Apology to Tamino:I originally posted comments critical of Tamino believing him to have been responding to Anthony Watts. Tamino posted his post before Anthony posted about Muana Loa CO2, and so was not responding to Anthony’s post. The new July data appear to have become available within a few hours after Tamino posted.
So, apologies to Tamino who was using the most recent data available when it was available. I’m editing to simply show this month’s data.
Replacement post
I have highlighted it with an orange star:
Click for larger.(MaunaLoa data available here.)
For those wondering how far July’s seasonally adjusted measurement falls from the trendline, I subtracted the measurements from the trendline, to obtain residuals.
Click for larger.
Note that, relative to the trend line for seasonally adjusted CO2, this is a large-ish deviation.
Tamino is correct that
- The trend in CO2 is up.
- The recent dip likely doesn’t mean anything.
As I observed last April, NOAA specifically states that the instruments require post calibration. Moreover, temporary downturns happen. Given the combination, it’s quite likely the dip will reverse itself.
My guess, as before, is this dip– measured only relative to the relentless upward trend– will turn around on post calibration!
It will be interesting to see the Aug. 08 data
Yes, Tom!
Future data is important here.
Hello Lucia,
Can you tell me whether I should ever pay attention to anything Tamino (Mr. Foster?) says? Others indicate that he has some expertise and has been published, but all I ever see of his blog writing is drowned in sarcasm and invective so foul that he appears to be a spoiled little child.
Hi Lucia,
Thanks for the clarifications and defenses. This may be related to La Nina and PDO, or maybe even worldwide oil prices as its been mentioned that Americans alone have driven 11 billion less miles recently.
It will be really interesting to find out what the August numbers look like. And, perhaps we’ll finally get an understanding of “who on first?” Temperature or CO2.
In the meantime I’ll continue to ask questions and point out interesting blips like this one. – Anthony
Hi Anthony–
Yes. If this turns out to be real, it might be the slight cooling of the oceans, or, the reduction in oil consumption. We’ll see! I always suspect calibration error first– particularly if an agency mentions it with the data. But, at the same time, it is the current data.
The oceans are showing cooling and the sea level, as measured by JASON, is level or falling (which may be confirmation of the former). If cooler oceans can absorb more CO2 (or release less) then the drop may be significant assuming it continues.
I have to agree with Joel. the level of invective and bile that I see in Tamino’s posts leaves me cold. Also, I’ve seldom seen a point that came out of his website that hasn’t been well refuted. His response to Lucia’s argument is childish in the extreme.
But I am looking forward to August’s numbers.
You say “Tamino commented on Anthony Watt’s post discussing July CO2 measured at Mauna Loa. True to form, Tamino modified the subject and left off the specific point Anthony discussed. For interested readers, I’ve added the missing data point to the graph Tamino created to “rebutt†Anthony’s post observing that July’s seasonally adjusted measurement is down.”
Note the date on my post: August 3, 2008.
Note the date on Anthony Watts’ post: August 4, 2008.
You owe me an apology, and you owe all your readers an admission that you’re wrong.
Lucia,
I took a stroll over to Tamino’s blog and I have to agree with your analysis. Instead of debating the points, the focus seemed driven by a personal agenda to malign Anthony. Perhaps Blog Readership Envy?
More importantly, my first suspicion was indeed calibration errors, however as I took a closer look at relationship between PDO and CO2, I am more inclined to hang this on a cooler SST due to the recent la Nina.
Anthony has kindly updated his post with my plot which shows the rate of change in CO2 against the PDO and UAH on an annual basis July to July with the PDO/UAH annual data skewed 8-months ahead. It roughly shows the change in temperature is driving the rate of change of CO2.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1978.708/every:12/derivative/plot/jisao-pdo/from:1979.08/every:12/plot/uah/from:1979.08/every:12
Also, looking at the annual May to May change in the rate of change (acceleration if you will) of CO2, we can clearly see a pair of signals that coincide with the start 1974 and 1998 PDO shifts.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1960.375/every:12/derivative/derivative
The July CO2 drop could be a reversal due to the recent La Nina. As we get more data points over the next year, it will become more clear. It also may be localized. As the global CO2 data is not current, it is hard to say at this point.
Tamino,
There is no doubt that your post was live before Anthony’s and that the timestamp on the Mona Loa data indicates that you could not have had the July data when you posted. That said, the July data is available now and I am wondering when you plan to update the graphs in your post?
That’s still wrong. Tamino is clearly using data from March 2008, as he alludes to in his introductory paragraph, and can be seen by inspection of his graphs.
Atmoz– In the recent post, Tamino discusses data through June. He writes:
lucia,
That’s not though June. Notice the last 3 points in the seasonally adjusted data (blue). Maximum in the second to last point, then two sequential decreasing values. Skip to the recent plot shown at Watt’s Up and you’ll see that there are 4 months of data after that decrease (April, May, June, and July).
(really Atmoz, not A)
[Added: I see. He plotted through June in his second plot, but only through March in the first one. Sorry.]
I find it extraordinary that no one here has even contemplated that in fact C02 may simply continue to go down.. and it may not be a “blip”. I would not have a clue why it should but it could couldn’t it?
Atmoz– According to the text Tamino wrote, and I quoted, he applied a fit to data through June. July is not included– but was not available. Within a short time (likely hours) the July data were available. Anthony discussed that.
I was confused about the time stamps.
@Vincent
CO2 could continue to go down, especially if sea surface temperature continues to fall. Some feel that the 20th century increase in CO2 was largely driven by warming oceans (the cause of that warming is very much under debate however).
If the oceans are indeed cooling (without trying to prove just why they are cooling), the solubility of CO2 in water will go up. Also phytoplankton are more efficient CO2 ‘scrubbers’ in cool water then warm. There is also a proposed theory that as CO2 increases, the subsequent increase in vegetation eventually creates a larger carbon sink, reversing the increase.
Since there is only one data point (July) for one location (Mauna Loa), all this is speculation for the time being.
Yes it is a blip, but as pointed out in another blog, it is a very interesting blip if it is not a calibration error.
I doubt that a change in automobile usage would be detectable. It is a small percentage of petroleum products which is burned in automobiles (and decide whether truck traffic has been significantly affected). I await a year or two of further CO2 data with interest.
Lucia,
Why would it be a calibration error? Why post data if you’re not sure about the calibration in the first place? The CO2 measurement apparatus at Mauna Loa must have been calibrated to death. It’s claimed to be one of the most precise. Furthermore, it seems to me you calibrate BEFORE you make the measurement, not many days after!
Second, why use trend lines? We’re back to statistical analysis again!? But there IS a simple physical model that can be used to relate CO2 to temperature and human emissions. Once you fit the model to the data, you can extrapolate, and actually PREDICT something.
As I’ve commented on another thread, the CO2 sink IS growing. Half of human emissions are taken up, so if human emissions are growing, the sink is growing too. The sink is both the oceans and the land biomass (forests etc). And the uptake IS dependent on temperature. That is a FACT!!! It has strong physical basis, both from the temperature dependence of solubility, and temperature dependence of biological activity in the oceans, and maybe even bacterial respiration in the soil. Most agree that the so-called “biological pump” is what is responsible for the sharp drop in CO2 during the glacial ages.
Now it may very well be that the response of the CO2 sink has itself grown recently (I played with that idea while analyzing the data), so it may be that it is growing faster. At the same time, global temperatures, and especially southern ocean temperatures, are going down, and I did notice that the uptake was more closely linked to southern oceans.
I’m going away for a few days now, but when I come back, I’ll start playing with my model again, and with the most recent data.
Note that there was a brief period in the early 20th century when the CO2 growth rate turned negative. That corresponded with a colder period (early 20th century was damn cold…).
I don’t know what all the fuss is about. If CO2 goes down, it goes down. What’s the problem? We should all be happy about it. Methane has stopped growing. Nobody talks about it because they don’t understand, and it’s a bit embarrassing. I suspect that methane has quite a different dynamics with temperature.
You see, if the premise of all this is that we MUST REDUCE EMISSIONS BECAUSE THEY ARE MORALLY BAD, then this is an inconvenient fact. Warming is good, because it reinforces the moral edict.
But please, let’s stop this! We want to understand how nature works, whatever it does!
For those who haven’t noticed, July’s CO2 at Mauna Loa is now 385.60.
Raphael–
Weird! July is up compared to this morning. June is down! I would have thought they’d need to wait for the post calibration for things to change– but evidently not!
I have inquired of NOAA as to the reason for the adjustment. I will post any reply I receive.
———————————————————–
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:34 PM
To: ‘pieter.tans@noaa.gov’
Subject: Re: Mauna Loa CO2 trend
Dear Dr Tans,
I just noticed NOAA upward adjusted the Mauna Loa CO2 for July 2008, but I could not find a explanation on the website. As CO2 is of great interest to a number of people, is there a specific reason for the adjustment? The original value of 384.93 created a little bit of a stir amongst the skeptics.
Thank you,
And something I am a bit confused about: Comparing the data table at mauna loa to the data table Watts> gives on his sight, adjustments were made to data going back to July ’05? But not every month going back had adjustments?
In case the edit didn’t go through, the ’95 was a typo. It should have been ’05.
Sorry, they go back further. My eyes are just glazing over.
This is what they read when I downloaded. Now I wish I’d copied the headers into the excel spreadsheet so we’d have the time stamp. The time stamp has changed. They are clearly updating even as we blog! (I wonder why they don’t wait a few days until they think they have stable results? Oh well….)
