Global Warming Thread XI

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: Jon Estes

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Ed Edwards » Sun Dec 12, 2010 4:24 pm

http://climateprogress.org/2010/12/12/n ... on-record/

of 12 Dec 2010 says this FACT

From Jan to Nov 2010, the average earth surface
temperature offset (difference) from the
1951-1980 baseline was 0.66°C ±0.05°C. The actual
temperature lies between +0.61°C and +0.62°C


1. This is not enough margin of confidence to
say that 2010 was the warmest year (and 2005 the
second warmest year).

2. However, there is no doubt that global warming
is going on.

the ±0.5 in 2010 is because of the pleminary
nature of the NASA report

3. Here are three reasons why the the 2010
figures
(+0.66°C±0.05)
should be less than the 2005 figues (+0.62°C±0.01):

A. see the blue streak (1.6 to -1.0) from the
equator mark on the 2010 picture? That is the
start of a La Nina condition (which should cool
most of the world). In 2005 there is an light orange
streak in the East Pacific indication the start of
an El Nino condition (which should warm up
most of the world.

B. England was cooler in 2010 than was it was
in 2005 (sorry, the heat is bases on land
area, not population)

C. the temperature is indistinguishabe if it is one temp
(say 54.0°C) on your feet and 54.66°C on your hands).
An I assure you, nobody can physically experience the
global earth temperature as a person cannot be spread all over
the earth like that. The temperature difference is
discerned by human minds ONLY not by physical bodies.

So it sure makes some one look clueless who looks out
the window and sees a Meter of Snow (39 inches) and
says "where did global warming go". Global Warming
is still here. And the odds favor the statement being true:
"2010 is the warmest earth-wide year of the last 131 years".
Keep the Planet Cool :angel:
( for the physical Millennial Messianic Reign of Jesus )


Image

-- Ed Edwards, AGW Dude
(AGW = Anthropogenic Global Warming)
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Ed Edwards » Sun Dec 12, 2010 4:53 pm

Brother Elder David: // My goodness, Ed!!!! So as
a denier of AGW, I'm one in the spirit with deniers
of God? Where, oh where, on earth did you come
up with that looney idea? Are you questioning
my salvation by that comment? Where have you ever
in your life seen a single word that I've
written which declared that I deny God?
Where have I ever stated that there is no God?
How am I corrupt? How have I done abominable
works? I find it amazing that you could
possibly draw such a conclusion? Yes,
I do deny the existence of anthropogenic
global warming (AGW), but how does that make
me a denier of God, corrupt, and a worker of abomination? \\

Ah, good exercise, jumping to conclusions.

I call you "Elder Brother" cause I recognize your
salvation by your works which I know.
However, what you say here in this quoted paragraph shows proof positive
that you are are denying Global Warming and that humans
caused the recent (last 100 years or so)
Global Warming with thier ruining the earth
scurring about all over the place making tire tracks.

// I'm one in the spirit with deniers of God? \\

I may have said that. It is certainly true when you deny
the facts of GW and the 95% chance that at least
half of the Global Warming is human caused.
Your spirit when you deny AGW is the same spirit that causes
people to deny God. That spirit is the same one that makes
people deny that a small group of Muslim extream terrorists
made the US Government to look the fool on 11 Sept 2001.

// Where have you ever
in your life seen a single word that I've
written which declared that I deny God? \\

Here you are saying things I did not claim, did not say,
did not think, did not in any way imply. But you might
check the path you walk, just as a general principle -
God's Word is way sharper than any two-eged sword
and can reveal things that I probably have no knowledge of.

// Where have I ever stated that there is no God? \\

I did not say you did. Somone else may have told you that,
not me.

// Yes,
I do deny the existence of anthropogenic
global warming (AGW), but how does that make
me a denier of God, corrupt, and a worker of abomination? \\

I did not say it did. I also did not say that David wrote the
Psalm, the Bible said that.

BTW, I think December 2010
will be in the top ten warmest Decembers in
this Millennium. Tee hee, this is true, for it will be
the tenth December in the period 2001-3000, the current Millennium :-)

I also think December 2010 will be in the top ten warmest
years for which we have records, that is for total earth
average for the whole month. But that is an opinion, and
opinions will naturally vary, and this is good.
Keep the Planet Cool :angel:
( for the physical Millennial Messianic Reign of Jesus )


Image

-- Ed Edwards, AGW Dude
(AGW = Anthropogenic Global Warming)
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby David Flick » Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:24 pm

Ed Edwards wrote:http://climateprogress.org/2010/12/12/n ... on-record/

of 12 Dec 2010 says this FACT

From Jan to Nov 2010, the average earth surface
temperature offset (difference) from the
1951-1980 baseline was 0.66°C ±0.05°C. The actual
temperature lies between +0.61°C and +0.62°C


1. This is not enough margin of confidence to
say that 2010 was the warmest year (and 2005 the
second warmest year).

2. However, there is no doubt that global warming
is going on.

the ±0.5 in 2010 is because of the pleminary
nature of the NASA report

3. Here are three reasons why the the 2010
figures
(+0.66°C±0.05)
should be less than the 2005 figues (+0.62°C±0.01):

A. see the blue streak (1.6 to -1.0) from the
equator mark on the 2010 picture? That is the
start of a La Nina condition (which should cool
most of the world). In 2005 there is an light orange
streak in the East Pacific indication the start of
an El Nino condition (which should warm up
most of the world.

