Met Office Say Surface Temperatures Should Agree With Satellites
January 17, 2015
By Paul Homewood
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate-guide/science/temp-records
In 2013, the Met Office had this to say about global temperature datasets:
“Changes in temperature observed in surface data records are corroborated by records of temperatures in the troposphere recorded by satellites”
Well, except when they’re not!!
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/17/why-satellite-records-cannot-be-ignored/
8 Comments
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
GISS making hay with their up to 1200 kilometers from a weather station estimations.
Here is what the MET say about that-
“NASA GISS assumes that temperature anomalies remain coherent out to distances of 1200km from a station”
I have often assumed things…… but never that NASA GISS are coherent.
Off topic.
http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2390642/wind-farms-could-save-uk-gbp74bn-in-gas-import-costs-report-finds
Thanks, Paul.
Yes, Surface Temperatures Should Agree With Satellites, but they don’t.
What are REMSS and UAH to do? Adjust their software?
They are in the process of doing that, but I doubt the Met Office will like the results.
It should be pointed out that the surface and satellite temps had roughly the same trend from 2001 to 2013. (basically flat)
.
.
.
Then Gavin took over.
ps… if you look closely you can see that Gavin took over about mid-year 2013.
On the questions-and-answers website of the UK’s Met Office Hadley Centre, some time ago, this is what the Met Office said in response to a question, “Do you use satellite data to estimate the global average surface temperature? If not, why not?”:
“Although satellites can provide a quasi-global view of Earth’s surface, there are a number of difficulties involved in estimating near-surface temperatures from these observations. Over land, the satellites measure the temperature of the surface, which can be very different from the air temperature just above the surface. The difference depends, amongst other things, on the wind speed and the nature of the surface. Because of the way that the satellites orbit the earth, many only take measurements at a given point only a few times a day, making it harder to estimate the mean temperature.
Over the oceans the problem is somewhat simpler. The satellites measure the temperature of the sea-surface, which is what we are interested in. The daily range of sea-surface temperature is much smaller than over land, so the time at which the observations are made is less important, although it is still significant. However, the observations from satellites are influenced by atmospheric conditions, particularly aerosols (small particles in the air), which can mean that the measurements are often in error by several tenths of a degree. Some sea surface temperature products (for example HadISST) use satellite data, but because of the difficulties of forming a homogeneous climate record from satellite data, they are not yet used in our estimates of global average temperature.”
This response is outrageous for obvious reasons, and it explains why the Met Office keeps its head buried in the sand!
“outrageous for obvious reasons”
Please explain as it’s not obvious to me
– I’d always belived that satellite is better than surface : more measurements of more locations.
“However, the observations from satellites are influenced by atmospheric conditions, particularly aerosols (small particles in the air), which can mean that the measurements are often in error by several tenths of a degree.”
That does seem to claim that these measurements are known to be sometimes out by tenths of a degree and give a reason why.
Using “can often” is confusing, do they mean something like 0.01% of readings are way out, or 20% ?
Thanks Paul2.Obvious nonsense of course as more wind farms mean that MORE gas is needed for back up.