1958 3 1958.208 315.71 315.71 314.61
1958 4 1958.292 317.45 317.45 315.3
1958 5 1958.375 317.5 317.5 314.71
1958 6 1958.458 -99.99 317.09 314.85
1958 7 1958.542 315.86 315.86 314.98
1958 8 1958.625 314.93 314.93 315.94
1958 9 1958.708 313.2 313.2 315.91
1958 10 1958.792 -99.99 312.66 315.61
1958 11 1958.875 313.33 313.33 315.31
1958 12 1958.958 314.67 314.67 315.61
1959 1 1959.042 315.62 315.62 315.7
1959 2 1959.125 316.38 316.38 315.88
1959 3 1959.208 316.71 316.71 315.61
1959 4 1959.292 317.72 317.72 315.57
1959 5 1959.375 318.29 318.29 315.5
1959 6 1959.458 318.16 318.16 315.93
1959 7 1959.542 316.55 316.55 315.67
1959 8 1959.625 314.8 314.8 315.81
1959 9 1959.708 313.84 313.84 316.55
1959 10 1959.792 313.26 313.26 316.19
1959 11 1959.875 314.8 314.8 316.78
1959 12 1959.958 315.59 315.59 316.53
1960 1 1960.042 316.43 316.43 316.51
1960 2 1960.125 316.97 316.97 316.47
1960 3 1960.208 317.58 317.58 316.48
1960 4 1960.292 319.02 319.02 316.87
1960 5 1960.375 320.02 320.02 317.23
1960 6 1960.458 319.59 319.59 317.36
1960 7 1960.542 318.18 318.18 317.3
1960 8 1960.625 315.91 315.91 316.92
1960 9 1960.708 314.16 314.16 316.87
1960 10 1960.792 313.83 313.83 316.75
1960 11 1960.875 315 315 316.98
1960 12 1960.958 316.19 316.19 317.13
1961 1 1961.042 316.93 316.93 317.01
1961 2 1961.125 317.7 317.7 317.2
1961 3 1961.208 318.54 318.54 317.44
1961 4 1961.292 319.48 319.48 317.33
1961 5 1961.375 320.58 320.58 317.79
1961 6 1961.458 319.77 319.77 317.54
1961 7 1961.542 318.58 318.58 317.7
1961 8 1961.625 316.79 316.79 317.8
1961 9 1961.708 314.8 314.8 317.51
1961 10 1961.792 315.38 315.38 318.31
1961 11 1961.875 316.1 316.1 318.08
1961 12 1961.958 317.01 317.01 317.95
1962 1 1962.042 317.94 317.94 318.02
1962 2 1962.125 318.55 318.55 318.05
1962 3 1962.208 319.68 319.68 318.58
1962 4 1962.292 320.63 320.63 318.48
1962 5 1962.375 321.01 321.01 318.22
1962 6 1962.458 320.55 320.55 318.32
1962 7 1962.542 319.58 319.58 318.7
1962 8 1962.625 317.4 317.4 318.41
1962 9 1962.708 316.26 316.26 318.97
1962 10 1962.792 315.42 315.42 318.35
1962 11 1962.875 316.69 316.69 318.67
1962 12 1962.958 317.7 317.7 318.64
1963 1 1963.042 318.74 318.74 318.9
1963 2 1963.125 319.08 319.08 318.63
1963 3 1963.208 319.86 319.86 318.65
1963 4 1963.292 321.39 321.39 319.06
1963 5 1963.375 322.24 322.24 319.33
1963 6 1963.458 321.47 321.47 319.15
1963 7 1963.542 319.74 319.74 318.87
1963 8 1963.625 317.77 317.77 318.92
1963 9 1963.708 316.21 316.21 319.04
1963 10 1963.792 315.99 315.99 318.96
1963 11 1963.875 317.12 317.12 319.12
1963 12 1963.958 318.31 318.31 319.29
1964 1 1964.042 319.57 319.57 319.66
1964 2 1964.125 -99.99 320.09 319.6
1964 3 1964.208 -99.99 320.73 319.54
1964 4 1964.292 -99.99 321.76 319.48
1964 5 1964.375 322.24 322.24 319.42
1964 6 1964.458 321.89 321.89 319.67
1964 7 1964.542 320.44 320.44 319.49
1964 8 1964.625 318.7 318.7 319.77
1964 9 1964.708 316.7 316.7 319.58
1964 10 1964.792 316.79 316.79 319.82
1964 11 1964.875 317.79 317.79 319.81
1964 12 1964.958 318.71 318.71 319.67
1965 1 1965.042 319.44 319.44 319.49
1965 2 1965.125 320.44 320.44 319.95
1965 3 1965.208 320.89 320.89 319.66
1965 4 1965.292 322.13 322.13 319.79
1965 5 1965.375 322.16 322.16 319.35
1965 6 1965.458 321.87 321.87 319.67
1965 7 1965.542 321.39 321.39 320.53
1965 8 1965.625 318.8 318.8 319.94
1965 9 1965.708 317.81 317.81 320.69
1965 10 1965.792 317.3 317.3 320.3
1965 11 1965.875 318.87 318.87 320.83
1965 12 1965.958 319.42 319.42 320.3
1966 1 1966.042 320.62 320.62 320.63
1966 2 1966.125 321.59 321.59 321.09
1966 3 1966.208 322.39 322.39 321.14
1966 4 1966.292 323.87 323.87 321.51
1966 5 1966.375 324.01 324.01 321.17
1966 6 1966.458 323.75 323.75 321.52
1966 7 1966.542 322.4 322.4 321.54
1966 8 1966.625 320.37 320.37 321.52
1966 9 1966.708 318.64 318.64 321.54
1966 10 1966.792 318.1 318.1 321.19
1966 11 1966.875 319.78 319.78 321.82
1966 12 1966.958 321.08 321.08 321.93
1967 1 1967.042 322.06 322.06 322.07
1967 2 1967.125 322.5 322.5 321.97
1967 3 1967.208 323.04 323.04 321.72
1967 4 1967.292 324.42 324.42 322.07
1967 5 1967.375 325 325 322.3
1967 6 1967.458 324.09 324.09 321.94
1967 7 1967.542 322.55 322.55 321.64
1967 8 1967.625 320.92 320.92 322.03
1967 9 1967.708 319.31 319.31 322.2
1967 10 1967.792 319.31 319.31 322.38
1967 11 1967.875 320.72 320.72 322.76
1967 12 1967.958 321.96 321.96 322.82
1968 1 1968.042 322.57 322.57 322.59
1968 2 1968.125 323.15 323.15 322.6
1968 3 1968.208 323.89 323.89 322.62
1968 4 1968.292 325.02 325.02 322.76
1968 5 1968.375 325.57 325.57 322.91
1968 6 1968.458 325.36 325.36 323.23
1968 7 1968.542 324.14 324.14 323.22
1968 8 1968.625 322.03 322.03 323.08
1968 9 1968.708 320.41 320.41 323.24
1968 10 1968.792 320.25 320.25 323.26
1968 11 1968.875 321.31 321.31 323.3
1968 12 1968.958 322.84 322.84 323.71
1969 1 1969.042 324 324 323.98
1969 2 1969.125 324.42 324.42 323.87
1969 3 1969.208 325.64 325.64 324.4
1969 4 1969.292 326.66 326.66 324.33
1969 5 1969.375 327.34 327.34 324.56
1969 6 1969.458 326.76 326.76 324.6
1969 7 1969.542 325.88 325.88 325
1969 8 1969.625 323.67 323.67 324.78
1969 9 1969.708 322.38 322.38 325.29
1969 10 1969.792 321.78 321.78 324.85
1969 11 1969.875 322.85 322.85 324.85
1969 12 1969.958 324.12 324.12 324.98
1970 1 1970.042 325.03 325.03 324.99
1970 2 1970.125 325.99 325.99 325.4
1970 3 1970.208 326.87 326.87 325.64
1970 4 1970.292 328.14 328.14 325.84
1970 5 1970.375 328.07 328.07 325.22
1970 6 1970.458 327.66 327.66 325.47
1970 7 1970.542 326.35 326.35 325.57
1970 8 1970.625 324.69 324.69 325.86
1970 9 1970.708 323.1 323.1 326.02
1970 10 1970.792 323.16 323.16 326.26
1970 11 1970.875 323.98 323.98 325.96
1970 12 1970.958 325.13 325.13 325.94
1971 1 1971.042 326.17 326.17 326.26
1971 2 1971.125 326.68 326.68 326.13
1971 3 1971.208 327.18 327.18 325.96
1971 4 1971.292 327.78 327.78 325.5
1971 5 1971.375 328.92 328.92 326.15
1971 6 1971.458 328.57 328.57 326.45
1971 7 1971.542 327.34 327.34 326.5
1971 8 1971.625 325.46 325.46 326.49
1971 9 1971.708 323.36 323.36 326.17
1971 10 1971.792 323.56 323.56 326.54
1971 11 1971.875 324.8 324.8 326.73
1971 12 1971.958 326.01 326.01 326.94
1972 1 1972.042 326.77 326.77 326.85
1972 2 1972.125 327.63 327.63 327.05
1972 3 1972.208 327.75 327.75 326.53
1972 4 1972.292 329.72 329.72 327.41
1972 5 1972.375 330.07 330.07 327.24
1972 6 1972.458 329.09 329.09 326.95
1972 7 1972.542 328.05 328.05 327.18
1972 8 1972.625 326.32 326.32 327.33
1972 9 1972.708 324.93 324.93 327.75
1972 10 1972.792 325.06 325.06 328.07
1972 11 1972.875 326.5 326.5 328.51
1972 12 1972.958 327.55 327.55 328.56
1973 1 1973.042 328.55 328.55 328.63
1973 2 1973.125 329.56 329.56 328.95
1973 3 1973.208 330.3 330.3 329.05
1973 4 1973.292 331.5 331.5 329.18
1973 5 1973.375 332.48 332.48 329.68
1973 6 1973.458 332.07 332.07 330
1973 7 1973.542 330.87 330.87 330.05
1973 8 1973.625 329.31 329.31 330.33
1973 9 1973.708 327.51 327.51 330.31
1973 10 1973.792 327.18 327.18 330.15
1973 11 1973.875 328.16 328.16 330.15
1973 12 1973.958 328.64 328.64 329.67
1974 1 1974.042 329.35 329.35 329.45
1974 2 1974.125 330.71 330.71 330.1
1974 3 1974.208 331.48 331.48 330.19
1974 4 1974.292 332.65 332.65 330.25
1974 5 1974.375 333.16 333.16 330.19
1974 6 1974.458 332.06 332.06 329.87
1974 7 1974.542 330.99 330.99 330.22
1974 8 1974.625 329.17 329.17 330.3
1974 9 1974.708 327.41 327.41 330.31
1974 10 1974.792 327.2 327.2 330.27
1974 11 1974.875 328.33 328.33 330.34
1974 12 1974.958 329.5 329.5 330.51
1975 1 1975.042 330.68 330.68 330.77
1975 2 1975.125 331.41 331.41 330.81
1975 3 1975.208 331.85 331.85 330.46
1975 4 1975.292 333.29 333.29 330.74
1975 5 1975.375 333.91 333.91 330.89
1975 6 1975.458 333.4 333.4 331.16
1975 7 1975.542 331.78 331.78 331.03
1975 8 1975.625 329.88 329.88 331.12
1975 9 1975.708 328.57 328.57 331.55
1975 10 1975.792 328.46 328.46 331.59
1975 11 1975.875 329.26 329.26 331.35
1975 12 1975.958 -99.99 330.57 331.59
1976 1 1976.042 331.71 331.71 331.83