B. England was cooler in 2010 than was it was
in 2005 (sorry, the heat is bases on land
area, not population)

C. the temperature is indistinguishabe if it is one temp
(say 54.0°C) on your feet and 54.66°C on your hands).
An I assure you, nobody can physically experience the
global earth temperature as a person cannot be spread all over
the earth like that. The temperature difference is
discerned by human minds ONLY not by physical bodies.

So it sure makes some one look clueless who looks out
the window and sees a Meter of Snow (39 inches) and
says "where did global warming go". Global Warming
is still here. And the odds favor the statement being true:

"2010 is the warmest earth-wide year of the last 131 years".

Ed, the whole notion of 2010 being the hottest year in the last 131 years is a boatload of BS. The alarmist blogs (i.e. Climate Progress. Skeptical Science, RalClimate.Org, GISS, etc. etc.) and the so-called "Mainstream Media" are basing their predictions on bogus data. Both James Hansen, (who heads GISS) and Michael Mann (who is a co-founder of RalClimate.Org) have been preaching their alarmist views like mad. Hansen has been the loudest voice over the last year. His "DATA" has been fabricated to make it appear as though 2010 is the hottest year ever. It's all a myth...
.
.
.
.
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Ed Edwards » Mon Dec 13, 2010 8:34 pm

Merry Christmas!
Keep the Planet Cool :angel:
( for the physical Millennial Messianic Reign of Jesus )


Image

-- Ed Edwards, AGW Dude
(AGW = Anthropogenic Global Warming)
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby KeithE » Mon Dec 13, 2010 9:38 pm

David Flick wrote:
Ed, the whole notion of 2010 being the hottest year in the last 131 years is a boatload of BS. The alarmist blogs (i.e. Climate Progress. Skeptical Science, RalClimate.Org, etc. etc.) and the so-called "Mainstream Media" are basing their predictions on bogus data. Both James Hansen and Michael Mann (Mann is a co-founder of RalClimate.Org) have been preaching their alarmist views like mad. Hansen has been the loudest voice over the last year. His "DATA" has been fabricated to make it appear as though 2010 is the hottest year ever. It's all a myth...


2010 is actually the hottest year in the last 160 years. This plot shows the 131 years of GISS reduced DATA.
Image
But the Hadley DATA starts in 1850 and all those anomalies prior to 1880 are below 0.0C as shown here

And if you believe any of the paleoclimatic data, it is the hottest in the last 2000 years:
Image

Claiming this is all FABRICATED is pure nonsense. If it were all fabiricated, scientists since 1850 would have to be involved (Roy Spencer would have to have been in on it). And why in the world if the data was fabricated would they fabricate the leveling off between 1998 and 2008 right during the great GW decision making time from Kyoto to Congressional hearings to 2001 IPCC to 2007 IPCC. Pure wishful thinking or more likely profit-motivated BS fearful of that dreaded word - regulation.

As for the evidence in David's link His "DATA" has been fabricated to make it appear as though 2010 is the hottest year ever., it only shows 2010 data. How could that possibly make the case that 2010 is (or is not) the hottest year?? Now that is more than a "boatload of BS" and David bought it. That's because David blindly trusts the denialist press headlines
Hansen’s “Hottest Year Ever” Is Primarily Based On Fabricated Data.

without even a cursory check of their data.

The third map in David's linked article is a temp anomaly map (color coded) and is only for 2010 - see below:
Image
It is explicitly for Dec 2009 to Nov 2010 (upper left). Do not be fooled by the "1951-1980" (that's their baseline period).

Likewise the 4th graphic a plot is explicitly over Jan 2010 to Nov 2010 and is repeated below:
Image
How can that be indicative of 2010 not being the highest year??? Now I did check this data plot (because I never trust a denialist source) and it appears to be an accurate plot for all 4 temperature readings). And the satellite data (both UAH and RSS) has shown a downward trend since Sept contrary to the direct surface measurements per GISS (Hadley has yet to report on Nov 2010 as the plot faithfully shows). As an aside, do remember that GISS and Hadley data have differing baseline years (GISS's is 1951-1980 while Hadley's is 1961-1990 leading to a 0.08C bias between the them, so imagine raising the HadCRUT yellow line 0.08C to compare GISS to HadCRUT reductions of the surface data measurements in their differing detailed manners).

