Resisting Climate Hysteria

[basilio]

The Graph was from NOAA. I think you have seen it before.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif

I like your little bit of fantasy denial fantasy. Guess what !! Yep According to the creatives who made that up current temperatures are way below the medieval warm period. And since you have chosen to post it I have to assume you believe it is accurate.

So I have to gather that all that effort into showing the mistakes and deliberate misinterpretation of Leohle 2007-8 paper was lost on you ? But my predication on your behaviour was totally spot on. It doesn't matter how much evidence there is to show we are now much warmer than than anytime in the last 10,000 years.... it will never be enough.

Cheers !

 

[trainspotter]

The Graph was from NOAA. I think you have seen it before.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif

I like your little bit of fantasy denial fantasy. Guess what !! Yep According to the creatives who made that up current temperatures are way below the medieval warm period. And since you have chosen to post it I have to assume you believe it is accurate.

So I have to gather that all that effort into showing the mistakes and deliberate misinterpretation of Leohle 2007-8 paper was lost on you ? But my predication on your behaviour was totally spot on. It doesn't matter how much evidence there is to show we are now much warmer than than anytime in the last 10,000 years.... it will never be enough.

Cheers !

Predicate all you like but it still does not make you right ...

 

[basilio]

Clearly one of us is not the full quid on reading articles TS.

Lets be clear about it. Accuweather was only using data from one year to look at the number of record highs and lows. The thrust of his article was trying to understand what he saw as the pause in global warming. This was the clamour of denialists who chose to ignore the steep temperature increases from 1970-96 and then wanted to say "Hey it's stopped . Nothing to worry about folks " during 2005-2012 And on the way lets kick the hell out the climate change models because for the last 17 years the temperature hasn't gone up like they said it would.

But of course since 2014 world temperatures have gone up with a vengeance. In fact they are now sitting at the top of CC models. Does this have any relevance to the discussion ?

 

[basilio]

And TS why do you insist of re presenting a graph that isn't even remotely close to the facts ? At least the one you used earlier on was close even if it ignored all the warming of the 20th Century.

Do you seriously expect anyone on the thread with more than 2 neurons operating would accept such a bare faced lie? (If you can find the author I'm happy to research it's origins and creative artiste..)

 

[trainspotter]

Clearly one of us is not the full quid on reading articles TS.

Lets be clear about it. Accuweather was only using data from one year to look at the number of record highs and lows. The thrust of his article was trying to understand what he saw as the pause in global warming. This was the clamour of denialists who chose to ignore the steep temperature increases from 1970-96 and then wanted to say "Hey it's stopped . Nothing to worry about folks " during 2005-2012 And on the way lets kick the hell out the climate change models because for the last 17 years the temperature hasn't gone up like they said it would.

But of course since 2014 world temperatures have gone up with a vengeance. In fact they are now sitting at the top of CC models. Does this have any relevance to the discussion ?

Clearly your one sided blinded opine is clouding your comprehension abilities.

Accuweather was pointing out an "anomaly" based on his recorded data and was asking if they could understand what had happened and incorporate it into current climate models it would assist in future predictions/modelling being more accurate. And not for just one year only

I will repeat his statement to prove yet again your unwillingness to observe and understand the matters at hand is nearly as flawed as the IPCC's predictions.

LOOK: I'm not saying it won't resume; I'm not saying Global Warming isn't real (although I do believe it's exaggerated by bad sensor locations); I'm not saying we shouldn't take care of the Earth better. What I'm saying is that something happened there and we need to figure out what, because it wasn't predicted by the models (as shown by the graph below, which doesn't even include the last couple years). If we could figure out what happened, it would be awesome because we could change the climate models to give an accurate prediction of the future.

Only 2 years worth of data basilio ? 2014 - 2016 but but but NOAA and NASA have already credited this with an extended El Nino' effect.



I am off to get a mercury thermometer to shove up a dead salmons @ss as PROOF that the world is getting hotter!

 

[trainspotter]

And TS why do you insist of re presenting a graph that isn't even remotely close to the facts ? At least the one you used earlier on was close even if it ignored all the warming of the 20th Century.

Do you seriously expect anyone on the thread with more than 2 neurons operating would accept such a bare faced lie? (If you can find the author I'm happy to research it's origins and creative artiste..)

Oh please do tell me you are going to bring in the hockey stick graph as exhibit "A"

 

[trainspotter]

2 neurons anyone ... anyone?

 

[basilio]

Don't worry about trying to identify the source of that wondrous "No global warming" graph TS. It wasn't hard to find it on Google. Essentially it is the PIN Up Drool of every CC denier on the net and has been duly copied and recopied

(And no wonder !! It is just so convincing isn't it ..)

It is in fact a bastardised copy of the Eastbrook work on temperatures at the top of the Green land Ice cap.
It's last accurate figure (even for that particular location) was 1855 ..

Now if one wants to see what has happened since 1855 check out this analysis.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/decadaltemp.php

 

[basilio]

Had to give a geeup for the last website I cited. It is NASA's work of course

It really gives a fantastic ongoing visual analysis of changes around the world. ( Absolutely nothing to do with CC of course.. All just natural stuff.)

