Adjustments vs CO2

Steven Goddard has posted about the remarkable correlation between USHCN adjustments and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations:

goddard co2

Here’s my plot of Australian adjustments to minima, Acorn minus raw vs CO2 data (downloaded from NASA GISS at ):

acorn vs co2

R2= 0.777 not as impressive as 0.988, so not proof of anything except past cooling adjustments which we already knew.  Interesting all the same.


Tags: , ,

4 Responses to “Adjustments vs CO2”

  1. blackduck19 Says:

    Thanks Ken. I was not aware of Steve Goddard’s announcement. R^2 at 0.988? GISS may as well have plotted all values on the line.

  2. DaveR Says:

    The Australian correlation is not 0.99, but at 0.78 its still very good. With atmospheric CO2 on the X-axis essentially a proxy for the date, the new Goddard plot of CO2 ppm plus the RAW-ACORN adjustment together on the Y-axis vs year on the X-axis would also be interesting.

    Doesn’t it just show that BOM have systematically lowered older temperatures, and raised modern temperatures to match the rising CO2 plot? Isn’t is suspicious that all of the earliest temperature adjustments are a lowering?

    What if GISS in the USA, BOM in Australia, NIWA in NZ and Met Office in UK have all systematically adjusted raw temperature data the same way?

  3. Mikky Says:

    I think you have to de-trend data before computing correlation coefficients, otherwise there is a very spooky correlation between my weight and the sea level, both of which have risen nearly linearly over the past few decades.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: