Antarctica Melting FASTER!

Sorry for the late reply. I see you are eager for me to do so, but I don't have long to do so.

Originally posted by atlasastro
Why do they claim that no data needs adjustment given known changes in stations etc.

They don't. They question the need for such large adjustments, when no explanations are provided.

Salinger said adjustments were made for legitimate reasons, such as changes of site.

Except these reasons are not provided. Science doesn't just rely on peoples word.

Dude, read the actual PDF, they only use the overlap period to get a cooler average. The reason why they only use the overlap is because if they where to trend out the South and the Higher station, the south historically is warmer, so what they do is find a point that show cooling and then make a claim that this is typical for the entire history.
Of course they used the overlap period. That's how you can compare two sites. You can't compare different sites at completely different times to make accurate adjustments. So what was it you wanted me to read again?

When they say "all the Adjustments" do you actually know how many station are adjusted? Wellington is explained, Lincoln, Dunedin and Hotikita.

Again, they are NOT explained. Just the possible reasons that they were adjusted. They don't have the records any more to show what adjustments were made. NIWA directed people to papers which did not explain the changes made to the record. This is the issue.

Dunedin shows cooling. Some conspiracy hey. NIWA adjusted it, and it shows cooling after the adjust.
I bet you won't be questioning that adjustment.

Not a conspiracy. Just scientific negligence. And I will be questioning those adjustments. If correct adjusting principles have been applied, then that's great.

It may be shown that all the adjustments were made appropriately. I have come across this which outlines the magnitude of adjustments, but not the reasons. Instead they provide this as a footnote

Please note that all adjustments can only ever be estimates, made in good faith and using scientifically accepted methodologies.

.

They also have this footnote for one of the sites, Albert park.

Note that the adjustments are increasing with time, a possible indication of urban warming. This is a key reason for moving to a less built-up site (Mangere) as the station representing the “Auckland” location in the composite temperature series.

Albert park is smack bang in the middle of Auckland city, NZ's largest and fastest growing urban area. Of course there is an urban warming effect. Yet they only note it as a "possible indication". So although it appears to have been adjusted due to the UHI effect (as it should be), it is not known for sure.

This is not the kind of science that should be used to promote an official temperature record. NIWA are now trying to recreate the adjustments so they can explain them sufficiently.

Lets hope that they were done so correctly

Are you serious? See this:
www.forbes.com...

Antarctic sea ice set another record this past week, with the most amount of ice ever recorded on day 256 of the calendar year (September 12 of this leap year).

reply to post by ProfEmeritus


Sea Ice is completely different to Ice Sheets that are mentioned in the OP.

But why let that get in the way of your denial Prof.

Here is a rebuttle to your BLOG piece.

The extent of Arctic sea ice at its summertime low point has dropped 40 percent in the past three decades. The idea that a tiny Antarctic ice expansion makes up for this — that heat is merely shifting from the the Southern Hemisphere to the Northern and therefore global warming must not be happening — is "just nonsense," Serreze said.

www.livescience.com...