Current Rate of Warming Slower Than Previous Rates of Warming..

[Billy_Bob]

This should send the alarmists into orbit... When EMPIRICAL DATA is used, our current rate of warming if far less than the one ending in 1937... The last half of the twentieth century was not uncommon or unprecedented....

The curve shows 2 major periods of cooling since 1880. Each lasted approximately a decade (1900 to 1910, and 1942 to 1952), and reached cooling rates of about -2.0 °C per century. There is a large interval of continuous warming from 1910 to 1942 (about 32 years). This reached a maximum rate of warming of about +2.8 °C per century around 1937. 1937 is the year with the highest rate of warming since the start of the GISTEMP series in 1880

This article is sure to leave a permeate mark in the CAGW agenda showing all of their dire warnings and alramisim a LIE!

OUCH.. This is going to leave a mark!

Source

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I see some data that needs adjusting

 

[S.J.]

But, but I thought the debate was over.

 

[Muhammed]

But, but I thought the debate was over.

...simply because I said so to a bunch of impressionable teenaged children.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The only problems i see with the writers approach is the average of the average. This makes the margin of error +/- 0.5 deg F, leaving significant questions. Then we add the GISS adjustments of + 0.67 deg C for the present and a -0.47 deg C for the past (before 1996) and the whole exercise is is most likely a close to flat line.

 

[flacaltenn]

The only problems i see with the writers approach is the average of the average. This makes the margin of error +/- 0.5 deg F, leaving significant questions. Then we add the GISS adjustments of + 0.67 deg C for the present and a -0.47 deg C for the past (before 1996) and the whole exercise is is most likely a close to flat line.

Adjustments are not THAT high.. Don't need to be.. They just need enough to make the news every month..

 

[Crick]

This should send the alarmists into orbit... When EMPIRICAL DATA is used, our current rate of warming if far less than the one ending in 1937... The last half of the twentieth century was not uncommon or unprecedented....

The curve shows 2 major periods of cooling since 1880. Each lasted approximately a decade (1900 to 1910, and 1942 to 1952), and reached cooling rates of about -2.0 °C per century. There is a large interval of continuous warming from 1910 to 1942 (about 32 years). This reached a maximum rate of warming of about +2.8 °C per century around 1937. 1937 is the year with the highest rate of warming since the start of the GISTEMP series in 1880

This article is sure to leave a permeate mark in the CAGW agenda showing all of their dire warnings and alramisim a LIE!

OUCH.. This is going to leave a mark!

Source

Even with the decadal smoothing used, how much of this graph is above zero? And the "leave a mark" comments are just puerile.

 

[Matted Joybeard]

This should send the alarmists into orbit... When EMPIRICAL DATA is used, our current rate of warming if far less than the one ending in 1937... The last half of the twentieth century was not uncommon or unprecedented....

The curve shows 2 major periods of cooling since 1880. Each lasted approximately a decade (1900 to 1910, and 1942 to 1952), and reached cooling rates of about -2.0 °C per century. There is a large interval of continuous warming from 1910 to 1942 (about 32 years). This reached a maximum rate of warming of about +2.8 °C per century around 1937. 1937 is the year with the highest rate of warming since the start of the GISTEMP series in 1880

This article is sure to leave a permeate mark in the CAGW agenda showing all of their dire warnings and alramisim a LIE!

OUCH.. This is going to leave a mark!

Source

Graph suggests the globe is warming, no?

 

[flacaltenn]

This should send the alarmists into orbit... When EMPIRICAL DATA is used, our current rate of warming if far less than the one ending in 1937... The last half of the twentieth century was not uncommon or unprecedented....

The curve shows 2 major periods of cooling since 1880. Each lasted approximately a decade (1900 to 1910, and 1942 to 1952), and reached cooling rates of about -2.0 °C per century. There is a large interval of continuous warming from 1910 to 1942 (about 32 years). This reached a maximum rate of warming of about +2.8 °C per century around 1937. 1937 is the year with the highest rate of warming since the start of the GISTEMP series in 1880

This article is sure to leave a permeate mark in the CAGW agenda showing all of their dire warnings and alramisim a LIE!

