Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- Gamecock on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on The End Of Polar Bears
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Richard E Fritz on HUD Climate Advisor
- Richard E Fritz on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Robertvd on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Robertvd on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Bob G on Ellen Flees To The UK
I was looking at this the other day. What’s funny about this is that this is a plot of surface temps on a NASA website that is all about satellite imagery.
NASA GISS must be the only NASA agency still measuring on the ground. Maybe they’ll get with the space age someday.
and there baseline….time to bring it back inline with the last 30 “normal” years…nah….why let good BS get in the way of a HOT graph
Its much more difficult to apply algorerhythmic fudgetery to data collected from sat. So fer now, we keep it on the ground.
I really pains me to see what this insanity has done to an institution such as NASA.
They can make it appear warm anywhere they like since they omit a very large number of ground based measurement sites and extrapolate 1200 km across regions where they have no data.
Thanks Steve and Anthony
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/20/giss-arctic-trends-disagree-with-satellite-data/
The map description comes as 2009.
Is this a summary of 2009 overall estimated anomaly or what?
The link in full is this:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/42000/42392/GISS_temperature_2009_lrg.png
Etudiant:
It does not matter what it is labeled. It is from GISS and it is Garbage!
Now they are saying (after the fact) that the warm Arctic is making it unusually cold in mid-latitudes where most people live. Make up your freaking mind!!!
It doesn’t matter whether this winter is particularly cold or not, what’s important is the long-term trends, and the long term trends clearly show that the earth is warming.
Also, as far as I can tell, the only issue with GISS and the extrapolation of data over 1200km is in the arctic, where temperature data is sparse. If you ignore the arctic region on this map, you still see a lot more red than blue.
Yes, it is really hot out there.
Katie:
Truly long term trends show a cooling climate. However if you are looking at the recovery from the LIA then you are partly correct. The best reference to any warming is from the PROPERLY adjusted data. The raw data shows no warming for the last 60 years or longer.
This winter being especially cold goes against the AGW theory and if you remove all questionable records you will have nothing to base any results on because more than 90% of the globe is not well represented in the historic climate records.
The only thing wrong with GISS is the fact that it even exists!
Katie
The satellites show only a very small temp increase since 1979 and since about 1995 no increase at all. There is considerable evidence that global temps in the 1930’s were at a similar level to today.
And of course as Mike says, we would expect a moderate amount of warming coming out of the LIA.
“This winter being especially cold goes against the AGW theory”
Mike, like I said, one year doesn’t prove anything either way. Anyways, if we actually look at temperatures around the globe, not just North America and Europe, this year is not particularly cold. The temperatures in North America and Europe are being influenced by the North Atlantic oscillation, which is currently in a negative phase.
“The satellites show only a very small temp increase since 1979 and since about 1995 no increase at all.”
Paul, I consider a 0.4 degree increase in 30 years more than a small temperature increase. And when you say that we would expect warming coming out of the LIA, if this is referring to an increase in the sun’s activity (which is thought to have caused the end of the LIA), the sun’s activity has been about level for the past 30 years, so this warming must be due to some other cause.
From 1910 to 1940, temperatures also rose 0.4 degrees. Was that due to SUVs?
So like the 11 year solar cycles are a figment of our imagination and we don’t have variable solar storms ?
Katie
The temperature patterns we see make sense when you look at PDO cycles.