1976 2 1976.125 332.76 332.76 332.13
1976 3 1976.208 333.48 333.48 331.97
1976 4 1976.292 334.78 334.78 332.21
1976 5 1976.375 334.79 334.79 331.79
1976 6 1976.458 334.17 334.17 331.85
1976 7 1976.542 332.78 332.78 332
1976 8 1976.625 330.64 330.64 331.97
1976 9 1976.708 328.95 328.95 331.97
1976 10 1976.792 328.77 328.77 331.93
1976 11 1976.875 330.23 330.23 332.39
1976 12 1976.958 331.69 331.69 332.72
1977 1 1977.042 332.7 332.7 332.81
1977 2 1977.125 333.24 333.24 332.65
1977 3 1977.208 334.96 334.96 333.42
1977 4 1977.292 336.04 336.04 333.44
1977 5 1977.375 336.82 336.82 333.93
1977 6 1977.458 336.13 336.13 333.84
1977 7 1977.542 334.73 334.73 333.86
1977 8 1977.625 332.52 332.52 333.8
1977 9 1977.708 331.19 331.19 334.19
1977 10 1977.792 331.19 331.19 334.35
1977 11 1977.875 332.35 332.35 334.55
1977 12 1977.958 333.47 333.47 334.5
1978 1 1978.042 335.11 335.11 335.16
1978 2 1978.125 335.26 335.26 334.65
1978 3 1978.208 336.6 336.6 335
1978 4 1978.292 337.77 337.77 335.16
1978 5 1978.375 338 338 335.11
1978 6 1978.458 337.99 337.99 335.66
1978 7 1978.542 336.48 336.48 335.64
1978 8 1978.625 334.37 334.37 335.76
1978 9 1978.708 332.27 332.27 335.32
1978 10 1978.792 332.4 332.4 335.61
1978 11 1978.875 333.76 333.76 335.98
1978 12 1978.958 334.83 334.83 335.8
1979 1 1979.042 336.21 336.21 336.26
1979 2 1979.125 336.64 336.64 335.99
1979 3 1979.208 338.12 338.12 336.45
1979 4 1979.292 339.02 339.02 336.36
1979 5 1979.375 339.02 339.02 336.12
1979 6 1979.458 339.2 339.2 336.88
1979 7 1979.542 337.58 337.58 336.78
1979 8 1979.625 335.55 335.55 337.01
1979 9 1979.708 333.89 333.89 337.01
1979 10 1979.792 334.14 334.14 337.36
1979 11 1979.875 335.26 335.26 337.47
1979 12 1979.958 336.71 336.71 337.66
1980 1 1980.042 337.8 337.8 337.91
1980 2 1980.125 338.29 338.29 337.68
1980 3 1980.208 340.04 340.04 338.38
1980 4 1980.292 340.86 340.86 338.16
1980 5 1980.375 341.47 341.47 338.41
1980 6 1980.458 341.26 341.26 338.78
1980 7 1980.542 339.29 339.29 338.48
1980 8 1980.625 337.6 337.6 339.12
1980 9 1980.708 336.12 336.12 339.33
1980 10 1980.792 336.08 336.08 339.39
1980 11 1980.875 337.22 337.22 339.44
1980 12 1980.958 338.34 338.34 339.29
1981 1 1981.042 339.36 339.36 339.4
1981 2 1981.125 340.51 340.51 339.87
1981 3 1981.208 341.57 341.57 339.98
1981 4 1981.292 342.56 342.56 339.93
1981 5 1981.375 343.01 343.01 339.99
1981 6 1981.458 342.47 342.47 340.05
1981 7 1981.542 340.71 340.71 339.88
1981 8 1981.625 338.52 338.52 340
1981 9 1981.708 336.96 336.96 340.16
1981 10 1981.792 337.13 337.13 340.41
1981 11 1981.875 338.58 338.58 340.76
1981 12 1981.958 339.89 339.89 340.83
1982 1 1982.042 340.93 340.93 341.02
1982 2 1982.125 341.69 341.69 341.03
1982 3 1982.208 342.69 342.69 341.05
1982 4 1982.292 343.79 343.79 341.15
1982 5 1982.375 344.3 344.3 341.28
1982 6 1982.458 343.43 343.43 341.01
1982 7 1982.542 341.88 341.88 341.06
1982 8 1982.625 339.89 339.89 341.35
1982 9 1982.708 337.96 337.96 341.21
1982 10 1982.792 338.1 338.1 341.43
1982 11 1982.875 339.26 339.26 341.4
1982 12 1982.958 340.67 340.67 341.58
1983 1 1983.042 341.42 341.42 341.52
1983 2 1983.125 342.68 342.68 342.06
1983 3 1983.208 343.45 343.45 341.89
1983 4 1983.292 345.1 345.1 342.45
1983 5 1983.375 345.76 345.76 342.6
1983 6 1983.458 345.36 345.36 342.9
1983 7 1983.542 343.91 343.91 343.18
1983 8 1983.625 342.05 342.05 343.54
1983 9 1983.708 340 340 343.22
1983 10 1983.792 340.12 340.12 343.46
1983 11 1983.875 341.33 341.33 343.46
1983 12 1983.958 342.94 342.94 343.83
1984 1 1984.042 343.87 343.87 343.94
1984 2 1984.125 344.6 344.6 344
1984 3 1984.208 345.2 345.2 343.72
1984 4 1984.292 -99.99 346.55 343.95
1984 5 1984.375 347.36 347.36 344.17
1984 6 1984.458 346.74 346.74 344.28
1984 7 1984.542 345.41 345.41 344.71
1984 8 1984.625 343.01 343.01 344.48
1984 9 1984.708 341.23 341.23 344.4
1984 10 1984.792 341.52 341.52 344.83
1984 11 1984.875 342.86 342.86 344.99
1984 12 1984.958 344.41 344.41 345.3
1985 1 1985.042 345.09 345.09 345.12
1985 2 1985.125 345.89 345.89 345.27
1985 3 1985.208 347.5 347.5 346.03
1985 4 1985.292 348 348 345.4
1985 5 1985.375 348.75 348.75 345.55
1985 6 1985.458 348.19 348.19 345.71
1985 7 1985.542 346.54 346.54 345.83
1985 8 1985.625 344.63 344.63 346.12
1985 9 1985.708 343.03 343.03 346.24
1985 10 1985.792 342.92 342.92 346.24
1985 11 1985.875 344.24 344.24 346.37
1985 12 1985.958 345.62 345.62 346.51
1986 1 1986.042 346.43 346.43 346.44
1986 2 1986.125 346.94 346.94 346.36
1986 3 1986.208 347.88 347.88 346.52
1986 4 1986.292 349.57 349.57 347.02
1986 5 1986.375 350.35 350.35 347.22
1986 6 1986.458 349.72 349.72 347.29
1986 7 1986.542 347.78 347.78 346.98
1986 8 1986.625 345.86 345.86 347.25
1986 9 1986.708 344.84 344.84 347.98
1986 10 1986.792 344.32 344.32 347.58
1986 11 1986.875 345.67 345.67 347.81
1986 12 1986.958 346.88 346.88 347.8
1987 1 1987.042 348.19 348.19 348.13
1987 2 1987.125 348.55 348.55 347.91
1987 3 1987.208 349.52 349.52 348.15
1987 4 1987.292 351.12 351.12 348.62
1987 5 1987.375 351.84 351.84 348.82
1987 6 1987.458 351.49 351.49 349.15
1987 7 1987.542 349.82 349.82 349.04
1987 8 1987.625 347.63 347.63 349.02
1987 9 1987.708 346.38 346.38 349.52
1987 10 1987.792 346.49 346.49 349.7
1987 11 1987.875 347.75 347.75 349.85
1987 12 1987.958 349.03 349.03 349.91
1988 1 1988.042 350.2 350.2 350.2
1988 2 1988.125 351.61 351.61 350.99
1988 3 1988.208 352.22 352.22 350.77
1988 4 1988.292 353.53 353.53 350.93
1988 5 1988.375 354.14 354.14 351.07
1988 6 1988.458 353.62 353.62 351.27
1988 7 1988.542 352.53 352.53 351.8
1988 8 1988.625 350.41 350.41 351.88
1988 9 1988.708 348.84 348.84 352.01
1988 10 1988.792 348.94 348.94 352.14
1988 11 1988.875 350.04 350.04 352.12
1988 12 1988.958 351.29 351.29 352.16
1989 1 1989.042 352.72 352.72 352.69
1989 2 1989.125 353.1 353.1 352.47
1989 3 1989.208 353.65 353.65 352.24
1989 4 1989.292 355.43 355.43 352.83
1989 5 1989.375 355.7 355.7 352.57
1989 6 1989.458 355.11 355.11 352.72
1989 7 1989.542 353.79 353.79 353.09
1989 8 1989.625 351.42 351.42 352.92
1989 9 1989.708 349.81 349.81 352.99
1989 10 1989.792 350.11 350.11 353.32
1989 11 1989.875 351.26 351.26 353.36
1989 12 1989.958 352.63 352.63 353.53
1990 1 1990.042 353.64 353.64 353.59
1990 2 1990.125 354.72 354.72 354
1990 3 1990.208 355.49 355.49 354.02
1990 4 1990.292 356.09 356.09 353.48
1990 5 1990.375 357.08 357.08 353.9
1990 6 1990.458 356.11 356.11 353.68
1990 7 1990.542 354.7 354.7 354.04
1990 8 1990.625 352.68 352.68 354.27
1990 9 1990.708 351.05 351.05 354.28
1990 10 1990.792 351.36 351.36 354.6
1990 11 1990.875 352.81 352.81 354.95
1990 12 1990.958 354.22 354.22 355.16
1991 1 1991.042 354.85 354.85 354.75
1991 2 1991.125 355.67 355.67 354.84
1991 3 1991.208 357.04 357.04 355.44
1991 4 1991.292 358.4 358.4 355.67
1991 5 1991.375 359 359 355.73
1991 6 1991.458 357.99 357.99 355.56
1991 7 1991.542 356 356 355.43
1991 8 1991.625 353.78 353.78 355.52
1991 9 1991.708 352.2 352.2 355.57
1991 10 1991.792 352.22 352.22 355.53
1991 11 1991.875 353.7 353.7 355.86
1991 12 1991.958 354.98 354.98 355.92
1992 1 1992.042 356.09 356.09 355.98
1992 2 1992.125 356.85 356.85 356.05
1992 3 1992.208 357.73 357.73 356.14
1992 4 1992.292 358.91 358.91 356.15
1992 5 1992.375 359.45 359.45 356.17
1992 6 1992.458 359.19 359.19 356.77
1992 7 1992.542 356.72 356.72 356.18
1992 8 1992.625 354.79 354.79 356.55
1992 9 1992.708 352.79 352.79 356.2
1992 10 1992.792 353.2 353.2 356.53
1992 11 1992.875 354.15 354.15 356.27
1992 12 1992.958 355.39 355.39 356.27
1993 1 1993.042 356.77 356.77 356.68
1993 2 1993.125 357.17 357.17 356.28
1993 3 1993.208 358.26 358.26 356.56
1993 4 1993.292 359.17 359.17 356.47
1993 5 1993.375 360.07 360.07 356.86
1993 6 1993.458 359.41 359.41 356.97
1993 7 1993.542 357.44 357.44 356.91
1993 8 1993.625 355.3 355.3 357.1
1993 9 1993.708 353.87 353.87 357.29
1993 10 1993.792 354.04 354.04 357.39
1993 11 1993.875 355.27 355.27 357.39
1993 12 1993.958 356.7 356.7 357.57
