Significant differences in determinations of mean global surface temperature trends for recent decades
Richard S Courtney    Email address in full version
For full version of paper in MSWord format
This paper was rejected by Nature in 2003 because the Editor said that “Comparison of data sets does not have sufficient importance to warrant publication.”  It is provided here so readers can judge the importance of the information for themselves.
The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)  has concluded there is “increasing evidence” for an anthropogenic influence on the global climate.  This conclusion is based on assessments of two independent determinations of the mean surface temperature of the globe since year 1880, the Jones et al and GHCN datsets.  These determinations are each obtained by analyses of the temperature measurements mostly made at weather stations, so any difference in their indications must result from their different analysis methods.  Until now these data sets have been assessed by comparison of their indications of changes to indications of annual temperature anomalies.  It is argued here that the rate of change indicated by linear regression analysis over the most recent 30 years is the most valid comparison of the data.  And it is shown here that these determinations disagree this indication of the rate of change by 42%.  At present, there is no method to determine which, if either, analysis method is correct.  Hence, there exists no reliable indication of the rate of change to mean global surface temperature and, therefore, the IPCC conclusion is not tenable.

Graphic comparing Jones and GHCN updated through 2004 not included in 2003 paper
Jones vs GHCN  1975-2004
Back to