John Lees

Some more thoughts on potential biases introduced into the global sea surface temperature dataset.
Here I have found a nice graphic showing the relative proportions of various methods of sea water sampling over time.
You can see that buckets predominated right up until the second world war, when ERI (engine room intake?) took over.
When bucket measurement disappeared during world war 2, that just left ERI as the primary form of measurement.
And what we see, is that the raw temperature shot up, for the duration of the war.
Of course, this looks bad, so in all analyses this spurious warming is nullified. The blip is removed.
But, after the war there was then a steady growth in the use of ERI.
We can see from the WW2 period that a switch to ERI produces spurious warming requiring a massive correction.
So, don't we need to also correct for the warming bias introduced by the more gradual shift to ERI following the war i.e. in the 50's and 60's?
No, apparently not. Because, I suppose, that post war gradual warming is exactly what the alarmists want to see.
But what if the post war use of ERI was also creating a false warming bias, just as it clearly did during the war years?
(In the second graph you can see the raw data in blue with the final processed HadCRUT data in red. The black line is the difference.




Sources, and excellent articles on this topic:
https://hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/2xxlfhva/release/3
And:
http://euanmearns.com/making-the-measurements-match-the-models-part-2-sea-surface-temperatures/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 12:11 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 256 words, total size 3 kb.