The claim that is made in the first two maps in David's link, that only 25% of the red and 33% of the brown are based on actual thermometers readings is also misleading.
Image
Image
The maps are square projections and the arctic area where most of the red (highest increases) are, is exaggerated. Thus the % of gray boxes in Map 2 (where thermometer data was not available due to inaccessibility) have been greatly overestimated in this map form. The whole northern latitudes from 75 deg N (Middle of Greenland ) to 90 deg (North Pole) only accounts for 5% of the earth's surface area. GISS uses reasonable nearest neighbor interpolation to fill in the gaps in the Arctic, Antarctic, Saharan, and Amazonian regions (grays box areas in Map 2). Interestingly, I believe the Hadley data analysis process does not do that; instead they report on how much earth coverage have been gathered each month - one of their differing methods. Apparently GISS believes it is better to fill in that gap in data with reasonable intepolations in an honest attempt to be totally "global", while the Hadley folks stick to only earth areas with actual measurements. But at any rate, GISS is not fabricating the data they are interpolating the data; heck you cannot have thermometers everywhere. To boot the GISS method and Hadley method have not changed and have been consistently applied, so the time trends are on an equal basis.

This whole article is a clever graphical attempt by the denialist analysts (if you could call them that) to suggest that the global temp trend over the last 160 years represents only 25-33% of the earth and therefore as the headline says:
Hansen’s “Hottest Year Ever” Is Primarily Based On Fabricated Data.
That is pure BS and the denialist machine's lying ways are evident again; the actual % of global coverage is recorded in the Hadley data file for each month; and it has been between 77% and 89% global coverage ever since 1966 as shown here in alternating rows. True, the history of direct temperature readings has not been totally 100% global; but to try and imply that it has been as little as 25-33% (when the number is more like 79-89%) is just another example of how the Denialist Machine lies. And note the story of increasing temps is same when using the satellite data (only since 1979) which is very nearly "global". Yep here it comes again:
Image
David - Try to comprehend DATA.
Last edited by KeithE on Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby David Flick » Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:48 am

David Flick wrote:
Ed, the whole notion of 2010 being the hottest year in the last 131 years is a boatload of BS. The alarmist blogs (i.e. Climate Progress. Skeptical Science, RalClimate.Org, etc. etc.) and the so-called "Mainstream Media" are basing their predictions on bogus data. Both James Hansen and Michael Mann (Mann is a co-founder of RalClimate.Org) have been preaching their alarmist views like mad. Hansen has been the loudest voice over the last year. His "DATA" has been fabricated to make it appear as though 2010 is the hottest year ever. It's all a myth...

=================================================================
David: All of Keith's data sources (i.e. GISS, Hadley, Mann's "reconstructed" hockey stick graphs and the various IPCC reports) are known to be either fabricated or corrupt. Documentation below...

KeithE wrote:2010 is actually the hottest year in the last 160 years. This plot shows the 131 years of GISS reduced DATA.
Image

2010 is not the hottest year in the last 160 years. Both of these graphs are based on GISS data. James Hansen is the head honcho of the NASA GISS outfit. There is ample evidence that the GISS data is corrupt to the gills. (see here, here, here, here.)

KeithE wrote:But the Hadley DATA starts in 1850 and all those anomalies prior to 1880 are below 0.0C as shown here

The Hadley data originated from the CRU at East Anglia University which is the source of the Climategate Scandal. Exposure of the corrupt science practiced by Phil Jones, et. al was what brought down him and friends. (Documentation)

KeithE wrote:And if you believe any of the paleoclimatic data, it is the hottest in the last 2000 years:
Image

I don't believe any of the paleoclimatic data produced by Michael Mann & friends. This is a Wikipedia-created version of Michale Mann's "reconstructed" hockey stick graphs. Not one of the hockey stick graphs --there are several-- is correct. Mann plotted the first graph in an attempt to entirely omit both the Medieval Warming Period (MWP) and the Little Ice Age (LIA). The first had a completely straight handle. It was proven to be wrong. He then "reconstructed" the graph several times and never did get it correct. While he attempted to edit in both the MWP and the LIA and still didn't get it correct. All of the so-called hockey stick graphs are incorrect insofar as plotting the MWP & LIA are concerned. Here's the correct plotting of the MIA & LIA.
Bottom line is that it's not currently hotter than it's been in the last 2000 years...

KeithE wrote:1Claiming this is all FABRICATED is pure nonsense. If it were all fabiricated, scientists since 1850 would have to be involved (2Roy Spencer would have to have been in on it). And why in the world if the data was fabricated would they fabricate the leveling off between 1998 and 2008 right during the great GW decision making time from Kyoto to Congressional hearings to 2001 IPCC to 2007 IPCC. 3Pure wishful thinking or more likely profit-motivated BS fearful of that dreaded word - regulation.

1) Not nonsense at all...

2) Spencer has been all over it for years. If you've read either of his books (Climate Confusion and/or The Great Global Warming Blunder) you would know what he says. Incidentally, Spencer went to Cancun along with Christopher Monckton and Marc Morano to debunk the cloud feedback study presented by the alarmists. I know it just galls you to no end that Roy Spencer is a skeptic, but he has been debunking AGW alarmism for years.

3 No "wishful thinking," dreaded word not withstanding. "Wishful thinking" belongs to the alarmists who believe that global warming is both catastrophic and man-made. It's neither...