1994 1 1994.042 357.99 357.99 357.91
1994 2 1994.125 358.81 358.81 358
1994 3 1994.208 359.68 359.68 358.06
1994 4 1994.292 361.13 361.13 358.41
1994 5 1994.375 361.48 361.48 358.29
1994 6 1994.458 360.6 360.6 358.24
1994 7 1994.542 359.2 359.2 358.61
1994 8 1994.625 357.23 357.23 358.91
1994 9 1994.708 355.42 355.42 358.8
1994 10 1994.792 355.89 355.89 359.22
1994 11 1994.875 357.41 357.41 359.51
1994 12 1994.958 358.74 358.74 359.63
1995 1 1995.042 359.73 359.73 359.6
1995 2 1995.125 360.61 360.61 359.77
1995 3 1995.208 361.58 361.58 359.97
1995 4 1995.292 363.05 363.05 360.35
1995 5 1995.375 363.62 363.62 360.41
1995 6 1995.458 363.03 363.03 360.61
1995 7 1995.542 361.55 361.55 360.93
1995 8 1995.625 358.94 358.94 360.63
1995 9 1995.708 357.93 357.93 361.36
1995 10 1995.792 357.8 357.8 361.18
1995 11 1995.875 359.22 359.22 361.35
1995 12 1995.958 360.44 360.44 361.31
1996 1 1996.042 361.83 361.83 361.66
1996 2 1996.125 362.95 362.95 362.13
1996 3 1996.208 363.91 363.91 362.35
1996 4 1996.292 364.28 364.28 361.63
1996 5 1996.375 364.93 364.93 361.92
1996 6 1996.458 364.7 364.7 362.48
1996 7 1996.542 363.31 363.31 362.6
1996 8 1996.625 361.15 361.15 362.68
1996 9 1996.708 359.39 359.39 362.76
1996 10 1996.792 359.34 359.34 362.65
1996 11 1996.875 360.62 360.62 362.71
1996 12 1996.958 361.96 361.96 362.82
1997 1 1997.042 362.81 362.81 362.62
1997 2 1997.125 363.87 363.87 363.07
1997 3 1997.208 364.25 364.25 362.66
1997 4 1997.292 366.02 366.02 363.37
1997 5 1997.375 366.46 366.46 363.56
1997 6 1997.458 365.32 365.32 363.13
1997 7 1997.542 364.08 364.08 363.3
1997 8 1997.625 361.95 361.95 363.48
1997 9 1997.708 360.06 360.06 363.47
1997 10 1997.792 360.49 360.49 363.79
1997 11 1997.875 362.19 362.19 364.25
1997 12 1997.958 364.12 364.12 364.92
1998 1 1998.042 364.99 364.99 364.82
1998 2 1998.125 365.82 365.82 365.02
1998 3 1998.208 366.95 366.95 365.36
1998 4 1998.292 368.42 368.42 365.83
1998 5 1998.375 369.33 369.33 366.46
1998 6 1998.458 368.78 368.78 366.6
1998 7 1998.542 367.59 367.59 366.86
1998 8 1998.625 365.84 365.84 367.36
1998 9 1998.708 363.83 363.83 367.18
1998 10 1998.792 364.18 364.18 367.47
1998 11 1998.875 365.34 365.34 367.35
1998 12 1998.958 366.93 366.93 367.69
1999 1 1999.042 367.94 367.94 367.74
1999 2 1999.125 368.82 368.82 367.99
1999 3 1999.208 369.46 369.46 367.87
1999 4 1999.292 370.77 370.77 368.23
1999 5 1999.375 370.66 370.66 367.81
1999 6 1999.458 370.1 370.1 367.9
1999 7 1999.542 369.08 369.08 368.36
1999 8 1999.625 366.66 366.66 368.2
1999 9 1999.708 364.6 364.6 367.91
1999 10 1999.792 365.17 365.17 368.44
1999 11 1999.875 366.51 366.51 368.54
1999 12 1999.958 367.89 367.89 368.64
2000 1 2000.042 369.04 369.04 368.83
2000 2 2000.125 369.35 369.35 368.58
2000 3 2000.208 370.38 370.38 368.85
2000 4 2000.292 371.63 371.63 369.06
2000 5 2000.375 371.32 371.32 368.4
2000 6 2000.458 371.53 371.53 369.32
2000 7 2000.542 369.75 369.75 369.08
2000 8 2000.625 368.23 368.23 369.78
2000 9 2000.708 366.87 366.87 370.18
2000 10 2000.792 366.94 366.94 370.23
2000 11 2000.875 368.27 368.27 370.3
2000 12 2000.958 369.64 369.64 370.34
2001 1 2001.042 370.46 370.46 370.24
2001 2 2001.125 371.44 371.44 370.66
2001 3 2001.208 372.37 372.37 370.78
2001 4 2001.292 373.32 373.32 370.72
2001 5 2001.375 373.77 373.77 370.84
2001 6 2001.458 373.09 373.09 370.87
2001 7 2001.542 371.51 371.51 370.9
2001 8 2001.625 369.55 369.55 371.19
2001 9 2001.708 368.12 368.12 371.47
2001 10 2001.792 368.38 368.38 371.69
2001 11 2001.875 369.66 369.66 371.68
2001 12 2001.958 371.11 371.11 371.79
2002 1 2002.042 372.36 372.36 372.18
2002 2 2002.125 373.09 373.09 372.27
2002 3 2002.208 373.81 373.81 372.17
2002 4 2002.292 374.93 374.93 372.33
2002 5 2002.375 375.58 375.58 372.7
2002 6 2002.458 375.44 375.44 373.31
2002 7 2002.542 373.86 373.86 373.28
2002 8 2002.625 371.77 371.77 373.35
2002 9 2002.708 370.73 370.73 374
2002 10 2002.792 370.5 370.5 373.76
2002 11 2002.875 372.19 372.19 374.18
2002 12 2002.958 373.7 373.7 374.4
2003 1 2003.042 374.92 374.92 374.73
2003 2 2003.125 375.62 375.62 374.82
2003 3 2003.208 376.51 376.51 374.91
2003 4 2003.292 377.75 377.75 375.12
2003 5 2003.375 378.54 378.54 375.6
2003 6 2003.458 378.2 378.2 376.04
2003 7 2003.542 376.68 376.68 376.08
2003 8 2003.625 374.43 374.43 375.99
2003 9 2003.708 373.11 373.11 376.41
2003 10 2003.792 373.1 373.1 376.4
2003 11 2003.875 374.77 374.77 376.8
2003 12 2003.958 375.97 375.97 376.69
2004 1 2004.042 377.03 377.03 376.79
2004 2 2004.125 377.87 377.87 377.02
2004 3 2004.208 378.88 378.88 377.35
2004 4 2004.292 380.42 380.42 377.8
2004 5 2004.375 380.62 380.62 377.46
2004 6 2004.458 379.71 379.71 377.47
2004 7 2004.542 377.43 377.43 377.04
2004 8 2004.625 376.32 376.32 378
2004 9 2004.708 374.19 374.19 377.44
2004 10 2004.792 374.47 374.47 377.78
2004 11 2004.875 376.15 376.15 378.21
2004 12 2004.958 377.51 377.51 378.23
2005 1 2005.042 378.43 378.43 378.19
2005 2 2005.125 379.7 379.7 378.85
2005 3 2005.208 380.92 380.92 379.38
2005 4 2005.292 382.18 382.18 379.56
2005 5 2005.375 382.45 382.45 379.3
2005 6 2005.458 382.14 382.14 379.91
2005 7 2005.542 380.6 380.6 380.2
2005 8 2005.625 378.64 378.64 380.32
2005 9 2005.708 376.73 376.73 379.99
2005 10 2005.792 376.84 376.84 380.14
2005 11 2005.875 378.29 378.29 380.36
2005 12 2005.958 380.06 380.06 380.79
2006 1 2006.042 381.4 381.4 381.16
2006 2 2006.125 382.2 382.2 381.35
2006 3 2006.208 382.66 382.66 381.12
2006 4 2006.292 384.69 384.69 382.07
2006 5 2006.375 384.94 384.94 381.79
2006 6 2006.458 384.01 384.01 381.77
2006 7 2006.542 382.14 382.14 381.75
2006 8 2006.625 380.31 380.31 381.99
2006 9 2006.708 378.81 378.81 382.07
2006 10 2006.792 379.03 379.03 382.34
2006 11 2006.875 380.17 380.17 382.23
2006 12 2006.958 381.85 381.85 382.57
2007 1 2007.042 382.94 382.94 382.7
2007 2 2007.125 383.86 383.86 383.01
2007 3 2007.208 384.49 384.49 382.95
2007 4 2007.292 386.37 386.37 383.75
2007 5 2007.375 386.54 386.54 383.38
2007 6 2007.458 385.98 385.98 383.75
2007 7 2007.542 384.35 384.35 383.96
2007 8 2007.625 381.85 381.85 383.53
2007 9 2007.708 380.74 380.74 384
2007 10 2007.792 381.15 381.15 384.46
2007 11 2007.875 382.38 382.38 384.45
2007 12 2007.958 383.94 383.94 384.66
2008 1 2008.042 385.37 385.37 385.13
2008 2 2008.125 385.7 385.7 384.85
2008 3 2008.208 385.92 385.92 384.38
2008 4 2008.292 387.22 387.22 384.59
2008 5 2008.375 388.47 388.47 385.32
2008 6 2008.458 387.99 387.99 385.76
2008 7 2008.542 384.93 384.93 384.54
The adjustments stop in June 1974
Here is a table comparing the new mean and the old mean values
Mauna Loa Adjustments
# decimal new old
Year Month date mean mean Change
1958 3 1958.208 315.71 315.71 0
1958 4 1958.292 317.45 317.45 0
1958 5 1958.375 317.5 317.5 0
1958 6 1958.458 -99.99 -99.99 0
1958 7 1958.542 315.86 315.86 0
1958 8 1958.625 314.93 314.93 0
1958 9 1958.708 313.2 313.2 0
1958 10 1958.792 -99.99 -99.99 0
1958 11 1958.875 313.33 313.33 0
1958 12 1958.958 314.67 314.67 0
1959 1 1959.042 315.62 315.62 0
1959 2 1959.125 316.38 316.38 0
1959 3 1959.208 316.71 316.71 0
1959 4 1959.292 317.72 317.72 0
1959 5 1959.375 318.29 318.29 0
1959 6 1959.458 318.16 318.16 0
1959 7 1959.542 316.55 316.55 0
1959 8 1959.625 314.8 314.8 0
1959 9 1959.708 313.84 313.84 0
1959 10 1959.792 313.26 313.26 0
1959 11 1959.875 314.8 314.8 0
1959 12 1959.958 315.59 315.59 0
1960 1 1960.042 316.43 316.43 0
1960 2 1960.125 316.97 316.97 0
1960 3 1960.208 317.58 317.58 0
1960 4 1960.292 319.02 319.02 0
1960 5 1960.375 320.02 320.02 0
1960 6 1960.458 319.59 319.59 0
1960 7 1960.542 318.18 318.18 0
1960 8 1960.625 315.91 315.91 0
1960 9 1960.708 314.16 314.16 0
1960 10 1960.792 313.83 313.83 0
1960 11 1960.875 315 315 0
1960 12 1960.958 316.19 316.19 0
1961 1 1961.042 316.93 316.93 0
1961 2 1961.125 317.7 317.7 0
1961 3 1961.208 318.54 318.54 0
1961 4 1961.292 319.48 319.48 0
1961 5 1961.375 320.58 320.58 0
1961 6 1961.458 319.77 319.77 0
1961 7 1961.542 318.58 318.58 0
1961 8 1961.625 316.79 316.79 0
1961 9 1961.708 314.8 314.8 0
1961 10 1961.792 315.38 315.38 0
1961 11 1961.875 316.1 316.1 0
1961 12 1961.958 317.01 317.01 0
1962 1 1962.042 317.94 317.94 0
1962 2 1962.125 318.55 318.55 0
1962 3 1962.208 319.68 319.68 0
1962 4 1962.292 320.63 320.63 0
1962 5 1962.375 321.01 321.01 0
1962 6 1962.458 320.55 320.55 0
1962 7 1962.542 319.58 319.58 0
1962 8 1962.625 317.4 317.4 0
1962 9 1962.708 316.26 316.26 0
1962 10 1962.792 315.42 315.42 0
1962 11 1962.875 316.69 316.69 0
1962 12 1962.958 317.7 317.7 0
1963 1 1963.042 318.74 318.74 0
1963 2 1963.125 319.08 319.08 0
1963 3 1963.208 319.86 319.86 0
1963 4 1963.292 321.39 321.39 0
1963 5 1963.375 322.24 322.24 0
1963 6 1963.458 321.47 321.47 0
1963 7 1963.542 319.74 319.74 0
1963 8 1963.625 317.77 317.77 0
1963 9 1963.708 316.21 316.21 0
1963 10 1963.792 315.99 315.99 0
1963 11 1963.875 317.12 317.12 0
1963 12 1963.958 318.31 318.31 0
1964 1 1964.042 319.57 319.57 0
1964 2 1964.125 -99.99 -99.99 0
1964 3 1964.208 -99.99 -99.99 0
1964 4 1964.292 -99.99 -99.99 0
1964 5 1964.375 322.24 322.24 0
1964 6 1964.458 321.89 321.89 0
1964 7 1964.542 320.44 320.44 0
1964 8 1964.625 318.7 318.7 0
1964 9 1964.708 316.7 316.7 0
1964 10 1964.792 316.79 316.79 0
1964 11 1964.875 317.79 317.79 0
1964 12 1964.958 318.71 318.71 0
1965 1 1965.042 319.44 319.44 0
1965 2 1965.125 320.44 320.44 0
1965 3 1965.208 320.89 320.89 0
1965 4 1965.292 322.13 322.13 0
1965 5 1965.375 322.16 322.16 0
1965 6 1965.458 321.87 321.87 0
1965 7 1965.542 321.39 321.39 0
1965 8 1965.625 318.8 318.8 0
1965 9 1965.708 317.81 317.81 0
1965 10 1965.792 317.3 317.3 0
1965 11 1965.875 318.87 318.87 0
1965 12 1965.958 319.42 319.42 0
1966 1 1966.042 320.62 320.62 0
1966 2 1966.125 321.59 321.59 0
1966 3 1966.208 322.39 322.39 0
1966 4 1966.292 323.87 323.87 0
1966 5 1966.375 324.01 324.01 0
1966 6 1966.458 323.75 323.75 0
1966 7 1966.542 322.4 322.4 0
1966 8 1966.625 320.37 320.37 0
1966 9 1966.708 318.64 318.64 0
1966 10 1966.792 318.1 318.1 0
1966 11 1966.875 319.78 319.78 0
1966 12 1966.958 321.08 321.08 0
1967 1 1967.042 322.06 322.06 0
1967 2 1967.125 322.5 322.5 0
1967 3 1967.208 323.04 323.04 0
1967 4 1967.292 324.42 324.42 0
1967 5 1967.375 325 325 0
1967 6 1967.458 324.09 324.09 0
1967 7 1967.542 322.55 322.55 0
1967 8 1967.625 320.92 320.92 0
1967 9 1967.708 319.31 319.31 0
1967 10 1967.792 319.31 319.31 0
1967 11 1967.875 320.72 320.72 0
1967 12 1967.958 321.96 321.96 0
1968 1 1968.042 322.57 322.57 0
1968 2 1968.125 323.15 323.15 0
1968 3 1968.208 323.89 323.89 0
1968 4 1968.292 325.02 325.02 0
1968 5 1968.375 325.57 325.57 0
1968 6 1968.458 325.36 325.36 0
1968 7 1968.542 324.14 324.14 0
1968 8 1968.625 322.03 322.03 0
1968 9 1968.708 320.41 320.41 0
1968 10 1968.792 320.25 320.25 0
1968 11 1968.875 321.31 321.31 0
1968 12 1968.958 322.84 322.84 0
1969 1 1969.042 324 324 0
1969 2 1969.125 324.42 324.42 0
1969 3 1969.208 325.64 325.64 0
1969 4 1969.292 326.66 326.66 0
1969 5 1969.375 327.34 327.34 0
1969 6 1969.458 326.76 326.76 0
1969 7 1969.542 325.88 325.88 0
1969 8 1969.625 323.67 323.67 0
1969 9 1969.708 322.38 322.38 0
1969 10 1969.792 321.78 321.78 0
1969 11 1969.875 322.85 322.85 0
1969 12 1969.958 324.12 324.12 0
1970 1 1970.042 325.03 325.03 0
1970 2 1970.125 325.99 325.99 0
1970 3 1970.208 326.87 326.87 0
1970 4 1970.292 328.14 328.14 0
1970 5 1970.375 328.07 328.07 0
1970 6 1970.458 327.66 327.66 0
1970 7 1970.542 326.35 326.35 0
1970 8 1970.625 324.69 324.69 0
1970 9 1970.708 323.1 323.1 0
1970 10 1970.792 323.16 323.16 0
1970 11 1970.875 323.98 323.98 0
1970 12 1970.958 325.13 325.13 0
1971 1 1971.042 326.17 326.17 0
1971 2 1971.125 326.68 326.68 0
1971 3 1971.208 327.18 327.18 0
1971 4 1971.292 327.78 327.78 0
1971 5 1971.375 328.92 328.92 0
1971 6 1971.458 328.57 328.57 0
1971 7 1971.542 327.34 327.34 0
1971 8 1971.625 325.46 325.46 0
1971 9 1971.708 323.36 323.36 0
1971 10 1971.792 323.56 323.56 0
1971 11 1971.875 324.8 324.8 0
1971 12 1971.958 326.01 326.01 0
1972 1 1972.042 326.77 326.77 0
1972 2 1972.125 327.63 327.63 0
1972 3 1972.208 327.75 327.75 0
1972 4 1972.292 329.72 329.72 0
1972 5 1972.375 330.07 330.07 0
1972 6 1972.458 329.09 329.09 0
1972 7 1972.542 328.05 328.05 0
1972 8 1972.625 326.32 326.32 0
1972 9 1972.708 324.93 324.93 0
1972 10 1972.792 325.06 325.06 0
1972 11 1972.875 326.5 326.5 0
1972 12 1972.958 327.55 327.55 0
1973 1 1973.042 328.55 328.55 0
1973 2 1973.125 329.56 329.56 0
1973 3 1973.208 330.3 330.3 0
1973 4 1973.292 331.5 331.5 0
1973 5 1973.375 332.48 332.48 0
1973 6 1973.458 332.07 332.07 0
1973 7 1973.542 330.87 330.87 0
1973 8 1973.625 329.31 329.31 0
1973 9 1973.708 327.51 327.51 0
1973 10 1973.792 327.18 327.18 0
1973 11 1973.875 328.16 328.16 0
1973 12 1973.958 328.64 328.64 0
1974 1 1974.042 329.35 329.35 0
1974 2 1974.125 330.71 330.71 0
1974 3 1974.208 331.48 331.48 0
1974 4 1974.292 332.65 332.65 0
1974 5 1974.375 333.15 333.16 0.01
1974 6 1974.458 332.13 332.06 -0.07
1974 7 1974.542 330.99 330.99 0
1974 8 1974.625 329.17 329.17 0
1974 9 1974.708 327.41 327.41 0
1974 10 1974.792 327.21 327.2 -0.01
1974 11 1974.875 328.34 328.33 -0.01
1974 12 1974.958 329.5 329.5 0
1975 1 1975.042 330.68 330.68 0
1975 2 1975.125 331.41 331.41 0
1975 3 1975.208 331.85 331.85 0
1975 4 1975.292 333.29 333.29 0
1975 5 1975.375 333.91 333.91 0
1975 6 1975.458 333.4 333.4 0
1975 7 1975.542 331.74 331.78 0.04
1975 8 1975.625 329.88 329.88 0
1975 9 1975.708 328.57 328.57 0
1975 10 1975.792 328.35 328.46 0.11
1975 11 1975.875 329.33 329.26 -0.07
1975 12 1975.958 -99.99 -99.99 0
1976 1 1976.042 331.66 331.71 0.05
1976 2 1976.125 332.75 332.76 0.01
1976 3 1976.208 333.46 333.48 0.02
1976 4 1976.292 334.78 334.78 0
1976 5 1976.375 334.79 334.79 0
1976 6 1976.458 334.05 334.17 0.12
1976 7 1976.542 332.95 332.78 -0.17
1976 8 1976.625 330.64 330.64 0
1976 9 1976.708 328.96 328.95 -0.01
1976 10 1976.792 328.77 328.77 0
1976 11 1976.875 330.18 330.23 0.05
1976 12 1976.958 331.65 331.69 0.04
1977 1 1977.042 332.69 332.7 0.01
1977 2 1977.125 333.23 333.24 0.01
1977 3 1977.208 334.97 334.96 -0.01
1977 4 1977.292 336.03 336.04 0.01
1977 5 1977.375 336.82 336.82 0
1977 6 1977.458 336.1 336.13 0.03
1977 7 1977.542 334.79 334.73 -0.06
1977 8 1977.625 332.53 332.52 -0.01
1977 9 1977.708 331.19 331.19 0
1977 10 1977.792 331.21 331.19 -0.02
1977 11 1977.875 332.35 332.35 0
1977 12 1977.958 333.47 333.47 0
1978 1 1978.042 335.09 335.11 0.02
1978 2 1978.125 335.26 335.26 0
1978 3 1978.208 336.62 336.6 -0.02
1978 4 1978.292 337.77 337.77 0
1978 5 1978.375 338 338 0
1978 6 1978.458 337.98 337.99 0.01
1978 7 1978.542 336.48 336.48 0
1978 8 1978.625 334.37 334.37 0
1978 9 1978.708 332.33 332.27 -0.06
1978 10 1978.792 332.4 332.4 0
1978 11 1978.875 333.76 333.76 0
1978 12 1978.958 334.83 334.83 0
1979 1 1979.042 336.21 336.21 0
1979 2 1979.125 336.64 336.64 0
1979 3 1979.208 338.13 338.12 -0.01
1979 4 1979.292 338.96 339.02 0.06
1979 5 1979.375 339.02 339.02 0
1979 6 1979.458 339.2 339.2 0
1979 7 1979.542 337.6 337.58 -0.02
1979 8 1979.625 335.56 335.55 -0.01
1979 9 1979.708 333.93 333.89 -0.04
1979 10 1979.792 334.12 334.14 0.02
1979 11 1979.875 335.26 335.26 0
1979 12 1979.958 336.78 336.71 -0.07
1980 1 1980.042 337.8 337.8 0
1980 2 1980.125 338.28 338.29 0.01
1980 3 1980.208 340.04 340.04 0
1980 4 1980.292 340.86 340.86 0
1980 5 1980.375 341.47 341.47 0
1980 6 1980.458 341.26 341.26 0
1980 7 1980.542 339.34 339.29 -0.05
1980 8 1980.625 337.45 337.6 0.15
1980 9 1980.708 336.1 336.12 0.02
1980 10 1980.792 336.05 336.08 0.03
1980 11 1980.875 337.21 337.22 0.01
1980 12 1980.958 338.29 338.34 0.05
1981 1 1981.042 339.36 339.36 0
1981 2 1981.125 340.51 340.51 0
1981 3 1981.208 341.57 341.57 0
1981 4 1981.292 342.56 342.56 0
1981 5 1981.375 343.01 343.01 0
1981 6 1981.458 342.51 342.47 -0.04
1981 7 1981.542 340.71 340.71 0
1981 8 1981.625 338.51 338.52 0.01
