Open Letter No. 1 to all authors
of the Jones et al 1986 papers and DoE documentation books.
Open letter question re Atlanta station data Emailed 17 Dec
Dear Jones et al 1986 co-author,
Your participation in the landmark 1986 papers in Journal of Applied
Northern Hemisphere Surface Air Temperature Variations: 1851–1984. P.D.
Jones, S.C.B. Raper, R.S. Bradley, H.F. Diaz, P.M. Kelly and T.M.L.
Wigley, pages 161–179.
Southern Hemisphere Surface Air Temperature Variations: 1851–1984. P.D.
Jones, S.C.B. Raper and T.M.L. Wigley, pages 1213–1230.
Plus the hundreds of pages of documentation in the DoE reports
TR022 and TR027;
Jones PD , Raper SCB, Cherry BSG, Goodess CM, Wigley TML, Santer B,
Kelly PM, Bradley RS, Diaz HF, (1985) TR022 A Grid Point Surface Air
Temperature Data Set for the Northern Hemisphere. Office of Energy
Research , Carbon Dioxide Research Division, US Department of Energy.
Under Contract No. DE-ACO2-79EV10098
Jones PD , Raper SCB, Cherry BSG, Goodess CM, Wigley TML, (1986c) TR027
A Grid Point Surface Air Temperature Data Set for the Southern
Hemisphere. Office of Energy Research , Carbon Dioxide Research
Division, US Department of Energy. Under Contract No.
DE-ACO2-79EV10098, must indeed have been one of the highlights in your
I have been critical from 1991 of the methodology used in your global
compilations refs above and with 2006 just around the corner I have
started my '20th Anniversary Review" of the above papers at;
bearing in mind that not one Comment on your two papers was ever
published in the Journal of Applied Meteorology.
I would like to ask you if you still stand by your selection of station
data from Atlanta GA ?
Personally, I would have thought there was an abundance of evidence in
the early 1980's that Atlanta was UHI affected and that evidence
has compounded since with NASA web pages portraying satellite thermal
imagery defining the Atlanta UHI which they characterise as
Hotlanta. References can be seen on my new Blog;
A recent post discusses this very issue at; "How did Jones
et al 1986 and Jones 1994 select Atlanta ?"
Looking forward to your clarification and whether you still think
Atlanta is a good example of a station to contribute to a
reliable long term temperature trend representative of land areas of
Dr Phil Jones reply
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:26:14 +0000
From: Phil Jones <email@example.com>
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
M.Kelly@uea.ac.uk, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
Subject: Re: Open letter question re Atlanta
The Atlanta station you refer to
is one of 22 sites within
the grid box (30-35N, 80-85W) where Atlanta is located. So
even if the data have become more urban affected through
time, the effect on the grid-box average would be minor. For
the 1985/1986 papers/reports you refer to all the stations
were assessed for homogeneity problems.
I have looked at your blog. Thanks for
pointing out that
our Climate Monitor website has gone wrong. After each
month's update, the sequence for the last 12 months gets
redrawn. This is because the update of the latest month might
include some additional (late) data for earlier months. There
is no need to read any sort of conspiracy into this. A
updates many CRU datasets every Sunday morning. Sometimes
it occasionally reports errors which we then sort out. Sometimes
though it thinks it has worked OK, but clearly hasn't. We will
try and find out why it hasn't this time. Rest assured, none of
the data for earlier months in 2005 have been altered, except
for some back data for a few regions of the world.