KeithE wrote:
David wrote:Hansen’s “Hottest Year Ever” Is Primarily Based On Fabricated Data.
As for the evidence in David's link His "DATA" has been fabricated to make it appear as though 2010 is the hottest year ever., it only shows 2010 data. How could that possibly make the case that 2010 is (or is not) the hottest year?? Now that is more than a "boatload of BS" and David bought it. That's because David blindly trusts the denialist press headlines without even a cursory check of their data.

Call them "denialist press headlines" or whatever you choose, they're still correct. AGW wouldn't exist if there weren't fabricated or twisted data. The notion that man (humanity) can control climate one way or the other is a fabrication of the AGW alarmists.

KeithE wrote:The third map in David's linked article is a temp anomaly map (color coded) and is only for 2010 - see below:
Image
It is explicitly for Dec 2009 to Nov 2010 (upper left). Do not be fooled by the "1951-1980" (that's their baseline period).

The "baseline" --one way or the other-- has nothing whatsoever to do with validity of Hansen's map. The point made is that His data is fraudulent and fabricated. Here's the documentation.

KeithE wrote:Likewise the 4th graphic a plot is explicitly over Jan 2010 to Nov 2010 and is repeated below:
Image
1How can that be indicative of 2010 not being the highest year??? Now I did check this data plot (because I never trust a denialist source) and it appears to be an accurate plot for all 4 temperature readings). And the satellite data (both UAH and RSS) has shown a downward trend since Sept contrary to the direct surface measurements per GISS (Hadley has yet to report on Nov 2010 as the plot faithfully shows). 2As an aside, do remember that GISS and Hadley data have differing baseline years. (GISS's is 1951-1980 while Hadley's is 1961-1990 leading to a 0.08C bias between the them, so imagine raising the HadCRUT yellow line 0.08C to compare GISS to HadCRUT reductions of the surface data measurements in their differing detailed manners).

1) The GISS data (Hansen's data) Is fabricated data, as this article delineates...

2) Baseline, one or the other, mean nothing if both data sources are corrupt.

KeithE wrote:The claim that is made in the first two maps in David's link, that only 25% of the red and 33% of the brown are based on actual thermometers readings is also misleading. The maps are square projections and the arctic area where most of the red and brown (highest increases) are, is exaggerated. Thus the gray boxes (where thermometer data was not available due to inaccessibility) have been overestimated in this map form. Those grays areas in the arctic really represent 4-8 of the gridded dataset of 2592 equal areas. To boot the method has not changed dramatically over the years, so the time trends are on an equal basis. This whole article is a clever graphical attempt by the denialist analysts (if you could call them that) to claim the global temp trend over the last 160 years represents only 25-33% of the earth and therefore as the headline says:
Hansen’s “Hottest Year Ever” Is Primarily Based On Fabricated Data.
That is pure BS and the denialist machine's lying ways are evident again; the actual % of global coverage is recorded in the Hadley data file for each month; and it has been between 77% and 89% global coverage ever since 1966 as shown here in alternating rows. True the history of temperature readings has not been totally 100% global; but to try and imply that it has been as little as 25-33% (when the number is more like 79-89%) is just another example of how the Denialist Machine lies.

Once again, it's not the so-called "Denialist Machine" telling the lies. It's the other way around. Read this, this and this...

KeithE wrote:David - Try to comprehend DATA.

Keith, fabricated data is incomprehensible...
.
.
.
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Ed Edwards » Tue Dec 14, 2010 11:21 am

David Flick wrote:
Ed, the whole notion of 2010 being the hottest year in the last 131 years is a boatload of BS. ...


I yield the point to you. :brick: You are the resident expert on the subject of BS.

KeithE wrote: ...
2010 is actually the hottest year in the last 160 years. This plot shows the 131 years of GISS reduced DATA.
Image
But the Hadley DATA starts in 1850 and all those anomalies prior to 1880 are below 0.0C as shown here


Say KeithE, have your had any vocational or avocational reason to build a data base with 'running average' for display?
I have, it is lots of hard work, but interesting
Here one running average is the red line = 60 month running mean This is an average of the 30 months preceeding the point and the 30 months after the point (the monthly data provides the points). note that the read stops before the data does (on the right most line). The point after the end of the red line at the right does not have 30 more months of data (only 29). The red-line is fact, if I continued the red line to the right side, I would ahve to 'jimmy' some data, or make an educated opinion about what the future data might be. But that is, however one does it, an opinion. We each have our own opinion, and every right to it.
Keep the Planet Cool :angel:
( for the physical Millennial Messianic Reign of Jesus )


Image

-- Ed Edwards, AGW Dude
(AGW = Anthropogenic Global Warming)
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Ed Edwards » Tue Dec 14, 2010 11:39 am

Sorry there, I cannot edit with the Baptistlive.com editor past a certain point.
I cannot use my editor-of-choice to post graphs. So I am stuck with short
choppy posts.

Anway, If we took say sixty BL members and guessed what the next 30 months
of data is going to be, we could average that. The average opinion would be
more correct than at least half the individual (97% likely) or possibly 97% of the
opinions (4% likely).

