Experts: Cold snap doesn't disprove global warming

[OregonStream]

Variability within the climate system, despite the trend:

tinyurl.com/yam6ax9

 

[Old Rocks]

One of the predictions of global warming is for wider and wilder swings in the weather, with an overall warming trend.

 

[strollingbones]

mo fo's its like 8 degrees here and dropping ...i am in the foking south .....wind chills of minus 50 in the midwest.....somehow...as the toes tingle...i dont give a damn about global mo foking warming.....

 

[Old Rocks]

And here I am in Portland, Oregon, and we are having a cool night. All the way down to 36. In the usually cold country that I call home in Eastern Oregon, it has been a relitively warm winter, so far. The lowest temperature that I have seen so far for there is -9 at Seneca. Once, when I was a child, it was unofficialy -60 degrees in Seneca. The official record for there is -53.

Well, stay warm.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

From: Phil Jones <[email protected]>
To: ray bradley <[email protected]>,[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: [email protected],[email protected]


Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim's got a diagram here we'll send that either later today or
first thing tomorrow.
I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps
to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from
1961 for Keith's to hide the decline. Mike's series got the annual
land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land
N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999
for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with
data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers
Phil

East Anglia Confirmed Emails from the Climate Research Unit - Searchable

Man made global warming is the biggest scientific hoax in modern history

 

[CrusaderFrank]

From: John Daly <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Climatic warming in Tasmania
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 2000 +1100
Cc: Ed Cook <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], Mike Barbetti <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]

Dear Neville,

You mentioned to me some time ago that in your view, the 11-year solar cycle
did not influence temperature. There have been numerous attempts by
academics to establish a correlation, but each has been shot down on some
ground or other. I remember Barrie Pittock was especially dismissive of
attempts to correlate solar cycle with temperature.

Have you tried this approach?

Load "Mathematica" into your PC and run the following set of instructions -

data = ReadList[ "c:sydney.txt", Number]
dataElements = Length[data]
X = ListPlot[ data, PlotJoined-> True];
fourierTrans = Fourier[data];
ListPlot[Abs[fourierTrans], PlotJoined -> True];

fitfun1 = Fit[data,{1,x,x^2,x^3,Sin[11 2 Pi x/dataElements],
Cos[11 2 Pi x/dataElements]},x];
fittable = Table[N[fitfun1], {x, dataElements}];
Y = ListPlot[fittable, PlotJoined -> True];
Show[X, Y]

The reference to "c:sydney.txt" is a suggested pathname for the following
set of data - which is Sydney's annual mean temperature.

16.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.4
17.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.1
16.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.4
17.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.5
17.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.4
17.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.8
18.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.4
17.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.xxx xxxx xxxx.1
18.6

So Far so good.

"Mathematica" first plots out the data itself (see Atachment 1)

The first part of the instruction set lets "mathematica" do a Fourier Transform
on the data, ie. searching out the periodicities, if there are any. The result is
shown on Attachment 2.

The transform result shows a sharp spike at the 11 year point (I wonder
what is significant about 11 years?). The second part of the instructions
now acts upon this observed spike (the Cos 11 bit), to extract it's
waveform from the rest of the noise. The result is shown as a waveform
in attachment 3, the waves having an 11-year period, with the long-term
Sydney warming easily evident.

Attachment 4 shows the original Sydney data overlaid against the 11-year
periodicity.

It would appear that the solar cycle does indeed affect temperature.

(I tried the same run on the CRU global temperature set. Even though CRU
must be highly smoothed by the time all the averages are worked out, the
11-year pulse is still there, albeit about half the size of Sydneys).

Stay cool.

John Daly http://www.vision.net.au/~daly

East Anglia Confirmed Emails from the Climate Research Unit - Searchable

The Sun affects the climate? Holy fucking moly Batman!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

One of the predictions of global warming is for wider and wilder swings in the weather, with an overall warming trend.

And who can forget all those Cat 5 hurricanes!

Yes, it get cooler as it gets warmer hence the new phraseology: GlobalWarmerCoolering or The Great Climatic Googly Moogly

 

[logical4u]

One of the predictions of global warming is for wider and wilder swings in the weather, with an overall warming trend.

And who can forget all those Cat 5 hurricanes!

Yes, it get cooler as it gets warmer hence the new phraseology: GlobalWarmerCoolering or The Great Climatic Googly Moogly

It is the great climate ponzi scheme!

