http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt
Since 1998, US temperatures have been dropping at a rate of more than 4ºC per century.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
Recent Comments
- dm on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- dm on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Tel on COP29 Preview
- Robertvd on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- GW on A Giant Eyesore
- conrad ziefle on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Greg in NZ on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- arn on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Trevor on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- czechlist on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
But that’s not “normal”…..
We have sat back and allowed these people to define what “normal” is.
….and their definition of “normal” is that temperatures will continue to increase
Big trouble coming. If i extrapolate my weather stations data, i have lost 4 C in 5 years. At this pace my annual temperature will be -69.2 in the year 2100.
Perhaps Greenpeace will allow me to use more “renewable” energy to keep the mile deep ice off my house….
But this can’t be real, I saw hansen’s red hot earth graph….
ok, enough rambling…
With a very quiet sun, we should be buiding the biggest SUVs possilbe and drill for all the oil we can to prevent global cooling and perhaps another Ice Age.
I love cherry ice cream. I love cherry soda. I even love munching on apple seeds because they have a cherry flavor.
However I don’t like cherry picked information. Any intelligent 12 year old, interested in the subject, knows that 1998 was a super El Nino year. Therefore, you can create an artificial and misleading drop in temperatures by cherry picking 1998, an old Moncktonian trick to hide the incline.
When it’s done professionally you begin in 1979 which is the first year of data for the UAH satellite temp chart (put out by your beloed Roy Spencer) then you will see the contrived and bogus nature of such a claim.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_May_20111.gif
Right, the last 13 years of unprecedented global warming is cherry picking. Are you a maroon?
Somebody needs either lasik of some Piracetam.
The last 13 years in isolation from the last 35 years is cherry picking. Throughout the last 35 years there has been an increase of approximately .7F; about half of the entire rise of 1.4 since the Industrial Revolution.
Based on Roy Spencer’s chart, from 1979 to the present, there has been a rise of approximately .54F. 1979 was a few years past the first temperature jump and flattening.
As I’ve said before, there have been two such jumps in those past 35 years. First one in the late 1970s and the second one in 1995/1998. They come out as a staircase pattern (rise->flattening; another rise followed by yet another flattening; etc).
So repeat after me: 30+ years of info; 30+ years of info; 30+ years of info; 30+ years of info . . .
More years good; less years bad. More years good; less years bad. More years good; less years bad.
What a load of crap. We are in the exponential portion of Hansen’s warming curve. The oceans are supposed to be warming like crazy and the atmosphere trapping more and more heat. Temperatures can’t be going down now.
Ill wind blowing at it again? Yawn……..
What a load of crap. We are in the exponential portion of Hansen’s warming curve. The oceans are supposed to be warming like crazy and the atmosphere trapping more and more heat. Temperatures can’t be going down now.”
First Steve, temperatures are not going down except in those manipulated charts.
Second, I don’t see any sense in jumbling up together exponential curves; heat retention and oceans warming “like crazy” in the same breath. The reasons being:
a. Your perception of what those exponential curves represent is distorted. That “exponential” curve can be flattened out real easily by stretching the X axis and compressing the Y axis. The reality represented by the curve is still bad, but not in the distorted sense.
b. The Oceans are what absorb and then release most heat (90%+). They have their own way of doing things, not yours.
The dynamics of how the ocean absorbs and releases heat produces a thermal lag of about 30 years in order to get the full temperature rise. We are, at this point due for another 1F on top of our 1.4F (above industrial revolution levels) assuming all fossil fuel burning were to magically stop today.
c.
What?
LOL.
So even YOU admit it has not warmed since 1998.
Thank you.
“I even love munching on apple seeds because they have a cherry flavor.”
Apple seeds also contain small amounts of cyanide. If you eat enough of them, we will be free of your stupidity.
When it’s done professionally you begin in 1979
What is so magical about 1979? I really can’t believe you are that thick Ill, so I assume you are being extremely devious. Of course I could be wrong.
Even Homer admits the US was as warm as in the 1930’s as 1998.
“What is so magical about 1979?”
It’s when the UAH satellite temperature information begins. What’s so incomprehensible about that? The bottom line is that it’s deceptive to pick out 1998 where a misleading and artefactual decline can be produced.
Instead of telling me what’s so important about the first year of satellite recorde temperature it is you who has to justify why 1998 has been chosen out of all the years. Isn’t anyone capable of understanding that you always, always use the greatest amount of information possible to get the best conclusions?