And a strange thing about averaging many readings, the more the merrier -
the more readings taken, the more likely the average will be correct..

I am reasonably sure that at the scale above, that the 'real temperature average
would NOT be noticably different from the shown temperature average. 'Noticably
Different' here means: cannot be seen by the untrained eye.'
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby KeithE » Tue Dec 14, 2010 7:25 pm

David Flick wrote:
David Flick wrote:
Ed, the whole notion of 2010 being the hottest year in the last 131 years is a boatload of BS. The alarmist blogs (i.e. Climate Progress. Skeptical Science, RalClimate.Org, etc. etc.) and the so-called "Mainstream Media" are basing their predictions on bogus data. Both James Hansen and Michael Mann (Mann is a co-founder of RalClimate.Org) have been preaching their alarmist views like mad. Hansen has been the loudest voice over the last year. His "DATA" has been fabricated to make it appear as though 2010 is the hottest year ever. It's all a myth...

=================================================================
David: All of Keith's data sources (i.e. GISS, Hadley, Mann's "reconstructed" hockey stick graphs and the various IPCC reports) are known to be either fabricated or corrupt. Documentation below...


Only in your (and other dupees's) mind, David.

David Flick wrote:
KeithE wrote:Likewise the 4th graphic a plot is explicitly over Jan 2010 to Nov 2010 and is repeated below:
Image
1How can that be indicative of 2010 not being the highest year??? Now I did check this data plot (because I never trust a denialist source) and it appears to be an accurate plot for all 4 temperature readings). And the satellite data (both UAH and RSS) has shown a downward trend since Sept contrary to the direct surface measurements per GISS (Hadley has yet to report on Nov 2010 as the plot faithfully shows). 2As an aside, do remember that GISS and Hadley data have differing baseline years. (GISS's is 1951-1980 while Hadley's is 1961-1990 leading to a 0.08C bias between the them, so imagine raising the HadCRUT yellow line 0.08C to compare GISS to HadCRUT reductions of the surface data measurements in their differing detailed manners).

1) The GISS data (Hansen's data) Is fabricated data, as this article delineates...

You are really dense, David. Your linked article tried to question the fact that 2010 has been the hottest year ever. The evidence it offers are all plots that only shows 2010 data (example above). And when I point that obvious point out, you merely link the same article and say "as this article delineates". Geez, how dense can you be, but I'm not at all surprised.

I need to go back to work (Flight Intercept Test tomorrow - watch the news), so I don't have time to answer all your blusters that all the DATA is fabricated. You do not like the DATA, so it must be fabricated.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby David Flick » Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:09 pm

.
.
Gloabl Warming Alarmism's Worst Nightmare...

My son, Philip, is currently studying (for a D.M.A.) at the Frost School of Music at the University of Miami. He, of course, is in thte middle of that record breaking cold wave which is pushing across the entire southeastern part of the country. His apartment has no heating system. He attempted to purchase a space heater but couldn't locate one. So he purchased an electric blanket. He's still shivering...

Global warming alarmism's worst nightmare --in the year they famously claim is going to be the hottest year on record-- is headlines about record breaking temperatures. A google search turns up scores of articles about global warming alarmism's worst nightmare.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby KeithE » Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:56 pm

Ed Edwards wrote:
David Flick wrote:
Ed, the whole notion of 2010 being the hottest year in the last 131 years is a boatload of BS. ...


I yield the point to you. :brick: You are the resident expert on the subject of BS.

KeithE wrote: ...
2010 is actually the hottest year in the last 160 years. This plot shows the 131 years of GISS reduced DATA.
Image
But the Hadley DATA starts in 1850 and all those anomalies prior to 1880 are below 0.0C as shown here


Say KeithE, have your had any vocational or avocational reason to build a data base with 'running average' for display?
I have, it is lots of hard work, but interesting
Here one running average is the red line = 60 month running mean This is an average of the 30 months preceeding the point and the 30 months after the point (the monthly data provides the points). note that the read stops before the data does (on the right most line). The point after the end of the red line at the right does not have 30 more months of data (only 29). The red-line is fact, if I continued the red line to the right side, I would ahve to 'jimmy' some data, or make an educated opinion about what the future data might be. But that is, however one does it, an opinion. We each have our own opinion, and every right to it.


You understand running means perfectly Ed. I'd ask you to go across town and teach David rudimentary data analysis but it would take waaaaay toooooo long.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby KeithE » Wed Dec 15, 2010 12:11 am

David Flick wrote:.
.
Gloabl Warming Alarmism's Worst Nightmare...

My son, Philip, is currently studying (for a D.M.A.) at the Frost School of Music at the University of Miami. He, of course, is in thte middle of that record breaking cold wave which is pushing across the entire southeastern part of the country. His apartment has no heating system. He attempted to purchase a space heater but couldn't locate one. So he purchased an electric blanket. He's still shivering...

Global warming alarmism's worst nightmare --in the year they famously claim is going to be the hottest year on record-- is headlines about record breaking temperatures. A google search turns up scores of articles about global warming alarmism's worst nightmare.
.

.