OUCH.. This is going to leave a mark!

Source

Graph suggests the globe is warming, no?

Sure.. You'd have to take an integral here and there to be math certain,, but I'll give ya that..

The argument has never been over whether it's warming -- but how much and how quickly..
If the rate is 1degC/century instead of the 5degC/century that Doc Hansen told Congress in 1988 -- we've wasted a shitload of enviro hysteria on the topic.. The actual science is ALSO about HOW MUCH of the effect is due to man as opposed to well known natural cycles..

From THAT chart -- knowing that CO2 has done nothing but INCREASE fairly linearly throughout that time period -- you'd have to conclude that CO2 ALONE is not the clear forcing function in our recent temperature record..

Most all of the doomsday scare propaganda still stems from the absurd projections (now failed) that were made decades ago... Skeptics have already prevailed...

Which BTW -- is why the GWarming propaganda is getting more and more shrill as the early predictions continue to fail.. And why remediation efforts and political schemes have failed to get traction..

 

[flacaltenn]

If you took an eyeball estimate of the linear trend in that chart -- you'd have to conclude about 1deg/century.. Which is in fact -- where we actually are. Right at the CO2 only estimate of warming without all the GWarming magic multiplliers and hocus poci and fear mongering for political advantage..

 

[mamooth]

So, OP has an obvious fudge, the use of the moving average to remove the recent warming. Basic statistics failure. Fooled all the deniers, of course.

And why deniers expected accelerated warming, I have no idea.

So, same old, same old. We see a big denier science fail followed by their hysterical shrieking about how those scientists clearly don't know nuffin. And when everyone ignores the suckass denier science, it proves a conspiracy to oppress deniers.

 

[mamooth]

Change points of global temperature
Niamh Cahill, Stefan Rahmstorf and Andrew C Parnell
Published 3 August 2015

Change points of global temperature - IOPscience

You'd have to be kind of loopy to think warming trends were bigger in the past.

And yes, I understand how that disagrees with the religious beliefs of certain parties, hence they will now feel obligated to go on a jihad against it. Please proceed. I believe one of the authors, Rahmsdorf, is on the denier "We hates it, we hates it forever!" list, so I suggest they use that as their excuse to pretend the paper must be faked.

 

[skookerasbil]

Change points of global temperature
Niamh Cahill, Stefan Rahmstorf and Andrew C Parnell
Published 3 August 2015

Change points of global temperature - IOPscience

You'd have to be kind of loopy to think warming trends were bigger in the past.

And yes, I understand how that disagrees with the religious beliefs of certain parties, hence they will now feel obligated to go on a jihad against it. Please proceed. I believe one of the authors, Rahmsdorf, is on the denier "We hates it, we hates it forever!" list, so I suggest they use that as their excuse to pretend the paper must be faked.

What a ghey graph...........typical of the AGW k00ks on statistics. Always posting up those crunched graphs ( see temp anomaly axis ) to make things look ominous = ghey


.5 degrees..................nobody cares

 

[mamooth]

Dupe post, due to board being very slow. At least for me.

 

[mamooth]

The current rate of warming is 1.6C per century. Very close to Hansen's 1988 prediction.

The success of climate science predictions over the decades is why mainstream climate science has such crediblity. If deniers want to thought of as something other than cultists, they need to have the guts to start making predictions, and to stop failing so hard with the predicitions they do make. For example, deniers have been constantly predicting major global cooling since the 1970s. Is it here yet?

 

[Billy_Bob]

The current rate of warming is 1.6C per century. Very close to Hansen's 1988 prediction.