1981 9 1981.708 336.96 336.96 0
1981 10 1981.792 337.13 337.13 0
1981 11 1981.875 338.58 338.58 0
1981 12 1981.958 339.91 339.89 -0.02
1982 1 1982.042 340.92 340.93 0.01
1982 2 1982.125 341.69 341.69 0
1982 3 1982.208 342.88 342.69 -0.19
1982 4 1982.292 343.83 343.79 -0.04
1982 5 1982.375 344.3 344.3 0
1982 6 1982.458 343.42 343.43 0.01
1982 7 1982.542 341.85 341.88 0.03
1982 8 1982.625 339.82 339.89 0.07
1982 9 1982.708 337.98 337.96 -0.02
1982 10 1982.792 338.09 338.1 0.01
1982 11 1982.875 339.24 339.26 0.02
1982 12 1982.958 340.67 340.67 0
1983 1 1983.042 341.42 341.42 0
1983 2 1983.125 342.67 342.68 0.01
1983 3 1983.208 343.45 343.45 0
1983 4 1983.292 345.08 345.1 0.02
1983 5 1983.375 345.76 345.76 0
1983 6 1983.458 345.33 345.36 0.03
1983 7 1983.542 343.93 343.91 -0.02
1983 8 1983.625 342.08 342.05 -0.03
1983 9 1983.708 340 340 0
1983 10 1983.792 340.12 340.12 0
1983 11 1983.875 341.35 341.33 -0.02
1983 12 1983.958 342.89 342.94 0.05
1984 1 1984.042 343.87 343.87 0
1984 2 1984.125 344.59 344.6 0.01
1984 3 1984.208 345.29 345.2 -0.09
1984 4 1984.292 -99.99 -99.99 0
1984 5 1984.375 347.36 347.36 0
1984 6 1984.458 346.8 346.74 -0.06
1984 7 1984.542 345.37 345.41 0.04
1984 8 1984.625 343.06 343.01 -0.05
1984 9 1984.708 341.24 341.23 -0.01
1984 10 1984.792 341.54 341.52 -0.02
1984 11 1984.875 342.9 342.86 -0.04
1984 12 1984.958 344.36 344.41 0.05
1985 1 1985.042 345.08 345.09 0.01
1985 2 1985.125 345.89 345.89 0
1985 3 1985.208 347.49 347.5 0.01
1985 4 1985.292 348.02 348 -0.02
1985 5 1985.375 348.75 348.75 0
1985 6 1985.458 348.19 348.19 0
1985 7 1985.542 346.49 346.54 0.05
1985 8 1985.625 344.7 344.63 -0.07
1985 9 1985.708 343.04 343.03 -0.01
1985 10 1985.792 342.92 342.92 0
1985 11 1985.875 344.22 344.24 0.02
1985 12 1985.958 345.61 345.62 0.01
1986 1 1986.042 346.42 346.43 0.01
1986 2 1986.125 346.95 346.94 -0.01
1986 3 1986.208 347.88 347.88 0
1986 4 1986.292 349.57 349.57 0
1986 5 1986.375 350.35 350.35 0
1986 6 1986.458 349.7 349.72 0.02
1986 7 1986.542 347.78 347.78 0
1986 8 1986.625 345.89 345.86 -0.03
1986 9 1986.708 344.88 344.84 -0.04
1986 10 1986.792 344.34 344.32 -0.02
1986 11 1986.875 345.67 345.67 0
1986 12 1986.958 346.89 346.88 -0.01
1987 1 1987.042 348.2 348.19 -0.01
1987 2 1987.125 348.55 348.55 0
1987 3 1987.208 349.56 349.52 -0.04
1987 4 1987.292 351.12 351.12 0
1987 5 1987.375 351.84 351.84 0
1987 6 1987.458 351.45 351.49 0.04
1987 7 1987.542 349.77 349.82 0.05
1987 8 1987.625 347.62 347.63 0.01
1987 9 1987.708 346.37 346.38 0.01
1987 10 1987.792 346.48 346.49 0.01
1987 11 1987.875 347.8 347.75 -0.05
1987 12 1987.958 349.03 349.03 0
1988 1 1988.042 350.23 350.2 -0.03
1988 2 1988.125 351.58 351.61 0.03
1988 3 1988.208 352.22 352.22 0
1988 4 1988.292 353.53 353.53 0
1988 5 1988.375 354.14 354.14 0
1988 6 1988.458 353.64 353.62 -0.02
1988 7 1988.542 352.53 352.53 0
1988 8 1988.625 350.42 350.41 -0.01
1988 9 1988.708 348.84 348.84 0
1988 10 1988.792 348.94 348.94 0
1988 11 1988.875 349.99 350.04 0.05
1988 12 1988.958 351.29 351.29 0
1989 1 1989.042 352.72 352.72 0
1989 2 1989.125 353.1 353.1 0
1989 3 1989.208 353.64 353.65 0.01
1989 4 1989.292 355.43 355.43 0
1989 5 1989.375 355.7 355.7 0
1989 6 1989.458 355.11 355.11 0
1989 7 1989.542 353.79 353.79 0
1989 8 1989.625 351.42 351.42 0
1989 9 1989.708 349.83 349.81 -0.02
1989 10 1989.792 350.1 350.11 0.01
1989 11 1989.875 351.26 351.26 0
1989 12 1989.958 352.66 352.63 -0.03
1990 1 1990.042 353.63 353.64 0.01
1990 2 1990.125 354.72 354.72 0
1990 3 1990.208 355.49 355.49 0
1990 4 1990.292 356.1 356.09 -0.01
1990 5 1990.375 357.08 357.08 0
1990 6 1990.458 356.11 356.11 0
1990 7 1990.542 354.67 354.7 0.03
1990 8 1990.625 352.67 352.68 0.01
1990 9 1990.708 351.05 351.05 0
1990 10 1990.792 351.36 351.36 0
1990 11 1990.875 352.81 352.81 0
1990 12 1990.958 354.21 354.22 0.01
1991 1 1991.042 354.87 354.85 -0.02
1991 2 1991.125 355.67 355.67 0
1991 3 1991.208 357 357.04 0.04
1991 4 1991.292 358.4 358.4 0
1991 5 1991.375 359 359 0
1991 6 1991.458 357.99 357.99 0
1991 7 1991.542 355.96 356 0.04
1991 8 1991.625 353.78 353.78 0
1991 9 1991.708 352.2 352.2 0
1991 10 1991.792 352.22 352.22 0
1991 11 1991.875 353.7 353.7 0
1991 12 1991.958 354.98 354.98 0
1992 1 1992.042 356.08 356.09 0.01
1992 2 1992.125 356.84 356.85 0.01
1992 3 1992.208 357.73 357.73 0
1992 4 1992.292 358.91 358.91 0
1992 5 1992.375 359.45 359.45 0
1992 6 1992.458 359.19 359.19 0
1992 7 1992.542 356.72 356.72 0
1992 8 1992.625 354.77 354.79 0.02
1992 9 1992.708 352.8 352.79 -0.01
1992 10 1992.792 353.21 353.2 -0.01
1992 11 1992.875 354.15 354.15 0
1992 12 1992.958 355.39 355.39 0
1993 1 1993.042 356.76 356.77 0.01
1993 2 1993.125 357.17 357.17 0
1993 3 1993.208 358.26 358.26 0
1993 4 1993.292 359.17 359.17 0
1993 5 1993.375 360.07 360.07 0
1993 6 1993.458 359.41 359.41 0
1993 7 1993.542 357.36 357.44 0.08
1993 8 1993.625 355.29 355.3 0.01
1993 9 1993.708 353.96 353.87 -0.09
1993 10 1993.792 354.03 354.04 0.01
1993 11 1993.875 355.27 355.27 0
1993 12 1993.958 356.7 356.7 0
1994 1 1994.042 358.05 357.99 -0.06
1994 2 1994.125 358.8 358.81 0.01
1994 3 1994.208 359.67 359.68 0.01
1994 4 1994.292 361.13 361.13 0
1994 5 1994.375 361.48 361.48 0
1994 6 1994.458 360.6 360.6 0
1994 7 1994.542 359.2 359.2 0
1994 8 1994.625 357.23 357.23 0
1994 9 1994.708 355.42 355.42 0
1994 10 1994.792 355.89 355.89 0
1994 11 1994.875 357.41 357.41 0
1994 12 1994.958 358.74 358.74 0
1995 1 1995.042 359.73 359.73 0
1995 2 1995.125 360.61 360.61 0
1995 3 1995.208 361.6 361.58 -0.02
1995 4 1995.292 363.05 363.05 0
1995 5 1995.375 363.62 363.62 0
1995 6 1995.458 363.03 363.03 0
1995 7 1995.542 361.55 361.55 0
1995 8 1995.625 358.94 358.94 0
1995 9 1995.708 357.93 357.93 0
1995 10 1995.792 357.8 357.8 0
1995 11 1995.875 359.22 359.22 0
1995 12 1995.958 360.42 360.44 0.02
1996 1 1996.042 361.83 361.83 0
1996 2 1996.125 362.94 362.95 0.01
1996 3 1996.208 363.91 363.91 0
1996 4 1996.292 364.28 364.28 0
1996 5 1996.375 364.93 364.93 0
1996 6 1996.458 364.7 364.7 0
1996 7 1996.542 363.31 363.31 0
1996 8 1996.625 361.15 361.15 0
1996 9 1996.708 359.41 359.39 -0.02
1996 10 1996.792 359.34 359.34 0
1996 11 1996.875 360.62 360.62 0
1996 12 1996.958 361.96 361.96 0
1997 1 1997.042 362.81 362.81 0
1997 2 1997.125 363.87 363.87 0
1997 3 1997.208 364.25 364.25 0
1997 4 1997.292 366.02 366.02 0
1997 5 1997.375 366.47 366.46 -0.01
1997 6 1997.458 365.36 365.32 -0.04
1997 7 1997.542 364.1 364.08 -0.02
1997 8 1997.625 361.89 361.95 0.06
1997 9 1997.708 360.05 360.06 0.01
1997 10 1997.792 360.49 360.49 0
1997 11 1997.875 362.21 362.19 -0.02
1997 12 1997.958 364.12 364.12 0
1998 1 1998.042 365 364.99 -0.01
1998 2 1998.125 365.82 365.82 0
1998 3 1998.208 366.95 366.95 0
1998 4 1998.292 368.42 368.42 0
1998 5 1998.375 369.33 369.33 0
1998 6 1998.458 368.78 368.78 0
1998 7 1998.542 367.59 367.59 0
1998 8 1998.625 365.81 365.84 0.03
1998 9 1998.708 363.83 363.83 0
1998 10 1998.792 364.18 364.18 0
1998 11 1998.875 365.36 365.34 -0.02
1998 12 1998.958 366.87 366.93 0.06
1999 1 1999.042 367.97 367.94 -0.03
1999 2 1999.125 368.83 368.82 -0.01
1999 3 1999.208 369.46 369.46 0
1999 4 1999.292 370.77 370.77 0
1999 5 1999.375 370.66 370.66 0
1999 6 1999.458 370.1 370.1 0
1999 7 1999.542 369.1 369.08 -0.02
1999 8 1999.625 366.7 366.66 -0.04
1999 9 1999.708 364.61 364.6 -0.01
1999 10 1999.792 365.17 365.17 0
1999 11 1999.875 366.51 366.51 0
1999 12 1999.958 367.86 367.89 0.03
2000 1 2000.042 369.07 369.04 -0.03
2000 2 2000.125 369.32 369.35 0.03
2000 3 2000.208 370.38 370.38 0
2000 4 2000.292 371.63 371.63 0
2000 5 2000.375 371.32 371.32 0
2000 6 2000.458 371.51 371.53 0.02
2000 7 2000.542 369.69 369.75 0.06
2000 8 2000.625 368.18 368.23 0.05
2000 9 2000.708 366.87 366.87 0
2000 10 2000.792 366.94 366.94 0
2000 11 2000.875 368.27 368.27 0
2000 12 2000.958 369.62 369.64 0.02
2001 1 2001.042 370.47 370.46 -0.01
2001 2 2001.125 371.44 371.44 0
2001 3 2001.208 372.39 372.37 -0.02
2001 4 2001.292 373.32 373.32 0