Here are 90 record high temps just in the US on April 1, 2010. And it was not an April Fool's Day joke.

A fond aside for David: I got to admit, i knew you were being obtuse (for lack of a better word) and had not converted, but I hadn't registered with me that you were playing an April Fool's Day joke on BL on that morning until you popped up with the April's Fools icon. Good job.

Now back to the DATA.
Here is a summary of # of record highs vs record lows over the US. There have been more than twice as many record highs as record lows in the 2000's; more record lows than highs in the 70's. The ratio of record highs/record lows has climbed ever since the 70's just like the average temps in the US has:
Image

And it is not just the US. Read 17 countries have experienced record hgh temps in 2010; only 1 country has a record low. And these are not just daily record highs/lows for a locale, they are record highs/lows ever on any day at any locale in that country.
Only one country has set a record for its coldest-ever temperature in 2010. Guinea, in west Africa, recorded 1.4C (34.5F) in a nine-day cold snap at Mali-ville in the Labe region in January. Farmers lost most of their crops and animals.

Record temperatures in 2010:

Belarus, 7 August, 38.9C (102F) at Gomel
Ukraine, 1 August, 41.3C (106.3F), Lukhansk, Voznesensk
Cyprus, 1 August, 46.6C (115.9F), Lefconica
Finland, 29 July, 37.2C (99F), Joensuu
Qatar, 14 July, 50.4C (122.7F), Doha airport
Russia, 11 July, 44.0C (111.2F), Yashkul
Sudan, 25 June, 49.6C (121.3F), Dongola
Niger, 22 June, 47.1C (116.8F), Bilma
Saudi Arabia, 22 June, 52.0C (125.6F), Jeddah
Chad, 22 June, 47.6C (117.7F), Faya
Kuwait, 15 June, 52.6C (126.7F), Abdaly
Iraq, 14 June, 52.0C (125.6F), Basra
Pakistan, 26 May, 53.5C (128.3F), Mohenjo-daro
Burma, 12 May, 47C (116.6F), Myinmu
Ascension Island, 25 March, 34.9C (94.8F), Georgetown
Solomon Islands, 1 February, 36.1C (97F), Lata Nendo
Colombia, 24 January, 42.3C (108F), Puerto Salgar


Honesty compels that you tell the whole story David. Wouldn't you agree?
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby David Flick » Thu Dec 16, 2010 6:39 pm

.
.
Hasta la vista, global warming believers
Financial Post - December 16, 2010

It's over. The 15,000 delegates from 193 countries plus 10,000 hangers have packed their bags and left the Cancun luxury hotels where they were saving the Earth for two weeks. The purveyors of bad tequila (for technophobic young demonstrators) and fine wines (for delegates) are counting their money, and hotel employees are busily cleaning up the mess in preparation for the influx of Christmas tourists.

In the spirit of Copenhagen, civilization has again dodged the bullet of mass hysteria. A new dark age of deindustrialization has been evaded, and another nail has been driven into the coffin of the Kyoto accord. There was never any real possibility that major developing nations such as China and Brazil would line up to commit economic suicide, and agree to hobble their burgeoning industries by firmly limiting carbon dioxide emissions, while less developed countries would be free to do whatever they wish.

Continue reading...

.
.
.
.
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Ed Pettibone » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:24 am

David Flick wrote:.
.
Hasta la vista, global warming believers
Financial Post - December 16, 2010

It's over. The 15,000 delegates from 193 countries plus 10,000 hangers have packed their bags and left the Cancun luxury hotels where they were saving the Earth for two weeks. The purveyors of bad tequila (for technophobic young demonstrators) and fine wines (for delegates) are counting their money, and hotel employees are busily cleaning up the mess in preparation for the influx of Christmas tourists.

In the spirit of Copenhagen, civilization has again dodged the bullet of mass hysteria. A new dark age of deindustrialization has been evaded, and another nail has been driven into the coffin of the Kyoto accord. There was never any real possibility that major developing nations such as China and Brazil would line up to commit economic suicide, and agree to hobble their burgeoning industries by firmly limiting carbon dioxide emissions, while less developed countries would be free to do whatever they wish.

Continue reading...



And from Trudy's home town in w. Palm Beach Fl.

Record low lows and record low highs set in South Florida
Coldest temperatures since 1962
December 14, 2010|By Wayne K. Roustan, Sun Sentinel


South Florida set some record low lows and some record low highs during this second cold snap in as many weeks, according to the National Weather Service.

"This is kind of out of the ordinary for us," said meteorologist Barry Baxter.

There are three reasons for the cold weather.

"It's a combination of the cold air coming from the north, the trough and the dry conditions that we're in," he said.

