Uah sept global temp .37

[flacaltenn]

I can NOT believe I am reading that! After all the screaming and hollering about manipulated data you gripe that he hasn't applied averaging and FILTERS? Fer chrissake!

No.. I'm bitching that someone is using intuition and guesswork rather than relying on what the tools of mathematics tell us...

Get a grip..

LOL. These guys scream about models, then when presented with data that is just bare facts, maxima and minima over the last 34 years, bitch because it was not presented in the fashion of a model.

Those figures are the maxima and minima. Run a line on the maxima, it rises to the right. Run a line on the minima, it rises to the right. And Mathew and Dr. Spencer already presented you with an average and a running average. The fact that you are flapping yap when it is right there in your face by Dr. Spencer simply demonstrates that you are willing to tell bald faced lies with the contrary evidence sitting in front of you.

So you are saying that Mann and the IPCC are lying when they say there is no significant for the past 12, 15 or 17 years?

Show me an actual data prep that gives a number for a significant warming over the last 15 years. Quit your flap-yapping and put it up here...

 

[Abraham3]

No.. I'm bitching that someone is using intuition and guesswork rather than relying on what the tools of mathematics tell us...

Get a grip..

LOL. These guys scream about models, then when presented with data that is just bare facts, maxima and minima over the last 34 years, bitch because it was not presented in the fashion of a model.

Those figures are the maxima and minima. Run a line on the maxima, it rises to the right. Run a line on the minima, it rises to the right. And Mathew and Dr. Spencer already presented you with an average and a running average. The fact that you are flapping yap when it is right there in your face by Dr. Spencer simply demonstrates that you are willing to tell bald faced lies with the contrary evidence sitting in front of you.

So you are saying that Mann and the IPCC are lying when they say there is no significant for the past 12, 15 or 17 years?

Don't be an ass, he said no such thing. The point being made is (quite obviously) that either this complaint (that the data are too raw) or your earlier complaints (that the data have been too manipulated) were, to put it politely, insincere.

Get it?

 

[flacaltenn]

LOL. These guys scream about models, then when presented with data that is just bare facts, maxima and minima over the last 34 years, bitch because it was not presented in the fashion of a model.

Those figures are the maxima and minima. Run a line on the maxima, it rises to the right. Run a line on the minima, it rises to the right. And Mathew and Dr. Spencer already presented you with an average and a running average. The fact that you are flapping yap when it is right there in your face by Dr. Spencer simply demonstrates that you are willing to tell bald faced lies with the contrary evidence sitting in front of you.

So you are saying that Mann and the IPCC are lying when they say there is no significant for the past 12, 15 or 17 years?

Don't be an ass, he said no such thing. The point being made is (quite obviously) that either this complaint (that the data are too raw) or your earlier complaints (that the data have been too manipulated) were, to put it politely, insincere.

Get it?

I'm sorry.. Not Mann --- Phil Jones.. And many others. Mann is probably still in denial...
Are YOU in denial along with GoldiRocks?? Or are you just trying to annoy me??

All my comments stand.. Especially the ones relevent to this thread.. No hypocrisy on my part.. I never advocated intuition and eyeball inspection of data as superior to actual simple math measurement tools..

 

[Abraham3]

Ha! Good of you to admit it, but I was actually talking about poster Old Rocks.

But, say, if you'd like to have a discussion about what Jones meant when he said "no statistically significant warming", I'd be glad to discuss it with you in a dedicated thread.

 

[Old Rocks]

Trakar pointed out what Dr. Jones stated, and how he stated it several months ago. This is just the clap trap these denialists continually trot out. They shut up for a few weeks on a given sound bite when spanked hard enough, only to post exactly the same drivel again.

 

[flacaltenn]

Ha! Good of you to admit it, but I was actually talking about poster Old Rocks.

But, say, if you'd like to have a discussion about what Jones meant when he said "no statistically significant warming", I'd be glad to discuss it with you in a dedicated thread.

You really think quibbling about +/-0.02deg/15yrs deserves an elaborate grudge match?? Don't we have other biz that might be more productive?





Probably not....

 

[Abraham3]

We might try to figure out the mismatch between the low warming rate of the atmosphere and the continuing ToA imbalance.