2001 5 2001.375 373.77 373.77 0
2001 6 2001.458 373.13 373.09 -0.04
2001 7 2001.542 371.51 371.51 0
2001 8 2001.625 369.59 369.55 -0.04
2001 9 2001.708 368.12 368.12 0
2001 10 2001.792 368.38 368.38 0
2001 11 2001.875 369.64 369.66 0.02
2001 12 2001.958 371.11 371.11 0
2002 1 2002.042 372.38 372.36 -0.02
2002 2 2002.125 373.08 373.09 0.01
2002 3 2002.208 373.87 373.81 -0.06
2002 4 2002.292 374.93 374.93 0
2002 5 2002.375 375.58 375.58 0
2002 6 2002.458 375.44 375.44 0
2002 7 2002.542 373.91 373.86 -0.05
2002 8 2002.625 371.77 371.77 0
2002 9 2002.708 370.72 370.73 0.01
2002 10 2002.792 370.5 370.5 0
2002 11 2002.875 372.19 372.19 0
2002 12 2002.958 373.71 373.7 -0.01
2003 1 2003.042 374.92 374.92 0
2003 2 2003.125 375.63 375.62 -0.01
2003 3 2003.208 376.51 376.51 0
2003 4 2003.292 377.75 377.75 0
2003 5 2003.375 378.54 378.54 0
2003 6 2003.458 378.21 378.2 -0.01
2003 7 2003.542 376.65 376.68 0.03
2003 8 2003.625 374.28 374.43 0.15
2003 9 2003.708 373.12 373.11 -0.01
2003 10 2003.792 373.1 373.1 0
2003 11 2003.875 374.67 374.77 0.1
2003 12 2003.958 375.97 375.97 0
2004 1 2004.042 377.03 377.03 0
2004 2 2004.125 377.87 377.87 0
2004 3 2004.208 378.88 378.88 0
2004 4 2004.292 380.42 380.42 0
2004 5 2004.375 380.62 380.62 0
2004 6 2004.458 379.66 379.71 0.05
2004 7 2004.542 377.48 377.43 -0.05
2004 8 2004.625 376.07 376.32 0.25
2004 9 2004.708 374.1 374.19 0.09
2004 10 2004.792 374.47 374.47 0
2004 11 2004.875 376.15 376.15 0
2004 12 2004.958 377.51 377.51 0
2005 1 2005.042 378.43 378.43 0
2005 2 2005.125 379.7 379.7 0
2005 3 2005.208 380.91 380.92 0.01
2005 4 2005.292 382.2 382.18 -0.02
2005 5 2005.375 382.45 382.45 0
2005 6 2005.458 382.14 382.14 0
2005 7 2005.542 380.6 380.6 0
2005 8 2005.625 378.6 378.64 0.04
2005 9 2005.708 376.72 376.73 0.01
2005 10 2005.792 376.98 376.84 -0.14
2005 11 2005.875 378.29 378.29 0
2005 12 2005.958 380.07 380.06 -0.01
2006 1 2006.042 381.36 381.4 0.04
2006 2 2006.125 382.19 382.2 0.01
2006 3 2006.208 382.65 382.66 0.01
2006 4 2006.292 384.65 384.69 0.04
2006 5 2006.375 384.94 384.94 0
2006 6 2006.458 384.01 384.01 0
2006 7 2006.542 382.15 382.14 -0.01
2006 8 2006.625 380.33 380.31 -0.02
2006 9 2006.708 378.81 378.81 0
2006 10 2006.792 379.06 379.03 -0.03
2006 11 2006.875 380.17 380.17 0
2006 12 2006.958 381.85 381.85 0
2007 1 2007.042 382.91 382.94 0.03
2007 2 2007.125 383.87 383.86 -0.01
2007 3 2007.208 384.51 384.49 -0.02
2007 4 2007.292 386.38 386.37 -0.01
2007 5 2007.375 386.54 386.54 0
2007 6 2007.458 385.98 385.98 0
2007 7 2007.542 384.35 384.35 0
2007 8 2007.625 381.85 381.85 0
2007 9 2007.708 380.73 380.74 0.01
2007 10 2007.792 381.15 381.15 0
2007 11 2007.875 382.38 382.38 0
2007 12 2007.958 383.9 383.94 0.04
2008 1 2008.042 385.37 385.35 -0.02
2008 2 2008.125 385.69 385.7 0.01
2008 3 2008.208 385.94 385.92 -0.02
2008 4 2008.292 387.21 387.21 0
2008 5 2008.375 388.47 388.48 0.01
2008 6 2008.458 387.87 387.99 0.12
2008 7 2008.542 385.6 384.93 -0.67
Mommy? Is that you? I am afraid to look at the data. Can you leave the lights on?
The page I had opened when I did my first comparison had changes going back to June 76. (Nothing before that)
Edit: I see Dee beat me to that revelation. 🙂
Um, wasn’t there something over in the watts thread about something happening around ’80?
Not really… it was actually the 1976 PDO phase change as seen in the change in the rate of change of the CO2 levels shifted forward by smoothing.
Here is the original plot of the acceleration of the CO2 level over time. You can clearly see a signal from the PDO phase change in 1974 and 1998.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1960.375/every:12/derivative/derivative
Here is a smoothed version:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1960.375/every:12/derivative/mean:10/derivative/mean:10
The use of means pushed the 1974 spike forward to 1980.
The July correction (0.67) is humongus!
What a mess !!!
The first number adjusted is May 1974. I’m wondering what possible reason these months are being adjusted to parts per hundred million? Can anyone understand the effect of these adjustments? Other than the July 2008, of course.
So much for adjustments only going back one year. I wonder if there is a record somewhere of every time these wholesale adjustments have been made?
Mike Bryant
Who thought CO2 measurements could cause so much of a stir?
BTW, if anyone wants to bet on CO2 going down, I’m your man. I’ll offer 10-1 if you think CO2 will stop rising.
I thought skeps kept saying 1976 and–what, 20077?
Is this like the GISS temperature data where the previous data is adjusted as new data is added? It makes it pretty hard to maintain a historical record when the history depends on what day you view it! Why would they adjust over 30 years of data now?
All
Old programmer says that all data sets should be archived and with date time stamps and commentary as to what was the change. Then when things do change one can go back and see what happened. It seems that all of the data is very dynamic, even the elements representing days gone by. This seems to be true not only with CO2 concentrations but temperatures. I like to archive the version of the programs used to examine the data as well. Funny old programmer, but very precise.
Terry
I’m curious as to this new data. When I click on the Mauna Loa site, it is still showing the 384.93 for July and the timestamp on the data is still Sunday. Here is what I just copied as of 12:15 am EST Tuesday August 5th. Where is this other monthly mean data being posted?
2008 5 2008.375 388.48 388.48 385.33
2008 6 2008.458 387.99 387.99 385.76
2008 7 2008.542 384.93 384.93 384.54
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
Version 01 lucia August 4th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
2008 5 2008.375 388.47 388.47 385.32
2008 6 2008.458 387.99 387.99 385.76
2008 7 2008.542 384.93 384.93 384.54
Version 02 Dee Norris August 4th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
2008 5 2008.375 388.47 388.48 0.01
2008 6 2008.458 387.87 387.99 0.12
2008 7 2008.542 385.6 384.93 -0.67
Version 03 from vauss August 4th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
2008 5 2008.375 388.48 388.48 385.33
2008 6 2008.458 387.99 387.99 385.76
2008 7 2008.542 384.93 384.93 384.54
version 04 9:30 pm PST 4 Aug 2008 from NOAA website
2008 5 2008.375 388.47 388.47 385.46
2008 6 2008.458 387.87 387.87 385.51
2008 7 2008.542 385.60 385.60 385.25
Wow four different looks at static numbers?
Well, congratulations. You’ve done what many climate bloggers would never have done in your place, simply recognized an error and apologized and corrected. Mistakes happen. Its how we deal with them that shows whether we are a class act. It sets the tone. Its why the Blackboard is never boring no matter how detailed and technical, and why its remained civilized. There is an instructive contrast with the tone of Tamino’s post.
Yes, the alterations of the record going back several years are very odd. We really need to stop obsessively adjusting the past if we are to get to the bottom of any of this.
Terry,
Turns out that the data file I was accessing was a cached copy of the ftp file, since I had gone to that site earlier in the day. Once I hit the refresh button in IE, the new data file came up.
@Terry
My data was a side-by-side comparison of the old and new data sets using the mean value
If you look, you will see July 2008 has both 385.6 and 384.93. This agrees with the other datasets you have excerpted.
Here is a plot of the differences.
http://tinyurl.com/6qb3sg
The data comparison is available here: http://tinyurl.com/6hhy3e
Other than July 2008, the adjustments seem to radiate out from 1994, each oscillation growing larger as time progresses in either direction.
I now wonder if NOAA had a calibration issue in 1994 that was corrected. This still does not explain the change in July 2008.