At Palm Beach International Airport, a record low of 32 degrees was set early Tuesday morning beating the old record low of 33 degrees set in 1962. But a record low high of 55 degrees also was set during the day Tuesday, breaking the old record of 58 degrees in 1962, Baxter said.
User avatar
Ed Pettibone
 
Posts: 11963
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: .Burnt Hills, New York, Capital Area

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Jim » Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:09 am

I made a check to see how the actual data applied to Cancun. From 30 November to 12 December, about the tenure of the whole clambake, the temperature every day was either a new record for the low reading or equal to the existing record for the low – every day. A sort of review: Cancun-by-the-sea…Farewell!.
Jim
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Ed Edwards » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:00 pm

Tee Hee! ELder Bro. David, A quote you made came from Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
The temp there was -11°C. The Average temp in Decembers in Calgary is -1°C high and
-13°C low. The temperature in Calgary was average today.


-
Keep the Planet Cool :angel:
( for the physical Millennial Messianic Reign of Jesus )


Image

-- Ed Edwards, AGW Dude
(AGW = Anthropogenic Global Warming)
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby David Flick » Sat Dec 18, 2010 7:39 am

.
.
Ed Edwards wrote:Tee Hee! ELder Bro. David, A quote you made came from Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
The temp there was -11°C. The Average temp in Decembers in Calgary is -1°C high and
-13°C low. The temperature in Calgary was average today.

Ed, the logical conclusion is that an average temperature in Calgary means there's no warming. If there's a warming trend --even a mild one-- it wouldn't be "average."

Tee Hee back atcha! :wink:
.
.
.
.
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby David Flick » Sat Dec 18, 2010 8:08 am

KeithE wrote:Here are 90 record high temps just in the US on April 1, 2010. And it was not an April Fool's Day joke.

A fond aside for David: I got to admit, i knew you were being obtuse (for lack of a better word) and had not converted, but I hadn't registered with me that you were playing an April Fool's Day joke on BL on that morning until you popped up with the April's Fools icon. Good job.

Now back to the DATA.
Here is a summary of # of record highs vs record lows over the US. There have been more than twice as many record highs as record lows in the 2000's; more record lows than highs in the 70's. The ratio of record highs/record lows has climbed ever since the 70's just like the average temps in the US has:
Image

And it is not just the US. Read 17 countries have experienced record hgh temps in 2010; only 1 country has a record low. And these are not just daily record highs/lows for a locale, they are record highs/lows ever on any day at any locale in that country.
Only one country has set a record for its coldest-ever temperature in 2010. Guinea, in west Africa, recorded 1.4C (34.5F) in a nine-day cold snap at Mali-ville in the Labe region in January. Farmers lost most of their crops and animals.

Record temperatures in 2010:

Belarus, 7 August, 38.9C (102F) at Gomel
Ukraine, 1 August, 41.3C (106.3F), Lukhansk, Voznesensk
Cyprus, 1 August, 46.6C (115.9F), Lefconica
Finland, 29 July, 37.2C (99F), Joensuu
Qatar, 14 July, 50.4C (122.7F), Doha airport
Russia, 11 July, 44.0C (111.2F), Yashkul
Sudan, 25 June, 49.6C (121.3F), Dongola
Niger, 22 June, 47.1C (116.8F), Bilma
Saudi Arabia, 22 June, 52.0C (125.6F), Jeddah
Chad, 22 June, 47.6C (117.7F), Faya
Kuwait, 15 June, 52.6C (126.7F), Abdaly
Iraq, 14 June, 52.0C (125.6F), Basra
Pakistan, 26 May, 53.5C (128.3F), Mohenjo-daro
Burma, 12 May, 47C (116.6F), Myinmu
Ascension Island, 25 March, 34.9C (94.8F), Georgetown
Solomon Islands, 1 February, 36.1C (97F), Lata Nendo
Colombia, 24 January, 42.3C (108F), Puerto Salgar


Honesty compels that you tell the whole story David. Wouldn't you agree?

I am telling the whole story. What makes you think I'm not? Keith, that article to which you linked is from the Guardian (the UK's chief purveyor of AGW propaganda) appeared way back in August. Am I supposed to be impressed? Well, I'm not. Honesty compels me tell you that in the last month or so, there have been scores record low temperatures at many locations all over the globe. I haven't taken the time to do the research, but beginning with the 6 straight days of record lows in Cancun, to the scores of record lows all over the the southeastern part of the USA, to the record lows presently occurring in the in the UK and all across Europe, there have been literally scores of record low temperatures.

Truth of the matter is that the record low temperatures that are now occurring world wide are trumping your record warm temperatures. Don't have time at the moment, but I'll attempt to compile a list of record cold temperatures that have occurred across the globe in just then last month. For starters, however, I'll post a link to an article that appeared just yesterday: Coldest December since records began as temperatures plummet to minus 10C bringing travel chaos across Britain
.
.
.
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby KeithE » Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:59 am

David Flick wrote:
Keithe wrote:
Honesty compels that you tell the whole story David. Wouldn't you agree?

I am telling the whole story. What makes you think I'm not? Keith, that article to which you linked is from the Guardian (the UK's chief purveyor of AGW propaganda) appeared way back in August. Am I supposed to be impressed? Well, I'm not.

