[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

MORE:

********************************************************EXCERPTS*****************************************

angech says:

January 20, 2016 at 12:25 am

DMI did an Arctic Sea Ice Extent 30% coverage of the The Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice for 11 years.
As of the start of 2016 they have dropped this link.
The 30% coverage had shown above normal sea ice extent for over 2 months and it was at an all time high for that time of year on the 1/8/2016.
No reasons given.
Obviously inconvenient truth bites the warmists dust.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

More:

**********************************************EXCERPTS*******************************************

ATheoK says:

January 20, 2016 at 7:18 pm

Editor:
Steve Mosher’s list of satellite process is inaccurate with many of his allusions pulled from other posts, out of context.
Steve lists radiosonde data as being bad because prior attempts to mash all radiosonde data together failed. Comparing mashed radiosonde data to their own foolish concepts of modeled radiosonde data is not usable information.
The honest takeaway is that not all radiosonde data is well collected or accurate; yet some is.

Within those various links Steve provides are admissions that subsets of radiosonde data are accurate.

Steve also states a comparison Mears did that identified UAH as in error, forgetting to mention that UAH corrected the algorithm and both RSS and UAH are in agreement now.

Perhaps, if you really want to know how satellites are used to provide temperature reconstructions you could ask Mears, Christy or Spencer? Taking bulls___ from Steve Mosher as if it is truly in the interest of good science is just wrong.
Steve knows his stuff, and perhaps could give a reasonably accurate description of satellite processing, but Steve is all about the land based temperature record
– completely ignoring the rampant activist data adjustments,
– missing data recreated from stations 1200Km (745.7 miles) away,
– poorly sited and maintained temperature stations,
– adjustments of multiple degrees, not tenths, or hundredths,
– the fact that many land based stations are thermister driven, not thermometers and require similar algorithms as the satellite!

• Editor of the Fabius Maximus website says:
  January 20, 2016 at 7:38 pm

  ATheoK,

  We will know more about the sat data when the RSS or UAH group speaks for themselves — which I suspect they will soon.

  As for the surface atmosphere temperature data — I think there are far larger issues then those you mention.

  (1) There is no Global SurfaceStations project. Focus on the 7% of the world that us USA misses the bigger point. How many stations in poor nations are CRN cat 4 (error > 2degrees) or cat 5 (>5 degrees)? How many leaders of poor nations care about that? I wouldn’t. If we want good data, we’ll should pay for it.

  (2) The marine air data. It is often described in the literature as of lower quality than the land data. Holes in it are filled by proxies, such as satellite and SST data. Which is fine, but that probably does not give 4 significant digit data with good accuracy.