Where do you think its going?

 

[flacaltenn]

We might try to figure out the mismatch between the low warming rate of the atmosphere and the continuing ToA imbalance.

Where do you think its going?

My guess is we've haven't looked everywhere.. I know for a fact that the ToA is closed to hot air at the following coordinates.

1) 38deg 54m, -77deg 10m
2) 40deg 48m, -73deg 56m

Sooner we relieve the source of the hot air from these 2 hot spots, the sooner you will sleep better at night..

Hey --- take a look at my new Climate Model.... It's really nifty..

1.6W/m2 * (361*10e12)m2 * (3.15e7)sec/yr * 15yr * 0.90 = 24.6e22 joules

If only Trenberth and BalsamBrains had that level of detail in THEIR LETTER.....
Wrote in a minute and a half...

 

[flacaltenn]

Whhaaaa. You dont wanna review my climate model? Or didnt you recognize what those numbers represented.. it was a real deal equation.....

 

[mamooth]

Flac, you're giving the unibomber a run for the money with all your manifestos.

Say, you ought to offer your services to the defense team in the Mann libel case. They could use a supergenius like you to prove how Mann is a liar. Funny how the defense team isn't using that angle. Go set them straight.

 

[flacaltenn]

Really ---- you'd rather assail me again than comment on that calculation of the Joules going into the ocean for the past 15 yrs??

No wonder we keep you around here... Try it.... Does that number result look familiar to you? It should.
And what am I missing in the calculation?? Hint: there are several mods neccessary...


1.6W/m2 * (361*10e12)m2 * (3.15e7)sec/yr * 15yr * 0.90 = 24.6e22 joules


OR ............................












Just continue being an irrelevent horse's ass..... (So much for the peace-keeping around here)

 

[Abraham3]

Just continue being an irrelevent horse's ass..... (So much for the peace-keeping around here)

Why don't you show him how you'd prefer he behave? Try setting an example for all of us.

 

[mamooth]

Really ---- you'd rather assail me again than comment on that calculation of the Joules going into the ocean for the past 15 yrs??

Why do you think your number soup matters?

You can't ever write a coherent explanation of why you're tossing out all the numbers. Hence, it's meaningless jabber.

 

[flacaltenn]

Just continue being an irrelevent horse's ass..... (So much for the peace-keeping around here)

Why don't you show him how you'd prefer he behave? Try setting an example for all of us.

If you want a better tone --- why are you singling me out? That's awfully suspicious ya gotta admit.. Creepy actually when you tag me on multiple threads with an admonition to be nicer.. A better tone is gonna come from a LARGER AGREEMENT.. Unless you're certain that I'm the ONLY obstacle to a better forum..

Abraham.. I try.. I truely do.. This week a poster baited me into commenting by REPEATEDLY attacking my credentials in a particularly nasty fashion. I spent 2 lunch hrs in SERIOUS discussion of all types of integral vector products with him.. BECAUSE -- despite his constant abrasive attitude towards me -- I like him and believe he's here to learn.

But it's non-stop man.. Mamooth hasn't had a cogent topical comment with my name on it in MONTHS..
I'm restrained as I can get being constantly mugged by a gang..

If you ARE singling me out.. I suggest an alternative..
We could take advantage of the Bull Ring rules. A special one on one forum with no peanut gallery interruptions and see which of us gets coarse and profane first.. Go check out the forum rules and see if it's the alternative you prefer..

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-bull-ring/275697-the-bull-ring-guidelines-rules.html

PM me with suggestions for topics and rules if you're interested..

 

[flacaltenn]

Really ---- you'd rather assail me again than comment on that calculation of the Joules going into the ocean for the past 15 yrs??

Why do you think your number soup matters?

You can't ever write a coherent explanation of why you're tossing out all the numbers. Hence, it's meaningless jabber.

With all the time you spent on this forum EVERY ONE of those numbers and the units that are attached to them should be meaningfull..

Yes --- I tossed them out to see if anyone would intelligiently guess at the topic.. And THEN I just TOLD what the calculation represents.. There is all manner of IMPORTANT discussion to be had comparing that number to the recent "warming hiding in the oceans" topic..

But --- all i got was crickets..