Best I could find about the subject on a global basis. Repeated here: Guardian article.
It did give all the record highs and lows by date/station but only for early 2010 (jan- aug). Much better than your reports of early Dec lows at UK and Cancun. I would like to see a link to its data source, since there may be more DATA there on this subject over a longer period and I'll admit the Guardian may have been guilty of cherry picking (don't know w/o the DATA). But at least they recognized the need to mention both highs and lows and it was global in nature. So if it cherry picked, David's sources cherry pit picked.

But David the article that told the whole truth (both number of highs as well as number of record lows) for the US since the 50's was by University Cooperation for Atmospheric Reserach not the Guardian.

Here it is again and it is a summary of # of record highs vs the # of record lows since the 50's (albeit only over the US). Here is the key plot (which I haven't been able to make small enough) but you can easily go to the link above to see the whole dataset.
Image
UCAR's Conclusion wrote:The study team focused on weather stations that have been operating since 1950. They found that the ratio of record daily high to record daily low temperatures slightly exceeded one to one in the 1950s, dipped below that level in the 1960s and 1970s, and has risen since the 1980s. The results reflect changes in U.S. average temperatures, which rose in the 1950s, stabilized in the 1960s, and then began a warming trend in the late 1970s.


David wrote:Honesty compels me tell you that in the last month or so, there have been scores record low temperatures at many locations all over the globe. I haven't taken the time to do the research, but beginning with the 6 straight days of record lows in Cancun, to the scores of record lows all over the the southeastern part of the USA, to the record lows presently occurring in the in the UK and all across Europe, there have been literally scores of record low temperatures.

Remember to make you point you must count both record numbers of high as well as numbers of record lows and do so over the a long period of time (e.g. decades) and over as big a region as possible. Else drop the word "honestly". And preferably over the whole globe, but I have not been able to find anythng such data in a summarized form (and doubt that it exists). Of course one could find every temp reading made anywhere and start counting.

David wrote: Truth of the matter is that the record low temperatures that are now occurring world wide are trumping your record warm temperatures. Don't have time at the moment, but I'll attempt to compile a list of record cold temperatures that have occurred across the globe in just then last month. For starters, however, I'll post a link to an article that appeared just yesterday: Coldest December since records began as temperatures plummet to minus 10C bringing travel chaos across Britain

DATA David. It is necessary component to any statement like you made
Truth of the matter is that the record low temperatures that are now occurring world wide are trumping your record warm temperatures.

One does not use words like "trumping" unless you can back it up. It really translates "boy I hope I'm right" w/o the DATA.

And I note that David's statement in red above means that he is really on a one-sided search, not an honest one!

I'll concede that Dec in UK has been cold. The article quotes the Met Office which is a bonafide source for such DATA. But let's look at what the same Met Office has said about the long term global temp trend.
Image

I realise that this is a different parameter than the ratios of record highs / record lows, but it is related and actually more to the our major point of contention.

Of course, if the DATA is all FABRICATED in David's mind, it is no use arguing. If David doesn't like the DATA he either (1) ignores it, or (2) selectively picks small sibbets of that DATA that support him (e.g. UK or Cancun in early Dec 2010). Actually David just waits for the next denialist article. Now that should tell the whole honest story about GW (extreme TIC).

Now I have not found a truly global set of data that counts the record number of highs and record number of lows as a long term trend. But I'm not going waste my weekend doing so.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Thread XI

Postby Ed Edwards » Sat Dec 18, 2010 12:28 pm

Yes, KeithE, it is the so called 'global warming alarmists' standing on solid ground here;
by contrast the so called 'global warming denialists' standing on a shifting load of BS.

Reminds me of back in 1998 when I was arguing about when the 21st Century (2001-2100, yes
I always put the years, when I speak of the Century). People would argue about the year zero.
Sorry, in the AD (Anno Domini, Latin for 'year of our Lord') and BC (before Christ) system the
day after 31 Dec BC 0001is 1 Jan AD 0001, There is no year zero (0) that is neither BC nor AD.
This is NOT a matter of opinion to be debated, this is a matter of DEFINITION. Recall that
on 1 Jan AD 0001 nobody but some shepherds knew the Lord had arrived, and soon some
Wise Men caught on.

What will happen in 2011 is still a matter of Opinion.
What happened in 2010 (literally 1 Dec 2009 to 30 Nov 2010) is a fact, data is still being
colledcted. Current figure for the one number repesenting the 2010 temperature of the
whole earth for the whole phsical year is now at the ±0.05°C level.


Ed Edwards wrote:http://climateprogress.org/2010/12/12/nasa-explains-how-europe-can-be-so-cold-amidst-the-hottest-november-and-hottest-year-on-record/

of 12 Dec 2010 says this FACT

From Jan to Nov 2010, the average earth surface
temperature offset (difference) from the
1951-1980 baseline was 0.66°C ±0.05°C. The actual
temperature lies between +0.61°C and +0.62°C

...
My conclusional opinion is:
Global Warming is still here. And the odds favor the statement being true:
"2010 is the warmest earth-wide year of the last 131 years".
Keep the Planet Cool :angel:
( for the physical Millennial Messianic Reign of Jesus )


Image

-- Ed Edwards, AGW Dude
(AGW = Anthropogenic Global Warming)
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Previous

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron