America’s Most Advanced Climate Station Data Shows US In A 10-Year Cooling Trend Read more: http:

[Freewill]

The response is going to be that the US is not the world, only a small part. But consider what would be said if things were reversed. If the data shown indicated that the US was warming and the rest of the world was cooling. Those who seem to think we can do something about the climate would be saying that the US has the best equipment thus we have to believe the US data. Well I agree.

Go here to see the actual NOAA data:

National Temperature Index National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

From the linked article:

Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.

The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.

Read more: Advanced Climate Station Data Shows U.S. In A Cooling Trend The Daily Caller

The usual denier cult pseudo-science and deliberately twisted facts, sourced from fraudulent denier cult blogs.

For a good explanation of the lies in the OP, check this out...

The Daily Caller's Bad Science on 'Global Cooling'
Newsweek
BY ZOË SCHLANGER
6/18/15
(excerpts)
First of all, the data does not show a cooling trend. Second of all, even if it did (which it doesn’t!), it wouldn’t be proof that the globe is indeed in a global warming “pause,” which is the secondary argument of the article.

"It is a favorite tactic of those who resist climate regulation to cherry-pick data from limited time periods and limited geographical areas to draw broad conclusions that are contrary to the overwhelming body of climate science," says Michael Gerrard, a law professor and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.


***

A. I did not cherry pick data
B. I provided a very neutral site and provide a link to that site.
C. Quoting a quote is not much of an argument.

 

[RollingThunder]

The response is going to be that the US is not the world, only a small part. But consider what would be said if things were reversed. If the data shown indicated that the US was warming and the rest of the world was cooling. Those who seem to think we can do something about the climate would be saying that the US has the best equipment thus we have to believe the US data. Well I agree.

Go here to see the actual NOAA data:

National Temperature Index National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

From the linked article:

Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.

The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.

Read more: Advanced Climate Station Data Shows U.S. In A Cooling Trend The Daily Caller

The usual denier cult pseudo-science and deliberately twisted facts, sourced from fraudulent denier cult blogs.

For a good explanation of the lies in the OP, check this out...

The Daily Caller's Bad Science on 'Global Cooling'
Newsweek
BY ZOË SCHLANGER
6/18/15
(excerpts)
First of all, the data does not show a cooling trend. Second of all, even if it did (which it doesn’t!), it wouldn’t be proof that the globe is indeed in a global warming “pause,” which is the secondary argument of the article.

"It is a favorite tactic of those who resist climate regulation to cherry-pick data from limited time periods and limited geographical areas to draw broad conclusions that are contrary to the overwhelming body of climate science," says Michael Gerrard, a law professor and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.


***

A. I did not cherry pick data

Your source definitely did "cherry-pick" the data!

B. I provided a very neutral site and provide a link to that site.

The 'Daily Caller' and 'WattsUpMyButt' are NOT "neutral sites".

C. Quoting a quote is not much of an argument.

That was an excerpt (obviously) from the article, not "an argument. Read the Newsweek article for the facts that debunk your fraudulent OP!

 

[Freewill]

The response is going to be that the US is not the world, only a small part. But consider what would be said if things were reversed. If the data shown indicated that the US was warming and the rest of the world was cooling. Those who seem to think we can do something about the climate would be saying that the US has the best equipment thus we have to believe the US data. Well I agree.

Go here to see the actual NOAA data:

National Temperature Index National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

From the linked article:

Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.

The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.

Read more: Advanced Climate Station Data Shows U.S. In A Cooling Trend The Daily Caller

The usual denier cult pseudo-science and deliberately twisted facts, sourced from fraudulent denier cult blogs.

For a good explanation of the lies in the OP, check this out...

The Daily Caller's Bad Science on 'Global Cooling'
Newsweek
BY ZOË SCHLANGER
6/18/15
(excerpts)
First of all, the data does not show a cooling trend. Second of all, even if it did (which it doesn’t!), it wouldn’t be proof that the globe is indeed in a global warming “pause,” which is the secondary argument of the article.

"It is a favorite tactic of those who resist climate regulation to cherry-pick data from limited time periods and limited geographical areas to draw broad conclusions that are contrary to the overwhelming body of climate science," says Michael Gerrard, a law professor and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.


***

A. I did not cherry pick data

Your source definitely did "cherry-pick" the data!

B. I provided a very neutral site and provide a link to that site.

The 'Daily Caller' and 'WattsUpMyButt' are NOT "neutral sites".

C. Quoting a quote is not much of an argument.

That was an excerpt (obviously) from the article, not "an argument. Read the Newsweek article for the facts that debunk your fraudulent OP!

The headline provide said that the US has shown a 10 year cooling spell. The site I provided for back up the NOAA site. Which if you go to that site what is said in the OP is true. You may think that perhaps the largest industrilize nation in the world cooling is not an indication of anything. Maybe you are right but what was said in the OP is supported by NOAA.

 

[RollingThunder]

The response is going to be that the US is not the world, only a small part. But consider what would be said if things were reversed. If the data shown indicated that the US was warming and the rest of the world was cooling. Those who seem to think we can do something about the climate would be saying that the US has the best equipment thus we have to believe the US data. Well I agree.

Go here to see the actual NOAA data:

National Temperature Index National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

From the linked article:

Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.

The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.

Read more: Advanced Climate Station Data Shows U.S. In A Cooling Trend The Daily Caller

The usual denier cult pseudo-science and deliberately twisted facts, sourced from fraudulent denier cult blogs.

For a good explanation of the lies in the OP, check this out...

The Daily Caller's Bad Science on 'Global Cooling'
Newsweek
BY ZOË SCHLANGER
6/18/15
(excerpts)
First of all, the data does not show a cooling trend. Second of all, even if it did (which it doesn’t!), it wouldn’t be proof that the globe is indeed in a global warming “pause,” which is the secondary argument of the article.

"It is a favorite tactic of those who resist climate regulation to cherry-pick data from limited time periods and limited geographical areas to draw broad conclusions that are contrary to the overwhelming body of climate science," says Michael Gerrard, a law professor and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.


***

A. I did not cherry pick data

Your source definitely did "cherry-pick" the data!

B. I provided a very neutral site and provide a link to that site.

The 'Daily Caller' and 'WattsUpMyButt' are NOT "neutral sites".

C. Quoting a quote is not much of an argument.

That was an excerpt (obviously) from the article, not "an argument. Read the Newsweek article for the facts that debunk your fraudulent OP!

The headline provide said that the US has shown a 10 year cooling spell. The site I provided for back up the NOAA site. Which if you go to that site what is said in the OP is true. You may think that perhaps the largest industrilize nation in the world cooling is not an indication of anything. Maybe you are right but what was said in the OP is supported by NOAA.

Those are your denier cult delusions, fed by the propaganda pushers for the fossil fuel industry.

In reality, as the article from Newsweek that I cited explains.....

The author quotes Anthony Watts, a former meteorologist who runs a blog dedicated to climate change denial. For the graphs on which The Daily Caller article focuses, Watts used monthly temperature data from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) from 2005 to 2015.

There are two major problems here.

First, in 2005, the USCRN was far from complete. As of January 1, 2005, only 69 of its 114 temperature monitoring stations, or just 60 percent of the ultimate total, had been installed, according to NOAA’s Howard Diamond, who is the program manager of USCRN. The last and 114th station wasn’t installed until September 2008, which means that comparing the data from 2005 to 2008 with data after 2008 produces a severely lopsided analysis. This is especially important because of the geographic nature of temperature monitoring: Since only stations in certain areas of the U.S. were up and running before 2008, there is a lot of information missing from the averages of those early years.

If Watts had chosen to exclude the data from before the USCRN was complete and start his analysis on, say, January 1, 2009, to the present, he’d actually see see “a slightly increasing trend of temperature anomaly data in the contiguous U.S.,” according to Diamond, as shown in the graph below. “So the same upward trends in temperature data we have seen have been and continue to be the case.” In other words, the U.S. is still getting warmer.

A graph showing the trends in temperature anomalies monitored by USCRN from 2009 to 2015, layered over with data sets from two older climate monitoring networks, the U.S. Historical Climatology Network and U.S. Climate Divisional Dataset. The slight warming trend for this period is consistent across all three data sets. USCRN/NOAA

 

[Freewill]

The response is going to be that the US is not the world, only a small part. But consider what would be said if things were reversed. If the data shown indicated that the US was warming and the rest of the world was cooling. Those who seem to think we can do something about the climate would be saying that the US has the best equipment thus we have to believe the US data. Well I agree.

Go here to see the actual NOAA data:

National Temperature Index National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

From the linked article:

Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.

The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.

Read more: Advanced Climate Station Data Shows U.S. In A Cooling Trend The Daily Caller

The usual denier cult pseudo-science and deliberately twisted facts, sourced from fraudulent denier cult blogs.

For a good explanation of the lies in the OP, check this out...

The Daily Caller's Bad Science on 'Global Cooling'
Newsweek
BY ZOË SCHLANGER
6/18/15
(excerpts)
First of all, the data does not show a cooling trend. Second of all, even if it did (which it doesn’t!), it wouldn’t be proof that the globe is indeed in a global warming “pause,” which is the secondary argument of the article.

"It is a favorite tactic of those who resist climate regulation to cherry-pick data from limited time periods and limited geographical areas to draw broad conclusions that are contrary to the overwhelming body of climate science," says Michael Gerrard, a law professor and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.


***

A. I did not cherry pick data

Your source definitely did "cherry-pick" the data!

B. I provided a very neutral site and provide a link to that site.

The 'Daily Caller' and 'WattsUpMyButt' are NOT "neutral sites".

C. Quoting a quote is not much of an argument.

That was an excerpt (obviously) from the article, not "an argument. Read the Newsweek article for the facts that debunk your fraudulent OP!

The headline provide said that the US has shown a 10 year cooling spell. The site I provided for back up the NOAA site. Which if you go to that site what is said in the OP is true. You may think that perhaps the largest industrilize nation in the world cooling is not an indication of anything. Maybe you are right but what was said in the OP is supported by NOAA.

Those are your denier cult delusions, fed by the propaganda pushers for the fossil fuel industry.

In reality, as the article from Newsweek that I cited explains.....

The author quotes Anthony Watts, a former meteorologist who runs a blog dedicated to climate change denial. For the graphs on which The Daily Caller article focuses, Watts used monthly temperature data from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) from 2005 to 2015.

There are two major problems here.

First, in 2005, the USCRN was far from complete. As of January 1, 2005, only 69 of its 114 temperature monitoring stations, or just 60 percent of the ultimate total, had been installed, according to NOAA’s Howard Diamond, who is the program manager of USCRN. The last and 114th station wasn’t installed until September 2008, which means that comparing the data from 2005 to 2008 with data after 2008 produces a severely lopsided analysis. This is especially important because of the geographic nature of temperature monitoring: Since only stations in certain areas of the U.S. were up and running before 2008, there is a lot of information missing from the averages of those early years.

If Watts had chosen to exclude the data from before the USCRN was complete and start his analysis on, say, January 1, 2009, to the present, he’d actually see see “a slightly increasing trend of temperature anomaly data in the contiguous U.S.,” according to Diamond, as shown in the graph below. “So the same upward trends in temperature data we have seen have been and continue to be the case.” In other words, the U.S. is still getting warmer.

A graph showing the trends in temperature anomalies monitored by USCRN from 2009 to 2015, layered over with data sets from two older climate monitoring networks, the U.S. Historical Climatology Network and U.S. Climate Divisional Dataset. The slight warming trend for this period is consistent across all three data sets. USCRN/NOAA

Who is cherry picking? The OP said the last 10 years, that I proved to you with NOAA numbers. Mine were average temperatures what you provided is the temperature anomalies and you only went back 6 years.

 

[RollingThunder]

Who is cherry picking? The OP said the last 10 years, that I proved to you with NOAA numbers. Mine were average temperatures what you provided is the temperature anomalies and you only went back 6 years.

*
Are you kidding? The first four years of your supposed "last 10 years" of 'average national temperatures' data were very incomplete because the station network wasn't completed and all in place until the very end of 2008, so the earlier data was useless for computing real national averages. That's exactly why the fraudulent denier cult blog used that earlier 'data' - to skew the results so they could generate a little meaningless propaganda - and that's why it's called "cherry-picked".

What exactly can't you understand about the info you just read? Here, read it again.

