Reply #8: Maybe you do, but it's not. [View All]

[bean fidhleir]

This is news: ( http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ )

2008-11-13: NOAA combined the data it obtained from their various sources into another, slightly differing version of v2.mean. We ran our analysis again based on this new file; you may have to clear your buffer to see the updated results.

2008-11-12: It seems that one of the sources sent September data rather than October data. Corrected GHCN files were created by NOAA. Due to network maintenance, we were only able to download our basic file late today. We redid the analysis - thanks to the many people who noticed and informed us of that problem.

2008-11-11: Most data posted yesterday were replaced by the data posted last month since it looks like some mishap might have occurred when NOAA updated their GHCN data. We will postpone updating this web site until we get confirmation from NOAA that their updating programs worked properly. Because today is a Federal Holiday, some pages are still showing yesterday's data.


If you look at the plots using the bad vs the corrected data, here (one of that Torygraph hysteric's sources)

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/11/12/corrected-nasa-gistemp-data-has-been-posted/#comment-57760

you see that the difference is one of MAGNITUDE, not valence. The world remains hotter than normal almost everywhere, with Siberia much hotter, the latter fact predictable by the nature of what's called the "continental" climate in Russian (I don't know what it's called in English). Far from the moderating influence of the ocean, summers are hotter and winters colder.

And the fact that NASA doesn't have staff members on-site everywhere in the world monitoring the instruments --- that's NEWS to you? How big do you think NASA is, anyway?