 

[JWBooth]

Empirical evidence is meaningless, only rigged computer models are to be trusted.

Are these the same guys that created the BCS?

 

[Old Rocks]

I see. Melting glaciers and icecaps are the result of computer models.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I see. Melting glaciers and icecaps are the result of computer models.

Where is it written that the only reason we lose an ice cubes worth of glacier is due to mankind? Where?

 

[Old Rocks]

Here.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

American Institute of Physics.

 

[Oddball]

 

[concept]

I see. Melting glaciers and icecaps are the result of computer models.

yeah so is expanding antarctic ice.

 

[concept]

Here.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

American Institute of Physics.

Stuck on stupid.

 

[Big Fitz]

One of the predictions of global warming is for wider and wilder swings in the weather, with an overall warming trend.

If there's a heatwave, it's Global Warming.
If there's a cold snap, it's Climate Change.
If there's a drought, it's Global Warming
If there are floods, it's Climate Chang
If there is locusts, it's Global Warming
if there are crop failures, it's Climate Chage.

But the key points connecting all these threads are these.

1. It's man's fault
2. Massive fascist global government must be implemented immedeately, with it's supporters on top.
3. Deniers are less than human and should, ideally, be killed off.

Face it, this is a psychotic religion or mental disease.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Variability within the climate system, despite the trend:

tinyurl.com/yam6ax9

These the same experts that can not explain why for 10 years temperatures have not gone up, CO2 has?

 

[Foxfyre]

One of the predictions of global warming is for wider and wilder swings in the weather, with an overall warming trend.

If there's a heatwave, it's Global Warming.
If there's a cold snap, it's Climate Change.
If there's a drought, it's Global Warming
If there are floods, it's Climate Chang
If there is locusts, it's Global Warming
if there are crop failures, it's Climate Chage.

But the key points connecting all these threads are these.

1. It's man's fault
2. Massive fascist global government must be implemented immedeately, with it's supporters on top.
3. Deniers are less than human and should, ideally, be killed off.

Face it, this is a psychotic religion or mental disease.

Absolutely caused by anthropogenic global warming, you left out increase or decline of various species, hurricanes, tornadoes, hail storms, sunny days, variances in snowfall, increase in Anarctica ice, decrease in Arctic ice, warts, hang nails, and accordian players.

 

[Old Rocks]

I see. Melting glaciers and icecaps are the result of computer models.

yeah so is expanding antarctic ice.

What expanding Antarctic Ice?

Satellite data stunner: &#8220;Our data suggest that EAST Antarctica is losing mass&#8230;. Antarctica may soon be contributing significantly more to global sea-level rise.&#8221; « Climate Progress

Satellite data stunner: “Our data suggest that EAST Antarctica is losing mass…. Antarctica may soon be contributing significantly more to global sea-level rise.”
November 23, 2009
The East Antarctic ice sheet has been losing mass for the last three years, according to an analysis of data from a gravity-measuring satellite mission.

That’s from the BBC story. Nature Geoscience just published the study online, “Accelerated Antarctic ice loss from satellite gravity measurements.” It begins, “Accurate quantification of Antarctic ice-sheet mass balance and its contribution to global sea-level rise remains challenging, because in situ measurements over both space and time are sparse,” and it concludes:

Our results suggest that over the WAIS [West Antarctic ice sheet] (especially the ASE [Amundsen Sea Embayment]) there is accelerated ice loss since around 2005 and/or 2006, with the EAIS showing correlated changes of the same sign in this period, attributed to increased ice loss over EAIS coastal regions in recent years. Using a simple linear projection for the period 2006–2009, Antarctic ice loss rate can be as large as -22089 Gt yr-1. These new GRACE estimates, on average, are consistent with recent InSAR fluxes4 but, in contrast to previous estimates, they indicate that as a whole, Antarctica may soon be contributing significantly more to global sea-level rise.

 

[Old Rocks]

Variability within the climate system, despite the trend:

tinyurl.com/yam6ax9

These the same experts that can not explain why for 10 years temperatures have not gone up, CO2 has?

Sarge, you know that is a lie. The warmest decade on record is the last ten years. Assholes like you like to cherry pick the data by using 1998 as a base. That would be the same as if I used the coolest year from the Pinotubo eruption to prove a faster rate of warming than really exists.

Now we are very likely to have one, more likely two, years in the next five that exceed 1998. When we do, I am going to call your scuzzy ass on all the stupid posts you have done stating it is cooling.