April globally was the warmest on record---noaa

[Old Rocks]

SSDD and the other liars on the board have a real problem. El Nino. If we get a minor El Nino, and it beats out all the prior records, that shows major warming. If we get a major El Nino, and it does not, then we predicting the warming have a problem. But guess, by the tone of their present posts, what the 'sceptics' really believe is going to happen.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[mamooth]

SSDD and the other liars on the board have a real problem. El Nino. If we get a minor El Nino, and it beats out all the prior records, that shows major warming. If we get a major El Nino, and it does not, then we predicting the warming have a problem. But guess, by the tone of their present posts, what the 'sceptics' really believe is going to happen.

They'll just do what they always do, which is embrace whatever inconsistency pushes their cult agenda.

We already know they say that when La Nina depresses air temps, that proves there's no warming.

But when El Nino raises air temps, they'll instantly flip one-eighty and declare it doesn't mean anything because it's an El Nino.

Then in the same sentence, they'll flip back and use the new record high from that El Nino as a new baseline to prove there's no warming in the following years.

 

[Crick]

SSDD and the other liars on the board have a real problem. El Nino. If we get a minor El Nino, and it beats out all the prior records, that shows major warming. If we get a major El Nino, and it does not, then we predicting the warming have a problem. But guess, by the tone of their present posts, what the 'sceptics' really believe is going to happen.

You lost me there.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[mamooth]

The wackos prefer their thermometers be placed near airport taxiways, air conditioning exhausts, near south facing walls, and perhaps in the wall mart parking lot. Got to keep up appearances of impending climate catastrophe don't you know.

As SSDD and flac illustrate, the cult liars still pretend the surface station data is bad, despite that particularly stupid conspiracy theory being debunked over and over. That is, the "bad sites" show exactly the same temp trend as the "good sites". An honest person would admit it's a crap conspiracy, but we're talking about flac and SSDD.

SSDD, flac, what's your exit strategy? That is, are you taking the stupidity to the ultimate extreme and willingly going down with the denier ship, or do you plan to jump off at some point with the other rats?

 

[Crick]

I would very much like to see more research on the processes that led to the changes BTK found to have shifted thermal energy into deeper water and if, as it appears, that build up is going to lead to a significant El Nino. I guess I would like to see an increase in our knowledge of what controls or drives ENSO cycles. I realize they are an internal system process and are more of an end-product to the imbalance of long wave radiation at the Top of Atmosphere. However, since their effects control a great portion of the observations by which we measure what's happening, more knowledge can only help.

How about we start attaching accurate, broad spectrum radiometers and spectrometers for both in and outbound EMR to all GPS satellites from this point on? A constellation of such monitors in geosynchronous orbit constantly monitoring what's actually happening seems like a fundamental and irrefutable data source.

 

[Crick]

SSDD, flac, what's your exit strategy? That is, are you taking the stupidity to the ultimate extreme and willingly going down with the denier ship, or do you plan to jump off at some point with the other rats?

With the Costa Concordia and this South Korean ferry we've had multiple examples of captains NOT going down with their ships - with captains being one of the earliest to debark. Perhaps we should praise them for their commitment.

 

[mamooth]

How about we start attaching accurate, broad spectrum radiometers and spectrometers for both in and outbound EMR to all GPS satellites from this point on? A constellation of such monitors in geosynchronous orbit constantly monitoring what's actually happening seems like a fundamental and irrefutable data source.

I had a combo printer/scanner once. It was lousy at both printing and scanning.

That is, just combining things willy-nilly often isn't a good idea. As is putting civilian programs on Defense Department GPS satellites. Which aren't geosynchronous, by the way.

NASA does agree with you that gobs of such satellites would be great. But the cash hasn't been there. That may be changing, with the first RAVAN going up in 2015, a small, cheap and accurate radiometer.

