Sci-Tech -
News Sections
Toronto blogger turns up NASA climate error
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(20)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Wed. Aug. 15 2007 11:00 AM ET
A Toronto blogger's number-crunching skills turned up an error in the math NASA used to determine historic temperatures, forcing the agency to own up to an embarrassing mistake.
NASA had said 1998 was the hottest year on record in the U.S. but later revised the statistics, issuing a new list that instead named 1934 as the hottest year on the books.
Toronto-based blogger Steve McIntyre found the error. In a tongue-in-cheek posting on his blog climateaudit.org, he compared the race for the top spot to the leaderboard results from the U.S. Open.
"There has been some turmoil yesterday on the leaderboard of the U.S. (Temperature) Open and there is a new leader," he wrote on Aug. 8.
"Four of the top 10 are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900.
McIntyre scrutinized NASA's numbers, looking closely at data that recorded how warm a place is at a specific time, compared to its 30-year average.
He found that the numbers for 1999 to 2000 seemed abnormally high, and discovered that after 1999, the data wasn't being adjusted to figure in the times of day the readings were taken or the locations where they were taken.
He forwarded his findings to NASA, and the review was ordered. Eventually, NASA released a new list of the hottest years on record.
In addition to naming a new year as the hottest, NASA also reduced the mean U.S. temperature anomalies by .15 C for the years 2000 to 2006.
Some consider the adjustment a blow to Al Gore and others who maintain the planet is heating up as the result of global warming. But NASA has downplayed the corrections and even McIntyre has suggested the new numbers would have little impact on climate policy.
McIntyre has said he had fun discovering the flaws, but called the adjustment a "micro-change."
Those who doubt the science behind climate change theory, however, have used the new information as ammunition.
Conservative U.S. radio host Rush Limbaugh called it evidence that global warming is a man-made phenomenon that has been artificially trumped up by liberal scientists.
Others say that proof of errors within the system NASA uses to determine accurate temperature data, means the global warming camp has suffered a significant blow.
The 59-year-old McIntyre is a former mining executive. In 2003 he released data that called into question the accuracy of the "hockey stick" graph used to show rising global temperatures.
User Tools
Related Stories
Related Websites
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-


Font-size
Print Article
Comments(20)-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
I applaud the budget, even though Health Care and education may stay unscathed. Sadly this cannot last and I worry to later this year where cuts will become enviable. If anything, this provides the Wildrose Alliance plenty of ammo when an election is called.


Please Add Comments( )
Sal
0
said
0
Why do you suppose that is happening????
No matter who is to "blame", if we can slow the change down by making reasonable changes, why not!
J.F. Chalmers
0
said
0
Dick Varley
0
said
0
mcraser
0
said
0
Bruce, in Ottawa
0
said
0
peter
0
said
0
Warren Wall
0
said
0
It's important to look at and research, but the 'religion' of carbon based climate change is a joke. Yet some people want us to spend billions on it.
This just shows that even scientists and liberal bag men can make mistakes.
Gerry Ennis
0
said
0
Naren
0
said
0
We humans are not capable of causing such massive shifts in climate.
OAK
0
said
0
Pretty embarrasing!
Scott
0
said
0
That said, we should work to reduce pollution...
Deryk
0
said
0
Andre, Gatineau
0
said
0
Apparently, the earth got cooler between the 40's and 70s.
Interesting.
Liz
0
said
0
cameron
0
said
0
Leeky from Calgary
0
said
0
There is nothing wrong with continuing efforts to address the environment and reduce pollution, but it should now be put in its proper context and taken out of the domain of liberal zealots.
ian
0
said
0
Matt
0
said
0
Whether or not carbon emissions need to be reduced, they cannot and will not be as long as people live in gigantic houses and drive SUVs on hour-long commutes to work.
Even the Al Gore crowd is trying to put a positive spin on "going green" by trying to convince us we can make "small changes" in our lives to fix the problem. Wrong...suburban sprawl must be curbed, for an endless number of reasons, including (perhaps) climate change.
Rick G
0
said
0
Don J
0
said
0