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/larsenb.php

 

[trainspotter]

So not wanting to admit you were wrong about the salmon or the mercury thermometers on steamships nor realising you were totally off base on the Accuweather statement you go back to hacking on one graph that goes back for 15,000 years. How many times do you need to be told - open your brain basilio.

Okay ... here is another one to chow down on over 2000 years.

The researchers argue that “X-ray densitometry” enables a more accurate reconstruction of climate history than does analyzing the width of tree rings – the principal data used by MBH. For example, MBH found a “divergence,” starting in 1960, between a decline in Northern Hemisphere temperatures, as reconstructed from tree ring data, and the increase in Northern Hemisphere temperatures, as measured by thermometers and other heat sensing instruments. The divergence raises the question of how MBH can be so sure the Medieval Warm Period was tiny or non-existent when their proxy data fail to reflect the instrument-measured warmth of recent decades. To give the hockey stick its dangerous-looking blade, MBH had to “hide the decline.”

In contrast, the Esper team found no divergence between instrumental data and temperatures inferred from density analysis of living trees in the study area.

So what’s the upshot? Their reconstruction “shows a succession of warm and cold episodes including peak warmth during Roman and Medieval times alternating with severe cool conditions centred in the fourth and fourteenth centuries.” The warmest 30-year period was A.D. 21-50, which was 1.05 °C warmer than the mean temperature for 1951-1980 and ~0.5 °C warmer than the region’s maximum 20th century warmth, which occured during 1921-1950.

http://www.globalwarming.org/2012/0...mer-than-the-medieval-and-roman-warm-periods/

Here is a graph for all the people out there with 2 neurons to understand.

 

[explod]

Antartica has just hit 400PPM CO2 for the firts time in......

...... 4 million years.

from "IFLESCIENCE" today.

 

[explod]

So not wanting to admit you were wrong about the salmon or the mercury thermometers on steamships nor realising you were totally off base on the Accuweather statement you go back to hacking on one graph that goes back for 15,000 years. How many times do you need to be told - open your brain basilio.

Okay ... here is another one to chow down on over 2000 years.

View attachment 67226



http://www.globalwarming.org/2012/0...mer-than-the-medieval-and-roman-warm-periods/

Here is a graph for all the people out there with 2 neurons to understand.

View attachment 67227

Good chart there TS, thanks for posting.

It clearly shows the natural cooling up to 1900 and then the gradual rise to 2000. If we could add the last 16 years then the alarming rise would stand out considerably.

On "natural cooling" the earth was a firball of gas 5 billion years ago and should continue to cool. That fact that the temperature is rising at all is truly alarming and particularly when we take account of the sun cooling down also.

 

[trainspotter]

explod - you missed the point. The graph evidences the Medieval Global Warming in all it's glory. The hockey stick graph does not have the Medieval Warming Period in it's calculus. It was removed to "evidence" how SHARPLY temperatures have risen in the last 30 years and has since been disproved methodically by MANY scientists.

The existence of the Medieval Warm Period was accepted without question and noted in the first progress report of the IPCC from 1990. On page 202 of that 1990 IPCC report there was the graphic 7c, in which the Medieval Warm Period was portrayed as clearly warmer than the present.

By the time of the second IPCC report in 1995 where for the first time CO2 forcing began to be proposed more prominently as a cause of serious alarm, the Medieval Warm Period was sidelined in the text and narrative. An important way that this was done in the report was to alter the diagram of recent climate history by simply shortening the time period it covered so that it now started after the Medieval Warm Period.

In other words they have fudged the figures ... for all the people with 2 neurons to understand.

 

[wayneL]

http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...s/news-story/d775ecf894ab68415ed0108ced31a4e2

Let's get those v8s puping some co2!!!

 

[Knobby22]

http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...s/news-story/d775ecf894ab68415ed0108ced31a4e2

Let's get those v8s puping some co2!!!

We are due, mankind could be lucky, yet again. I think it has been eluded to previously.

This also shows that global warming through CO2 is real as though the sunspots have been dropping, and I looked it up, a new low is expected this year, the earth is still warming.

 

[cynic]

http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...s/news-story/d775ecf894ab68415ed0108ced31a4e2

Let's get those v8s puping some co2!!!

How can this be?

The climate models didn't say anything about this!

Does this mean that our very own sun is an acc denier?

 

[Knobby22]

How can this be?

The climate models didn't say anything about this!

Does this mean that our very own sun is an acc denier?

They did actually, the Sun has been reducing output for a while. That's why the critics couldn't use it in their arguments unless they were demented.

 

[explod]

How can this be?

The climate models didn't say anything about this!

Does this mean that our very own sun is an acc denier?

So we're supposed to be having an ice age every 11 years.

And heat records top end of Australia this month and over the planet first five months (individually) hottest ever recorded.

 

[wayneL]

We are due, mankind could be lucky, yet again. I think it has been eluded to previously.

This also shows that global warming through CO2 is real as though the sunspots have been dropping, and I looked it up, a new low is expected this year, the earth is still warming.

Lucky? An Ice Age will be far far worse for mankind a little bit of Warming.

 

[cynic]

So we're supposed to be having an ice age every 11 years.

And heat records top end of Australia this month and over the planet first five months (individually) hottest ever recorded.

Promises, promises, promises!

Shouldn't the winters be getting warmer also?

This one feels very cold to me, and I am certainly not looking forward to my next energy bill.