It is irrelevant that 1934 was a hot year in the United States. The United States is only 1.8% of the world.
Yeah, i guess Ill wind is still blowing maybe a Spicy Weener
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdcSxM7XNG4
“It is irrelevant that 1934 was a hot year in the United States. The United States is only 1.8% of the world.”
It was hot in Canada too. What % are we up to now? I will keep looking … soon that % will no longer be irrelevant.
The US may be only 1.8% of the world, but Philadelphia last July occupied at least 10% of the globe. The rest was occupied by Moscow.
An intelligent 12 year old (at least one that has examined weather data) would consider a 1979 starting year to be prime cherry picking, as it is widely known that the late 1970’s were abnormally cold. In fact the period from 1960-1979 was noted for significant global cooling (hence the Ice Age scare). Much of the 1980-1998 “warming” was just a return to pre-1960 normals.
“When it’s done professionally you begin in 1979 which is the first year of data”
1) How convenient that there were no satelites for the previous 30 years (cooling). I would love the see the trend with satelite data for 1950-1979.
2) The baseline is 1981 … you should go by that. 1979 to 1981 alone gives 0.2C (or almost 0.4F) temp rise … a little biased IMHO.
Starting in 1979 is cherry picking too………
http://www.drroyspencer.com/library/pics/2000-years-of-global-temperature.jpg
Oh my Gawwd! You chose a chart that:
1. Ends in the 1930s! And did you notice the dotted line?
2. Is most probably based on dendrochronology which one of the posters here disparaged. He did so because I brought the same chart up in order to show that the cycles he spoke of (PDO, etc) where not indicated there.
I guess that those charts are good when it’s convenient to you and worthless to when I bring it up. Four legs good, two legs bad. Four legs good, two legs better.
3. The usual Orwellian double standard of you using manipulated short term information when it’s to your convenience and then, when you’re told that you need 30+ years for the type of analysis that you’re doing you change the goalposts by bringing up even longer term trends that have nothing to do with the original issue.
Face it, there has been no plummeting of temperatures ever since they started rising in the late 1970s.
Looks like your ice-free Arctic prediction could end up going for a shitter:
http://iceagenow.com/Earth_may_enter_a_Little_Ice_Age_within_a_decade.htm
Since you/I/we don’t like tree rings, let’s put recent temperature rise into perspective using ice cores from Greenland:
http://iceagenow.com/2010—where_does_it_fit_in_the_warmest_year_list-9099th.htm
By the way, I looked for (and found) surface temperature data from 9000 years ago; turns out, James Hansen adjusted it all down by 3C, thereby making 2010 the hottest year since the last ice age began. I thought that was a little dishonest, so I didn’t include it. UAH only has satelite data from 1979, so I was out of luck there.
1. well yes, did you notice the point that you can start any where and show anything?
http://www.openyoureyesnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/UAH_LT_1979_thru_Mar_20111.gif
2. Wasn’t me, so what’s your point?
3. No, the original issue is that the whole premise of this “science” is based on “abnormal”, when no one has a clue what’s normal.
Face it, yourself……
Show me proof of what is the normal temperature?
Is the planet too cool, and it’s returning to normal?
Is the planet too warm, and it’s getting warmer?
I do believe IWB is a migrant farm worker because S/HE/IT does such a good job CHERRY PICKING then claims every one else is doing the same. If the study is based on Cherry Picking as one Dedro Climatologist claimed then Cherry Picking is the rule of the game. All the IPCC reports are composed of Cherry Picked data as that is what the IPCC was formed to do, gather Cherry Picked data to support the agenda and promote further research. Everything from UEA, GISS, NOAA, MET, and any number or other advocacy groups is based on Cherry Picked information.
Cherry Picked statistical methods give whatever results one desires, That is the magic of statistics. I certainly enjoy calims of smoothing out “KNOWN” Noise. Especially as a signal analyst that realizes that what is noise to one receiver is signal to another. It is a matter of recognizing multiple signals intertwined that represents long term regional weather patterns. The globe is much colder than the “Normal for the entire Holocene period since 15,000 years ago but the globe is warmer than the Normal for the last 800,000 years or even the last 38 million years since the start of the current Ice Age. Even if taking the recent 5,000 years the globe is in a cooling phase of the Glacial Interglacial pattern and cooler than 5000 years ago.
The preceding was CHERRY PICKED! It is the main rule of the GAME!