There are two major problems here. First, in 2005, the USCRN was far from complete. As of January 1, 2005, only 69 of its 114 temperature monitoring stations, or just 60 percent of the ultimate total, had been installed, according to NOAA’s Howard Diamond, who is the program manager of USCRN. The last and 114th station wasn’t installed until September 2008, which means that comparing the data from 2005 to 2008 with data after 2008 produces a severely lopsided analysis. This is especially important because of the geographic nature of temperature monitoring: Since only stations in certain areas of the U.S. were up and running before 2008, there is a lot of information missing from the averages of those early years.

If Watts had chosen to exclude the data from before the USCRN was complete and start his analysis on, say, January 1, 2009, to the present, he’d actually see see “a slightly increasing trend of temperature anomaly data in the contiguous U.S.,” according to Diamond, as shown in the graph below. “So the same upward trends in temperature data we have seen have been and continue to be the case.” In other words, the U.S. is still getting warmer.


***

 

[gtopa1]

What is the latest stupidity of the AGW mob now?? The bloody polar bears again!!

ar Status Report

This map by the Norwegian Polar Institute shows the status of the 19 polar bear subpopulations according to the latest IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group report: 3 are declining, 6 are stable, 1 is increasing, and 9 have insufficient data to make a determination. Details...

A rather large area where they are clueless about numbers!!

A different site has come up with this.

In summary, in order for the worldwide estimate of polar bears to have remained virtually unchanged since 2001, the global population must have increased by 2,650-5,700 bears (average 4,175) between 2001 and 2013. These increases did not off-set the slight declines in other subpopulations, as the unchanging totals imply, but were in addition to them.

In other words, it appears that the global population of polar bears could not have remained stable since 2001 – it had to have increased by an average of almost 4,200 bears!

Global population of polar bears has increased by 2 650-5 700 since 2001 polarbearscience

Let's face it; polar bear numbers are a bloody guess and can mean anything depending on what spin you put on them!!

Did someone say ice cover??

Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis

2015 is within the range though a tad below average...but not by much.

In short; no joy for the catastrophists here.

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

Who is cherry picking? The OP said the last 10 years, that I proved to you with NOAA numbers. Mine were average temperatures what you provided is the temperature anomalies and you only went back 6 years.

*
Are you kidding? The first four years of your supposed "last 10 years" of 'average national temperatures' data were very incomplete because the station network wasn't completed and all in place until the very end of 2008, so the earlier data was useless for computing real national averages. That's exactly why the fraudulent denier cult blog used that earlier 'data' - to skew the results so they could generate a little meaningless propaganda - and that's why it's called "cherry-picked".

What exactly can't you understand about the info you just read? Here, read it again.

There are two major problems here. First, in 2005, the USCRN was far from complete. As of January 1, 2005, only 69 of its 114 temperature monitoring stations, or just 60 percent of the ultimate total, had been installed, according to NOAA’s Howard Diamond, who is the program manager of USCRN. The last and 114th station wasn’t installed until September 2008, which means that comparing the data from 2005 to 2008 with data after 2008 produces a severely lopsided analysis. This is especially important because of the geographic nature of temperature monitoring: Since only stations in certain areas of the U.S. were up and running before 2008, there is a lot of information missing from the averages of those early years.

If Watts had chosen to exclude the data from before the USCRN was complete and start his analysis on, say, January 1, 2009, to the present, he’d actually see see “a slightly increasing trend of temperature anomaly data in the contiguous U.S.,” according to Diamond, as shown in the graph below. “So the same upward trends in temperature data we have seen have been and continue to be the case.” In other words, the U.S. is still getting warmer.


***

So if the accurate data set measuring devices weren't complete by 2008 then what are you comparing the data to...incomplete and inaccurate historical data??

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

Oh: and Antarctic sea ice is WAY UP!!!

Greg

 

[Billy_Bob]

The usual denier cult pseudo-science and deliberately twisted facts, sourced from fraudulent denier cult blogs.

For a good explanation of the lies in the OP, check this out...

The Daily Caller's Bad Science on 'Global Cooling'
Newsweek
BY ZOË SCHLANGER
6/18/15
(excerpts)
First of all, the data does not show a cooling trend. Second of all, even if it did (which it doesn’t!), it wouldn’t be proof that the globe is indeed in a global warming “pause,” which is the secondary argument of the article.