I am still unwashed, but how does one recalibrate history. Are the reference gasses archived and then audited with respect to the current view? No commentary as to why other than the the heading
“# NOTE: In general, the data presented for the last year are subject to change,
# depending on recalibration of the reference gas mixtures used, and other quality
# control procedures. Occasionally, earlier years may also be changed for the same
# reasons. Usually these changes are minor.”
A thought on the dataset naming MaunaLoa_CO2_ddmmyyyy.vvv very plain but informative. With money we show debits and credits with why on a transactional basis. History can be rewritten but knowing when and why is very important.
Terry
@Terry
Truly I am mystified here. I have sent Dr Peter Tans an email requesting an explanation for the adjustments as has Anthony Watts.
There maybe is a DQA issue here by there being no published explanation. However, I don’t read nefarious behavior into this change. The trend line of the changes is pretty much flat and NOAA does state they make changes to the entire data set.
I will share any reply I get from NOAA with everyone.
If only tamino were half the man you are lucia.
I mean that in the non gender way, of course.
but he is the self professed bulldog of Hansen.
Notice I avoided the other B word in that last sentence.
Terry, The Mauna Loa data has always kept having recalibration adjustments. The Uni that does the calibration used to have pages of detail on technical problems and adjustments etc. All the other sites use equipment calibrated by the same place, so there is no independent check. The expert opinion says I’m wrong, but personally I think anyone trying to measure CO2 change in Parts per Million, sitting on top of a semi active Volcano, with a couple of industrial gas canisters and a spanner, is going to come up wrong.
Terry–
In experimental work, many instruments are calibrated against know references both before and after use. The process involves someone mixing up standard batches with known properties, and checking the instrument reading.
Some instruments — like mercury thermometers– don’t drift much. Often people just rely on the marks on the thermometer as good enough for whatever they are doing. They don’t recalibrate. Other instruments are known to drift, go out of whack etc. This can happen for various reasons.
Obviously, one would like to use an instrument that measured perfectly, and never went out of calibration. But, this is often a practical impossibility. So, judgement is exercised, and some groups deploy an instrument, calibrate before and check afterwards. If the calibration is still “good” on post calibration, the data aren’t changed. If it is terrible the group might flag the data as bad. If it’s shifted a little, people might “correct” the data in some way. In the third case, they need to explain the process so others know what the heck happened.
Since NOAA says they post calibrate, the CO2 monitor is obviously at risk of going out of whack. But we can’t know that for sure until after they post calibrate!
All this looking at instruments and data reminds me of these pilots who were too busy reading the wrong instruments/data whilst not being aware of the real situation and not noticing that the plane was hurling towards the ground (so called somatogravic illusion). Fer crissakes where’s the common sense and the broad view in this whole climate game to be able to watch the horizon?
Hoi Polloi–
Metaphors can be useful. But I’m puzzled. In this context, what activity is equivalent to watching the horizon? Is monitoring the horizon and looking at instruments an either/or proposition? Don’t pilots ordinarily monitor instruments and the horizon?
I cannot imagine non transactional adjustments to historical data. I did go to engineering school and wrote software for capsule attitude adjustment to prevent skipping on reentry. I have done lab work and simulations on very big boxes. The procedures are sloppy at best. The data archiving is apparently very sloppy s well. How do we get improvements in these areas. Just because matrix numbers can be easily updated means that the archive procedures must be very precise.
A reply from Dr Tans at NOAA to my earlier email –
—–Original Message—–
From: Pieter Tans [mailto:Pieter.Tans@noaa.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 10:37 AM
To: Denise Norris
Subject: Re: Mauna Loa CO2 trend
Denise,
The reason was simply that we had a problem with the equipment for the
first half of July, with the result that the earlier monthly average
consisted of only the last 10 days. Since CO2 always goes down fast
during July the monthly average came out low. I have now changed the
program to take this effect into account, and adjusting back to the
middle of the month using the multi-year average seasonal cycle. This
change also affected the entire record because there are missing days
here and there. The other adjustments were minor, typically less than
0.1 ppm. Too bad for the self-described “skepticsâ€.
Pieter Tans
Denise Norris wrote:
> Dear Dr Tans,
>
>
>
> I just noticed NOAA upward adjusted the Mauna Loa CO2 for July 2008, but
> I could not find a explanation on the website. As CO2 is of great
> interest to a number of people, is there a specific reason for the
> adjustment? The original value of 384.93 created a little bit of a stir
> amongst the skeptics.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Denise Norris
>
——————————
and my response:
—–Original Message—–
From: Denise Norris [mailto:xxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 11:37 AM
To: ‘Pieter Tans’
Subject: RE: Mauna Loa CO2 trend
Dr Tans,
Thank you for the clarification of the July data adjustment.
How frequently is the data revised backwards to the extent of 1974? What sort of event would require that sort of adjustment?
I know all this may be a bother, but Mauna Loa is the crown jewel of the CO2 monitoring world and when there is even a minor adjustment, I feel transparency is the best way to head off needless controversy.
Thank you.
Denise Norris
People saying “Too bad for the self-described “skeptics— should not be analyzing this data!!!!! It is now even more highly suspect.
After further review of Dr Tans’ email, it would appear that two-thirds of the July data was not collected, so he changed the program to compensate for the missing days. This new program also back-filled any missing days for the past 34 years there by adjusting the datasets.
IMHO, this is the sort of stuff the DQA is suppose to prevent/disclose.
@V9ncent
In the interest of getting closer to the truth, I chose and continue to choose to overlook his observation regarding skeptics. In the larger picture of things, drawing up sides needlessly is silly.
Principles before Personalities and all that rot!
Dee Norris–
Yes. How an official publicly accessible data set is derived from measurements is something that ought to be documented and communicated. I don’t know if it is, or is not. Certainly, the web accessible data file says very little.
On the one hand, I can’t get too upset about this as “stuff happens”. On the other hand, I think we’ve learned to treat the Mauna Loa data with a grain of salt– at least on the day it is published!
@Lucia
I think we have to treat the July 2008 data point with even less then a grain of salt when most the month is missing. Granted the new value may be more accurate then the old value, but then again, maybe not. With 20 out of 31 days missing from the monthly mean, it would strain my trust to just accept it even if the historical data is used to approximate the missing days. One day here and there, I can accept.
I reserve judgment on the value of the July 2008 data point until I see the global July 2008 data.
Stuff happens indeed, but when stuff like this happens, behind the door changes to critical data is wrong. That is why we have DQA.
I am a bit confused here. If the data table has a column for monthly mean, and another for interpolated monlthy mean, why is missing data interpolated in the monthly mean column?
And to clarify the change that was made: The previous interpolation program was inadequate for months with large chunks of missing data, so it had to be changed. The new method caused changes to any month with missing data back to the beginning of our portion of the record. (Is that right?)
@Raphael
Yes, the correction methodology for the missing July 2008 data was propagated backwards to fill in missing days in the record. Dr Tans has confirmed this in a subsequent email to me. He also changed some of the methodology at the same time.
Dr Tans wrote:
“When I was at it, I made another adjustment to the program. I used to fit 4 harmonics (sine, cosine with frequencies 1/year through 4/year) to describe the average seasonal cycle. I changed that to 6 harmonics.
Therefore, there will be small systematic differences as a function of time-of-year in the de-seasonalized trend. That will be on top of adjustments caused by months in the past during which there were a number of missing days not symmetrically distributed during that month.”
I don’t see a huge issue as the net gain for all of the adjustments is only 0.19 ppmv. Hardly a biasing of the record.
Thanks Dee.
Dr. Tans first response was a little too specific to describe the changes clearly. I needed a clarification before I assumed something which wasn’t intended.
Do you have any idea on my other questions?
@Raphael
Without any confirmation from Dr Tans, I think he may have increased the harmonics to refine the automatic adjustments for seasonal variations to deliver a better product. Certainly the changes had near zero effect, so any argument that the data was Hansenized does not hold water (or is full of hot air?).
Without seeing the raw data, I can’t speak to ‘months with large chunks of data missing’ but I suspect that we are talking only a day here and there, unlike July 2008.
I believe that when and if Dr Tans chooses to share more specifics of his methodology, we will have a better understanding of what actually happened.
I had meant the question about the columns in the data table. My poor mind has trouble grasping the purpose of a column for interpolated means, but not using it for all the interpolated means.
Dee
I would not even begin to think that Dr. Tans was doing anything but dealing with the reality of the circumstance, which as it turns out he was. What my 44 years in programing has taught me is to defend the data and the programs. It is important to make the data sets easy to recognize by their names including the date time and version if possible. All changes need to note who, what, why and when as part of the archive. To do less is not responsible! I am surprised that this has not been brought up as a major issue before. If some advice is required in this area is required I offer my services as I think that the issues are of world wide importance.
Terry
I wonder if it would have been better to use July data from other stations rather than previous years data from this station to make the adjustment… CO2 being well mixed and all
Anthony Watts has had additional correspondence with Dr. Tans, and posted two additional blog entries on this issue at http://www.wattsupwiththat.com. Dr. Tans has demonstrated true academic integrity and openness regarding this issue. I think he was slightly surprised by the attention that the data report from MLO received. He is taking steps to insure, that if something similar occurs in the future, the data trail and any adjustments made will be available for outside examination. I also think he would be open to receiving private donations in order to get some more SOTA data storage units. 😉
Back from my kayak trip, I must say that I am amazed at the whole situation. They lost 20 days of data because the computer hard disk crashed !!! What the hell is going on there?
Here’s my guess. Their equipment is utterly out of date. The measurements are a combination of using an old piece of equipment, and a lot of manual patches here and there. They don’t have the budget to even buy a backup system! This looks like it’s just one guy doing is best in an old lab.
When I first posted on this thread, I assumed that the measurements were made by a professional lab with the most up-to-date equipment, with stringent calibration procedures, and quality controls. Now I see this is just another academic-like setting, where things are just MADE to look professional, but in fact this is just amateur work at best.
Now look at the way the correction is made. Sure there is an annual cycle, and you can fit it with whatever number of harmonics you want. Dr. Tans talks about “noise” remaining in the data. But that is not noise!!! It IS the data. The CO2 trend and temperature response is what remains AFTER you remove the annual cycle. So if you correct the data by interpolating with the annual cycle, you’ve just LOST the actual physical data. If there was an anomaly in July, we will never know! Whatever analysis of the relationship between the carbon cycle and temperature cannot use the July data. How much of the rest of the data is like that?
So plain interpolation using an average of past values is actually worst than just posting a “blank” month. At least we would know that there are no data for July.
The amateurishness of the whole process is amazing. Sure, Dr. Tans was open in his correspondence, and quite candid, but this only makes them look even worse. To find out that a single guy can suddenly decide to use 6 harmonics instead of four, and modify the historical data at will, that is just flabbergasting! To find out that they could publish data on the Web based on only 10 days, without anyone noticing or raising a flag somewhere along the process, just goes to show that this is NOT a rigorous process.
Francois–
Yes. I had assumed Dr. Tans would need all sorts of permissions to modify the procedure for detrending etc. But, evidently not!
I would think it wise for the document to include fiduciary information like the number of days of data on which the data point is based, and also include information on where to obtain the more detailed data.
All in all, I think Dr. Tans seems like a good guy, trying to do a good job, and even doing a decent one. But, the system is not set up as a rigorous source of data for “the whole world” to use! This is probably not Tans’s fault.