Germany’s DWD issues its 5th consecutive overheated press release on monthly/seasonal mean temperature for Germany amid accusations of hyping the data to show more warming. Downward corrections get quietly made later.
Weather and climate analyst Schneefan (Snow Fan) here at wobleibtdieerderwaermung.de reports that the German DWD national weather service recently issued its 5th overheated press release in a row to report the preliminary monthly/seasonal mean temperatures.
In all five press releases the mean temperatures provided were wrong in the sense they had been overheated!
Five press releases with overheated “preliminary” results
For example on February 27, 2018, the DWD also released its preliminary temperature summary for both February 2018 and the 2017/18 winter (December-January-February). In each the mean temperatures had been overstated by 0.1°C and were later corrected (quietly) downward.
Also the preliminary temperature results for January, 2018, made public in the late January press release were overstated by 0.1°C, Schneefan writes.
The same was true for March, 2018, as well. In late March the DWD press release with the preliminary results stated that the mean temperature for the month was 2.5°C, or 1.9°C below the 1981-2010 mean. Later that temperature got corrected to 2.4°C, or 1.9°C below the 1981-2010 30-year mean.
Finally, just recently, the DWD issued it’s press release with the preliminary results for April, 2018. Here the press release stated that April in Germany was the hottest recorded since measurements began in 1881. According to the DWD, the mean temperature was 12.4°C for the month, some 4°C above the 1981-2010 mean. Now it turns out that the mean was actually 12.3°C and not 12.4°C.
Overheated results make better headlines
As to why the DWD preliminary temperature results always need to be corrected downwards later is a mystery. DWD press releases are issued as soon as the preliminary results are available, just before the month ends, and not when the real results are known. Almost every press release comes out with overheated temperature results, and so provide for hotter headlines.
Press releases to inform the public about the later corrected (cooler) results are never issued.
As warm 200 years ago
Even a tenth of a degree can make a difference. For example, one of the oldest datasets comes from the station at Hohenspeißenberg, near Offenbach, which goes back to 1791!
Chart: Josef Kowatsch (EIKE).
Even during the time of Goethe, in the year 1800, April at this station was as hot as it was this year. Overall, temperatures at Hohenspeißenberg have only been elevated over the past dozen or so years. Now should the 12.2°C reading of April, 2018, get corrected downward (as the DWD has a habit of doing), then it won’t be a new record.
Exaggerating by using outdated reference period
Also the DWD has the habit of comparing German mean temperatures to the much cooler 1961-1990 mean, a practice that no one uses globally. Schneefan comments:
We see that the management of the DWD has not observed the WMO guideline in that it uses the outdated (colder) 1961-1990 climate period instead of the (warmer) 1981-2010 climate period in order to generate more positive – and thus more false – deviations to show a warming in Germany that does not exist in reality.
Through this intentional alarmist false reporting, regional stagnations and even declines in temperature in Germany are getting obscured, and that at the cost of the taxpayer.”
It’s called confirmation bias. If the preliminary numbers are inflated, you can bet that the final numbers will also be inflated, just by a bit less. This technique is used to convince that the final numbers are “correct“.
You may be interested to know that the anomaly calculations for UK Meteorological Office CET record Central England Temperature Record since 1659 use the period 1961-1990 as the average.
Maybe to you, the rest of us knows that measurements get quality controlled and those end of the month figures are just preliminary.
You know, like they are clearly writing in their press releases:
“Alle in dieser Pressemitteilung genannten Monatswerte sind vorläufige Werte. Die für den letz-ten Tag des Monats verwendeten Daten basieren auf Prognosen. Bis Redaktionsschluss standen nicht alle Messungen des Stationsnetzes des DWD zur Verfügung”
Any questions?
Anything to deny that it’s getting warmer? Now if you accept that graph as an accurate representation of warming in Germany/Central Europe, then you surely also accept that it is now warmer than in all of the 20th century and that there was no warm period in the 1930s/1940s in the Northern Hemisphere? I suspect you don’t … so why emphasize this graph?
You are kidding, right? 1961-1990 is the default period defined by the WMO. It’s an international standard. Besides, different baselines only shift the values, they don’t change the slope. And what happens when you have different baselines can often be seen when Kenneth posts a woodfortrees.org link completely ignoring them 😉 wouldn’t be a problem if every temperature index used the same baseline.
“Anything to deny that it’s getting warmer?”
The El Nino transient has all but disappeared.
There has been NO WARMING except El Nino events in the last 40 years.
So all down to the Sun’s energy, NOTHING more.
Or have you got some scientific evidence that humans cause those El Ninos?
Again, how do you think this works? Why has it been warmer after every major El Nino than before?
The Sun is the source of everything. It’s about what happens with this energy that determines climate.
Glad to see you finally admitting its the SUN..
and that CO2 has absolutely NOTHING to do with it.
YOu seem not to know how El Ninos work, even though it have been explained many time
Your ability to learn is being block by your brain-hosed AGW mantra.
Do you have any scientific evidence that humans cause those El Ninos?
Do you have any scientific evidence that human CO2 has caused ANY WARMING AT ALL ??
“It’s about what happens with this energy that determines climate.”
And CO2 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with it.
As proven by yourself in your ABJECT FAILURE to produce one tiny bit of empirical evidence of atmospheric CO2 causing any warming anywhere, anytime.
Odd, I thought my first comment has disappeared.
“1961-1990 is the default period defined”
And just happens to span the COLDEST period since 1920, maybe even since 1900 or even earlier.
Allows all that scary RED colour on their maps. (designed for the gullible fools of the AGW cult)
Will be funny when they start to use 1991-2020 as there baseline, and the temperatures are cooler than that period.
Will be time for another Ice Age scare… blamed on CO2 or human something or other, no doubt !
I wonder ifi all those who predicted cooling for the 2010-2020 period also believed it would be funny if that actually happened. Is this not happening the reason why you are so bitter and hope that it cools in the next decade? What will you do if nothing like that happens?
Central European instrumental temperatures averaged the records of Prague, Vienna, Hohenpeissenberg, Kremsmünster, Paris, and Munich (black).
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/clip_image0083.jpg
Would be interesting to know how much of the recent temperature was due to modern fast reacting equipment
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/9psXzDgd5dk/maxresdefault.jpg