The success of climate science predictions over the decades is why mainstream climate science has such crediblity. If deniers want to thought of as something other than cultists, they need to have the guts to start making predictions, and to stop failing so hard with the predicitions they do make. For example, deniers have been constantly predicting major global cooling since the 1970s. Is it here yet?

Nope!

0.47 deg C of actual empirical measurement. The rest is the upward adjustment of hacks and retards..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This should send the alarmists into orbit... When EMPIRICAL DATA is used, our current rate of warming if far less than the one ending in 1937... The last half of the twentieth century was not uncommon or unprecedented....

The curve shows 2 major periods of cooling since 1880. Each lasted approximately a decade (1900 to 1910, and 1942 to 1952), and reached cooling rates of about -2.0 °C per century. There is a large interval of continuous warming from 1910 to 1942 (about 32 years). This reached a maximum rate of warming of about +2.8 °C per century around 1937. 1937 is the year with the highest rate of warming since the start of the GISTEMP series in 1880

This article is sure to leave a permeate mark in the CAGW agenda showing all of their dire warnings and alramisim a LIE!

OUCH.. This is going to leave a mark!

Source

Graph suggests the globe is warming, no?

No, Honey Boo Boo

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The current rate of warming is 1.6C per century. Very close to Hansen's 1988 prediction.

The success of climate science predictions over the decades is why mainstream climate science has such crediblity. If deniers want to thought of as something other than cultists, they need to have the guts to start making predictions, and to stop failing so hard with the predicitions they do make. For example, deniers have been constantly predicting major global cooling since the 1970s. Is it here yet?

Yawn. The number of experiments showing 120PPM of CO2 warming 1.6C is ZERO! NONE! ZIPPO!

 

[flacaltenn]

The current rate of warming is 1.6C per century. Very close to Hansen's 1988 prediction.

Can't get away with that lie... Your handlers haven't purged the evidence yet..

Hansen's band of merry activist zealots in 1988 -- just prior to the famous senate hearing was predicting 0.5degC/decade or 5 degC/century for the "A" scenario. Which was a modest 1.5% INCREASE in CO2.

And he was juicing the propaganda passed to the media behind the scenes in that Senate appearance. From the NY TIMES coverage of that Senate appearance.. The article has Hansen's name all over it..

Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate

Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate

Mathematical models have predicted for some years now that a buildup of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil and other gases emitted by human activities into the atmosphere would cause the earth's surface to warm by trapping infrared radiation from the sun, turning the entire earth into a kind of greenhouse.

If the current pace of the buildup of these gases continues, the effect is likely to be a warming of 3 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit from the year 2025 to 2050, according to these projections. This rise in temperature is not expected to be uniform around the globe but to be greater in the higher latitudes, reaching as much as 20 degrees, and lower at the Equator.

Now where the fuck do you think the NYTimes got that "modeling" information? At the time NASA was the home to the climate modeling.. And this is the PROPAGANDA COVER that Hansen gave to the media and politicians to JUSTIFY their anti-fossil fuel campaign. The opening shot in the this long war.. It's the Fort Sumter of the Global Weirding wars..

Hansen was well quoted by 1988 as referring to coal trains as "trains of death"... THIS is the witchdoctory that built your movement. No wonder you can't confront it rationally or intelligiently..

Blantant lying about simple stuff like this is what I WANT you to do.. Because as a sack of lying shit -- you EXCEL at it..

 

[flacaltenn]

The only thing that stops me from going full commando on this leprechaun warmers is I KNOW they are picking their sources from some of the most biased and twisted backwaters of the internet. Like skepshitscience for instance. Who will LOOK at those 1988 NASA predictions and TELL the little leprechauns that Hansen "predicted the current 1.6DegC/century warming in 1988 ----------------


While leaving out the part that that was the "model run" for the stopping of ALL man-made CO2 emissions in 2000.
And completely leave the poor shitheads in the dark about what his REALISTIC MODELS were predicting.

Sometimes I'm just too gentle with these victims of propaganda..