The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) on Thu Aug 21, 2008 reported: “The first half of 2008 was the coolest for at least five years. The whole year will almost certainly be cooler than recent years, although temperatures remain above the historical average.”

Yet on 5 December 2009 they reported at the Copenhagen Summit: “This decade is the warmest on record and 2009 is likely to rank as the fifth warmest year since the beginning of instrumental climate recordings in 1850.”

Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, said the Office analysed land temperature data using a computer code developed by the University of East Anglia CRU (of Climategate infamy). She said CRU also supplied the Met Office with original data from some remote weather stations which had a significant impact on the global average.

This sudden backflip for the IPCC and Copenhagen Summit is making many wonder if the WMO are the latest to have adopted Michael Mann’s “trick” of massaging data to suit a preconceived agenda!

PS: See these sites re alleged corruption in WMO: http://screwtheun.blogspot.com/2007/02/audit-report-alleges-corruption-at-un.html
http://reformdesa.blogspot.com/

Go here for a temperature chart and more detail: http://www.biz-at-home.biz/climate/wmo.html

Cheers,

Denis Maclaine
Brisbane, Australia

1910 – – 0.32 2008 – +0.43 Around 0.7C since 1910. (GISS)

That’s off the official temp graph at:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif

note this comment on the current spike in satellite temperature:

‘John Christy sends in this note:

John C.”

so the “uncalibrated data” is too warm. i wonder how you guys would react to a similar (but going the opposite direction) statement by GISS…

Something I read last night from the Mariner 2 data collected from Venus during the early 1960’s showed 15 miles of dense cloud covering it, Venus that is. So there goes the runaway greenhouse idea.

http://landshape.org/enm/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/optical-depth-trend-1.png

Ergo no greenhouse effect for the last 50 years; well done sod; remind little will to pat you on the head at the next family reunion.

1910 – – 0.32 2008 – +0.43 Around 0.7C since 1910. (GISS)

could you be a little bit more specific? what comments are you talking about? NY central park?

the question is a simple one: does NOAA have the better data or some random blokes posting their impression on a blog.

if you were a sceptic, this wouldn t be a hard choice to make…

Sod, it is quite clear who is ignorant!

i think this is a funny claim. why not contradict the “ignorant” things i said? about UHI and wind, for example?

or finally quote Al Gore on saying:

ANYONE who denies global warming is in the pay of big oil. Remember that is what the big man, Al Gore, said in his movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth’.

i am here to learn!

—————

ps: i respect Anthony and his moderators for their decision to not allow the fraud claims against NASA GISS. the majority of you would also be better off, with some more caution on the claims you make..

Not all of the observations are based on ‘feeling’ but on temperature records and observations.

We’re not all silly!

1910 – – 0.32 2008 – +0.43 Around 0.7C since 1910. (GISS)

as has been pointed out over during the wattsup discussion on GISS june (notice how it is a really good idea to let some other opinions post..), several readers pointed out that UAH will most likely show a very warm July.

http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps+001

and there are also some good ideas, about why and when satellite and surface data will diverge.

your ideas about “entire warming of the century” are false, and show a serious limited ndersatnding of the subject and statistics.

Remember you were the one who posted that ‘I always wonder, why you “sceptics” are completely uncritical of such historic stories, while at the same time deny accurate modern measurements.’

So sod, which one is correct?

modern measurement.

Also, have a look at NOAA’s attempt to tell Americans that June 2009 in the US was above average.

And you wonder why we are skeptical.

you are not sceptical, you are ignorant. “feeling” the temperature will often give a badly false impression. for example the wet weather we are experiencing here at the moment, is feeling like a horrible summer: no pool days, no barbecues. weather is completely unpredictable and people get a “cold” feeling of the weather.

but most of them neither experience nor measure night time minimum temperature, which will effect 50% of the calculated average.

in short, your feelings are wrong, NOAA is right.