"It is a favorite tactic of those who resist climate regulation to cherry-pick data from limited time periods and limited geographical areas to draw broad conclusions that are contrary to the overwhelming body of climate science," says Michael Gerrard, a law professor and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.


***

A. I did not cherry pick data

Your source definitely did "cherry-pick" the data!

B. I provided a very neutral site and provide a link to that site.

The 'Daily Caller' and 'WattsUpMyButt' are NOT "neutral sites".

C. Quoting a quote is not much of an argument.

That was an excerpt (obviously) from the article, not "an argument. Read the Newsweek article for the facts that debunk your fraudulent OP!

The headline provide said that the US has shown a 10 year cooling spell. The site I provided for back up the NOAA site. Which if you go to that site what is said in the OP is true. You may think that perhaps the largest industrilize nation in the world cooling is not an indication of anything. Maybe you are right but what was said in the OP is supported by NOAA.

Those are your denier cult delusions, fed by the propaganda pushers for the fossil fuel industry.

In reality, as the article from Newsweek that I cited explains.....

The author quotes Anthony Watts, a former meteorologist who runs a blog dedicated to climate change denial. For the graphs on which The Daily Caller article focuses, Watts used monthly temperature data from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) from 2005 to 2015.

There are two major problems here.

First, in 2005, the USCRN was far from complete. As of January 1, 2005, only 69 of its 114 temperature monitoring stations, or just 60 percent of the ultimate total, had been installed, according to NOAA’s Howard Diamond, who is the program manager of USCRN. The last and 114th station wasn’t installed until September 2008, which means that comparing the data from 2005 to 2008 with data after 2008 produces a severely lopsided analysis. This is especially important because of the geographic nature of temperature monitoring: Since only stations in certain areas of the U.S. were up and running before 2008, there is a lot of information missing from the averages of those early years.

If Watts had chosen to exclude the data from before the USCRN was complete and start his analysis on, say, January 1, 2009, to the present, he’d actually see see “a slightly increasing trend of temperature anomaly data in the contiguous U.S.,” according to Diamond, as shown in the graph below. “So the same upward trends in temperature data we have seen have been and continue to be the case.” In other words, the U.S. is still getting warmer.

A graph showing the trends in temperature anomalies monitored by USCRN from 2009 to 2015, layered over with data sets from two older climate monitoring networks, the U.S. Historical Climatology Network and U.S. Climate Divisional Dataset. The slight warming trend for this period is consistent across all three data sets. USCRN/NOAA

Who is cherry picking? The OP said the last 10 years, that I proved to you with NOAA numbers. Mine were average temperatures what you provided is the temperature anomalies and you only went back 6 years.

Isn't alarmist deception fun... They dont do well with inconvenient facts.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Who is cherry picking? The OP said the last 10 years, that I proved to you with NOAA numbers. Mine were average temperatures what you provided is the temperature anomalies and you only went back 6 years.

*
Are you kidding? The first four years of your supposed "last 10 years" of 'average national temperatures' data were very incomplete because the station network wasn't completed and all in place until the very end of 2008, so the earlier data was useless for computing real national averages. That's exactly why the fraudulent denier cult blog used that earlier 'data' - to skew the results so they could generate a little meaningless propaganda - and that's why it's called "cherry-picked".

What exactly can't you understand about the info you just read? Here, read it again.

There are two major problems here. First, in 2005, the USCRN was far from complete. As of January 1, 2005, only 69 of its 114 temperature monitoring stations, or just 60 percent of the ultimate total, had been installed, according to NOAA’s Howard Diamond, who is the program manager of USCRN. The last and 114th station wasn’t installed until September 2008, which means that comparing the data from 2005 to 2008 with data after 2008 produces a severely lopsided analysis. This is especially important because of the geographic nature of temperature monitoring: Since only stations in certain areas of the U.S. were up and running before 2008, there is a lot of information missing from the averages of those early years.

If Watts had chosen to exclude the data from before the USCRN was complete and start his analysis on, say, January 1, 2009, to the present, he’d actually see see “a slightly increasing trend of temperature anomaly data in the contiguous U.S.,” according to Diamond, as shown in the graph below. “So the same upward trends in temperature data we have seen have been and continue to be the case.” In other words, the U.S. is still getting warmer.


***

You just cant get enough of lying.... You and your alarmist gods, manipulating data, falsifying records, and cherry picking your data start and end dates..