Earth Science & Climate Monitoring | Tiny Satellites May Answer Big Climate Change Question | SpaceNews.com
---
NASA’s Earth Science Technology Office is expected to provide roughly $4 million over three years to support development and construction of the first RAVAN cubesat. A portion of that funding also will be used to enable the RAVAN team to develop manufacturing processes and engineering principles to build a constellation of RAVAN cubesats as efficiently as possible. “Standardization allows you to build a lot of satellites inexpensively,” Dyrud said.

To provide a comprehensive measurement of Earth’s outgoing solar radiation, researchers would need to obtain data from between 30 and 40 cubesats similar to RAVAN.
---

 

[Crick]

Oh well. And you're right about the geosynchronicity. Must be the oxy-codone I'm fulla. The notes said not to operate heavy machinery or dance ballet. I should have known this would be beyond me.

;-)

ps: I've got an Epson RX-580 printer/scanner that does a bang-up job on both sides

 

[flacaltenn]

1) You still haven't identified the source of your data except...

2) We now see that you seem to be attempting to compare US data to global, combined land/sea data and we know you're smart enough to know that ain't valid.

3) NOAA/NCDC were not making any point about April being warmer than March. They were making the point that, globally, this was the warmest April in the record.

4) NOAA/NCDC were making a point about April because they had just finished compiling it's data - it having been the latest month to have gone by (check your calendar, it's true ;-))

5) NOAA/NCDC are not NASA and had nothing to do with putting people on the moon.

6) If you're tired of talking about temperature records, leave the thread for those who still think it bears discussion.

Not likely at all to be the "warmest April on record"... Satellite measurements DO NOT confirm that. But that doesn't stop the political organ of the Church of Global Warming from making pronouncements does it? FOR THEIR advantage in the propaganda barrage.

You shouldn't be going after for trivial details. If you KNOW the data came from Dr. Roy's site -- then you SHOULD know the source.. I don't like playing cred tag..

You SHOULD be embarrassed for NOAA and your government making such pronouncements without ever actually the full range of science evidence.. The lie is monumental according to the sat record...

 

[flacaltenn]

Crick:

Make ya a deal.. It took me 4 minutes to retrieve the sat record and i don't give a shit about the kitchen cooking that goes on at other Govt sites like NOAA or GISS. YOU go retrieve the past April readings from THEM -- like I did for the sat data and the 2 of US can figure out whether they track, or why not, or IF they are screeching victory over a third digit diff or what? Good luck hunting....

Anomalies are anomalies. The baseline used just subtracts a constant. So if the deltas are all whampus -- then we have something to discuss.
I posted the Aprils for the past decade and THIS APRIL ranks 3rd or 4th JUST WITHIN THAT TIMEFRAME. And that doesn't count the spike in 1998.

 

[Crick]

1) You still haven't identified the source of your data except...

2) We now see that you seem to be attempting to compare US data to global, combined land/sea data and we know you're smart enough to know that ain't valid.

3) NOAA/NCDC were not making any point about April being warmer than March. They were making the point that, globally, this was the warmest April in the record.

4) NOAA/NCDC were making a point about April because they had just finished compiling it's data - it having been the latest month to have gone by (check your calendar, it's true ;-))

5) NOAA/NCDC are not NASA and had nothing to do with putting people on the moon.

6) If you're tired of talking about temperature records, leave the thread for those who still think it bears discussion.

Not likely at all to be the "warmest April on record"... Satellite measurements DO NOT confirm that. But that doesn't stop the political organ of the Church of Global Warming from making pronouncements does it? FOR THEIR advantage in the propaganda barrage.

You shouldn't be going after for trivial details. If you KNOW the data came from Dr. Roy's site -- then you SHOULD know the source.. I don't like playing cred tag..

You SHOULD be embarrassed for NOAA and your government making such pronouncements without ever actually the full range of science evidence.. The lie is monumental according to the sat record...

I do NOT know the data came from UAH. As far as I know you have never given any credit for that data, but I could have missed it. Mamooth seemed to think it was from UAh and Spencer and perhaps he saw an accreditation I had missed. How about coming out and telling us where it came from? It's only been two days and dozen posts since I pointed out that you hadn't identified the source. How hard could it be?