1.6W/m2 is the power imbalance attributed to back radiation.
There is the surface area of the ocean, the amount of seconds in a year to go from Watts to Joules and a factor of 90% which SHOULD be engrained on the brain of ANYONE spending more than 2 hours a week reading this forum..

Recall the TrenBerth BalsamBrain graph of the "found" warming? The MAGNITUDE of that warming that was FOUND? Let's discuss how this TOTAL ocean exposure ends up on their graph..

ANYONE?

 

[polarbear]

Geez louise. They admitted there has been no warming since 1998 and you warmers are still desperately clinging and praying for the end of the world as we know it.

What a thing to wish for.

Jeez Louise, who is "they"?

The rate of warming dropped significantly, but the air and land temperature is still climbing while the oceans rate of increase went way up. The Earth's accumulation of heat has not slowed one iota.

We are not desperate, clinging or praying. We are holding to the truth, to objective evidence and to widely accepted science. It is only in the company of deniers that this forum has attracted that taking the position held by 97% of the scientists in a given field could be considered a bad thing.

Let`s start with the graph you posted:

You picked that from Spencer`s blog page:
October « 2013 « Roy Spencer, PhD

But chose not to include this link. After tracking down your source and reading the text it`s obvious to the reader how you twisted the facts.

Quotes from the text right below that graph :

I sometimes get asked why the tropospheric temperature variations are so large on a month-to-month basis. As I have mentioned before, these are usually due to natural oscillations in convective heat transfer from the ocean surface to the atmosphere
Note: In the previous version (v5.5, still provided to NOAA due to contract with NCDC) the temps are slightly cooler, probably due to the uncorrected diurnal drift of NOAA-18. Recall that in v5.6, we include METOP-A and NOAA-19, and since June 2013 they are the only two satellites in the v5.6 dataset, whereas v5.5 does not include METOP-A and NOAA-19.

Taken at face value, this plot shows that about 1/3 of ocean heating over the 20-year period from 1990-2010 can be accounted for just based upon a change in oceanic cloud cover alone, probably a decrease in low clouds. (I say probably a decrease in low clouds because the SSM/I and SSMIS instruments only measure cloud water, not cloud ice which is transparent at the 19.35 and 37 GHz microwave frequencies. The CERES comparison I did vs. cloud water showed that most of the relationship was in the reflected shortwave [sunlight], not emitted longwave [infrared], which is consistent with a low-cloud effect rather than high-cloud.)
What Does All This Mean?
I think it is additional evidence that natural cloud variations cause multi-decadal time scale climate change.
But how do we know that this isn’t just positive cloud feedback on human-caused warming? Well, first of all there has been virtually no surface warming over this period of time, and cloud feedback is (by definition) in response to surface temperature.
Secondly, since about 2010 we see there has been an abrupt reversal in the trend of ocean energy accumulation…basically wiping out the energy accumulation caused by the previous 20 years of reduced cloudiness.

No wonder you did not post the source URL and just cherry picked that graph you posted adding your "truth"..:

The Earth's accumulation of heat has not slowed one iota.

That might work with idiots which have to use "stadium waves" to "understand" dumbed down wave mechanics and with those who click on the "thank you" button on the crap you keep posting...which seems to be a full time activity:
Abraham3
Concerned human being
Member #38720
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,125

1125 "doomsday is coming" posts in just 435 days !...:

The Earth's accumulation of heat has not slowed one iota.

We are not desperate, clinging or praying. We are holding to the truth,

 

[Abraham3]

Dear Mr Bear,

If you'd gone back just a very few more posts, you might have noticed that the lead post in this thread used material from Spencer's website. I asked that poster whether or not he had any ulterior motive for using Spencer's material. I later posted the Spencer graphic to ask a question about a viewpoint that another poster had expressed about that specific data. If there was any cherry picking going on, it wasn't me that was doing it. I am not a fan of Spencer's and wouldn't normally use anything of his. I don't trust YECs and I don't believe the troposphere is a proxy for the rest of the Earth.

Note that I did not start the stadium wave thread. I don't even understand it.

Neither do I understand what appears to be an excess of animosity towards me. If I have insulted you in the past, I apologize. I have been less than polite on occasion and am attempting to make up for it.