flacaltenn
Diamond Member
I NEVER EVER said that it was awful that ONLY satellite data was used. What I scolded on was the fact that satellite data EXISTED prior to 1979, but it displays a tale that shan't be told.
Which is why those 3 papers, among others, studied it in detail, published about it, and why all the scientists knew about it how ice levels were higher pre-1979. It's only in your conspiracy theory that data is being hidden.
And thus after the 1990 publication by the IPCC of the ENTIRE satellite record (albeit it was processed differently and the satellites were different) --- it became MANDATORY to start the "satellite sea ice record" from 1979 instead of 1972 or so.
The modern papers use that 1972-1978 satellite data. Hence, nothing is being "hidden", and your conspiracy theory crashes.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdo...09A9C6D?doi=10.1.1.423.1769&rep=rep1&type=pdf
---
The homogenized combined time series is created from three individual products: a consistent passive microwave record
using multiple channels (frequencies and polarizations), an extended passive microwave record that also incorporates
an early 1970s single-channel passive microwave radiometer, and the pre-1979 part of the Hadley Centre climatology.
Each dataset is summarized below with references for details of the processing methods.
2.2 Extended passive microwave (XPM)
The sensors used in the consistent, long-term passive microwave sea ice time series, SMMR-SSM/I-SSMIS, are
multi-channel (five frequencies, four with dual polarization).Preceding this multichannel passive microwave era, a single-
channel sensor, the Electrically Scanning Microwave Radiometer (ESMR) on the NASA Nimbus-5 platform operated
from late 1972 through early 1977. Because it was only a single channel instrument, the NT algorithm is not applicable
and a single-channel algorithm was used. There were several quality control issues with ESMR, limiting data collec-
tion. Nonetheless, daily and monthly sea ice concentration and extent estimates have been produced for most months
between January 1973 and December 1977 (Parkinson et al., 1987a, b, 1999;
| National Snow and Ice Data Center).
These fields were produced on the same 25 km x 25 km polar stereographic grid as the data for the SII estimates.
The different algorithms, limited data quality, and the lack of an overlap between the ESMR and SMMR complicate
merging of the ESMR extents with the SII values in a consistent manner. However, Cavalieri et al. (2003) combined
the two passive microwave time series by using operational ice charts from the US National Ice Center (Dedrick et al.,
2001) to cross-calibrate between the SMMR-SSM/I record and ESMR and bridge the gaps within ESMR and between
ESMR and the multi-channel passive microwave record, creating a 30-yr time series spanning January 1972 through
December 2002 (Data Set Not Found | National Snow and Ice Data Center), denoted here as the “XPM” time
series. In the process, adjustments were made to both passive microwave records and this XPM time series is not entirely
consistent with the SII time series.
---
From your link..
Earlier records, compiled from ice charts and other sources exist, but are not consistent with the satellite record. Here, a method is presented to adjust a compilation of pre-satellite sources to remove discontinuities between the two periods and create a more consistent combined 59-yr time series spanning 1953–2011.
This is the current MO of ALL these data prep exercises. Take much more reliable and precise MODERN data (like satellite) and pound on the crap to tenderize it into one homogenous record. OFTEN with the goal of "adjusting" the more precise record to LOOK like the ancient sketchy data. They do it here. And they do it TODAY at NOAA for sea surface temps.
At NOAA -- they discount the modern instrumentation ENTIRELY to get HIGHER SST by going back to 19th century "ship intake methods". That's how NOAA CAUSED the recent divergence between satellite data and the 10,000 buoy methods. Fuck the buoys, ask the captains for ship logs and just homogenize it all.
The PRIMARY data is the reference source. It's never the other way around. .