 

[Crick]

And I guarantee you I understand how anomalies work. I just have wonder what understanding you're working with when you bring up the monthly delta as some sort of refutation of the record April. It's apples and oranges. As was US surface data against global land/sea combined.

 

[Crick]

Not likely at all to be the "warmest April on record"... Satellite measurements DO NOT confirm that.

What satellite records?

You shouldn't be going after for trivial details. If you KNOW the data came from Dr. Roy's site -- then you SHOULD know the source.. I don't like playing cred tag..

I don't know the data came from Spencer. That was a guess based on Mamooth's statement. And I'm not the one playing "cred tag". I would like a clear statement and a link if possible as to where the data comes from that you claim refutes NOAA/NCDC's statement.

You SHOULD be embarrassed for NOAA and your government making such pronouncements without ever actually the full range of science evidence.. The lie is monumental according to the sat record...

They're not the ones I distrust. And I still have not seen any demonstration of a lie. Perhaps I'm missing a post, but all I've seen here are your text descriptions of results you claim to have gotten.

 

[westwall]

And yet, the historical record...well the one that Hansen and company haven't screwed with that is, shows the 1930's to be the warmest decade in recorded US history.

 

[Crick]

NOAA/NCDC would be comparing their data against their records. To expect or demand anything else would be absurd.

 

[flacaltenn]

1) You still haven't identified the source of your data except...

2) We now see that you seem to be attempting to compare US data to global, combined land/sea data and we know you're smart enough to know that ain't valid.

3) NOAA/NCDC were not making any point about April being warmer than March. They were making the point that, globally, this was the warmest April in the record.

4) NOAA/NCDC were making a point about April because they had just finished compiling it's data - it having been the latest month to have gone by (check your calendar, it's true ;-))

5) NOAA/NCDC are not NASA and had nothing to do with putting people on the moon.

6) If you're tired of talking about temperature records, leave the thread for those who still think it bears discussion.

Not likely at all to be the "warmest April on record"... Satellite measurements DO NOT confirm that. But that doesn't stop the political organ of the Church of Global Warming from making pronouncements does it? FOR THEIR advantage in the propaganda barrage.

You shouldn't be going after for trivial details. If you KNOW the data came from Dr. Roy's site -- then you SHOULD know the source.. I don't like playing cred tag..

You SHOULD be embarrassed for NOAA and your government making such pronouncements without ever actually the full range of science evidence.. The lie is monumental according to the sat record...

I do NOT know the data came from UAH. As far as I know you have never given any credit for that data, but I could have missed it. Mamooth seemed to think it was from UAh and Spencer and perhaps he saw an accreditation I had missed. How about coming out and telling us where it came from? It's only been two days and dozen posts since I pointed out that you hadn't identified the source. How hard could it be?

OK -- the ship carrying the "convieniently stupid" has sailed.. You know darn well Abraham where that data came from. Your account may only show a couple dozen posts in this forum, but the ACCURATE record is more like 3500...

Thanks for the excersize. That was entertaining. Now let's get back to RealVille.

 

[mamooth]

I know the source was UAH because because flac's numbers matched the UAH monthly summary at this link. I didn't say anything about Spencer.

http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt

I do wonder if flac can explain why UAH is correct and the rest forgeries, given how UAH matches the other data sets so closely.

If they all look alike, you'd think they'd either be all good or all forgeries. UAH only looks significantly different if someone shifts the baseline without telling anyone, as Spencer has been caught doing.

 

[flacaltenn]

I know the source was UAH because because flac's numbers matched the UAH monthly summary at this link. I didn't say anything about Spencer.

http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt

I do wonder if flac can explain why UAH is correct and the rest forgeries, given how UAH matches the other data sets so closely.

If they all look alike, you'd think they'd either be all good or all forgeries. UAH only looks significantly different if someone shifts the baseline without telling anyone, as Spencer has been caught doing.

That's nothing new to me.. I expect that UAH would track well in general HAS tracked well.
So I provided the sat data for previous Aprils..

Now it's up to YOU to tell us how the Govt Political Zealots have manufactured the lie in this OP.... .