I need hip waders for the level of shit that is being spread here.

 

[Old Rocks]

Only when you are posting, Mr. Billy Bob, only when you or jc are posting.

Record heat over the whole West of the United States. Record heat over most of Europe. Record heat in Alaska and Canada.


As Alaska burns Anchorage sets new records for heat and lack of snow - The Washington Post

 

[Billy_Bob]

Only when you are posting, Mr. Billy Bob, only when you or jc are posting.

Record heat over the whole West of the United States. Record heat over most of Europe. Record heat in Alaska and Canada.


As Alaska burns Anchorage sets new records for heat and lack of snow - The Washington Post

Alaska is not covered by the CRN network as of yet. Your data is from the heavily adjusted HCN. SO this map represents squat, your pipe dream and a lie. Your attempt at equating the HCN unreliable and error ridden issues with 2-4 deg C error bars is just one more lie and deception that your trying to pawn...

 

[IanC]

Only when you are posting, Mr. Billy Bob, only when you or jc are posting.

Record heat over the whole West of the United States. Record heat over most of Europe. Record heat in Alaska and Canada.


As Alaska burns Anchorage sets new records for heat and lack of snow - The Washington Post

Alaska is not covered by the CRN network as of yet. Your data is from the heavily adjusted HCN. SO this map represents squat, your pipe dream and a lie. Your attempt at equating the HCN unreliable and error ridden issues with 2-4 deg C error bars is just one more lie and deception that your trying to pawn...

Actually there are CRN stations in Alaska. A dozen I think. Another two in Hawaii. I haven't seen the figures though.

 

[IanC]

 

[Billy_Bob]

Only when you are posting, Mr. Billy Bob, only when you or jc are posting.

Record heat over the whole West of the United States. Record heat over most of Europe. Record heat in Alaska and Canada.


As Alaska burns Anchorage sets new records for heat and lack of snow - The Washington Post

Alaska is not covered by the CRN network as of yet. Your data is from the heavily adjusted HCN. SO this map represents squat, your pipe dream and a lie. Your attempt at equating the HCN unreliable and error ridden issues with 2-4 deg C error bars is just one more lie and deception that your trying to pawn...

Actually there are CRN stations in Alaska. A dozen I think. Another two in Hawaii. I haven't seen the figures though.

I haven't seen the data as of yet from them. The current plots only include the lower 48 stations.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Cool. The data as of yet has not been incorporated in the data plots. Going to take a closer look today at the new stations. interesting thing of note is they are substantially cooler than the HCN sites but still they use HCN readings to infill the map..

 

[RollingThunder]

What a lot of nonsense you deniers spew.

The OP claimed that:
America’s Most Advanced Climate Station Data Shows US In A 10-Year Cooling Trend....
...but that was false, a phony trend based on cherry-picked, incomplete data (as explained in posts #20 & #24), put together by paid propagandists for the fossil fuel industry, and spread, like manure, by the astroturfed denier cult blogs.

The world is experiencing strong, abrupt global warming as a result of the 43% increase (so far) in CO2 levels that mankind's activities has produced. The USA, which only covers about 2% of the Earth's surface area, is also experiencing a warming trend....but it would make no difference to the fact that there is a global warming trend even if the U.S. had experienced ten years of some slight cooling (which it didn't).

The actual graphs of rising temperatures in the USA and the whole world. (Source: NASA)

Annual and five-year running mean surface air temperature in the contiguous 48 United States (1.6% of the Earth's surface) relative to the 1951-1980 mean.

Line plot of global mean land-ocean temperature index, 1880 to present, with the base period 1951-1980. The dotted black line is the annual mean and the solid red line is the five-year mean. The green bars show uncertainty estimates.


***

 

[hortysir]

The "pause" in gorebal warming is now 17 years old.

That's why the wordage had to be "change"d

 

[RollingThunder]

The "pause" in gorebal warming is now 17 years old.

That's why the wordage had to be "change"d

There has been no "pause" in anthropogenic global warming.
The "wordage" was not changed.

No matter what your fraudulent crackpot denier cult myths say.

In the real world...

No Pause in Global Warming
A new study suggests that global warming continues to steadily increase
Scientific American
June 4, 2015

Global warming vs climate change


***