US scientists: Global warming pause 'no longer valid'

[mamooth]

Where did Karl find the extra warmth this past decade?

There was no need to "find" any warmth, since there's never been a "pause" or "hiatus" in the first place. At best, there was just a slight slowdown in the warming trend. I've been pointing that out for years.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Where did Karl find the extra warmth this past decade?

There was no need to "find" any warmth, since there's never been a "pause" or "hiatus" in the first place. At best, there was just a slight slowdown in the warming trend. I've been pointing that out for years.

But why did the graph show that there was?

 

[Old Rocks]

Because it was primarily based on land data. Add ocean data, and Arctic data, and the 'pause' disappears. But even if we find that there was a 'pause', we saw that happen '50 to '70. And then the temperatures went right back up. There is a lot we have yet to discover about how our climate on this planet works. What we do know is that the 'alarmist' predictions of 35 years ago were wrong. They were far too conservative. What we see in the Arctic right now was not supposed to happen until 2050 to 2080. And the recession of the alpine glaciers exceeded predictions, as has the beginning of the breakup of the Antarctic Ice Shelves. The rise of the oceans is at the upper bounds of prediction. The decrease in pH is already causing problems in some areas, and the coral reefs are dying out in many places. Best keep a sharp eye on things and make some plans for the worst case.

 

[Crick]

Never mind that Karl Et Al defies the laws of thermal dynamics.. A first year physics student can debunk this pile of crap.

"Thermal dynamics"?!?!? "Thermal dynamics?!?!?!?!? Before you're going to convince anyone you're familiar with a topic, it's probably a good idea to learn how to spell it.

 

[Zander]

meanwhile Americans give a collective

 

[westwall]

What science? Climatology today is science fiction but precious little science.

Please stick to the topic. Do you think it's sensible to determine global average surface temperature by ignoring all the actual surface temperature measurements, and instead using very dubious measurements of the temperature at 14,000 feet?

If you have specific problems with the Karl15 paper, I suggest you do some science. It would be a new approach for the deniers here, a break from their constant snide remarks, political rants and conspiracy theories. Write up your critique, show your analysis, and submit it to the journal for a healthy scientific debate. Not specifically you, anybody on your side. The world awaits your brilliance.

This is the topic. The facts are, you have no facts. Your high priests have been making the crap up for decades now. But, they got caught and the whole mess is coming down around their ears. The politicians and bankers are so desperate for the cash they hope to steal though that they are not going to let it go. They are going to go down fighting. But go down they most certainly will.

 

[westwall]

Never mind that Karl Et Al defies the laws of thermal dynamics.. A first year physics student can debunk this pile of crap.

"Thermal dynamics"?!?!? "Thermal dynamics?!?!?!?!? Before you're going to convince anyone you're familiar with a topic, it's probably a good idea to learn how to spell it.

Academia uses thermodynamics, industry tends to use the term thermal dynamics as in this case...


Thermal dynamics in laser excited metal nanoparticles

Thermal dynamics in laser excited metal nanoparticles

 

[Billy_Bob]

Never mind that Karl Et Al defies the laws of thermal dynamics.. A first year physics student can debunk this pile of crap.

"Thermal dynamics"?!?!? "Thermal dynamics?!?!?!?!? Before you're going to convince anyone you're familiar with a topic, it's probably a good idea to learn how to spell it.

Molecular responses to Photons which create heat... imagine that... Crick and Old Fraud cant figure it out... Sources can be the sun's full spectrum, targeted lasers, and infrared... And you said you were scientists...

 

[Crick]

Never mind that Karl Et Al defies the laws of thermal dynamics.. A first year physics student can debunk this pile of crap.

"Thermal dynamics"?!?!? "Thermal dynamics?!?!?!?!? Before you're going to convince anyone you're familiar with a topic, it's probably a good idea to learn how to spell it.

Molecular responses to Photons which create heat... imagine that... Crick and Old Fraud cant figure it out... Sources can be the sun's full spectrum, targeted lasers, and infrared... And you said you were scientists...

God are you stupid.

I have never said I was a scientist. I am an engineer. I have a BS in Ocean Engineering. You're the one who claims to be moving from a degree in criminology directly to a PhD in meteorology. How's that coming along?

I aced two semesters of THERMODYNAMICS and a third of heat transfer during which they taught me, among other things, HOW TO SPELL THE GODDAMN WORD.

 

[Muhammed]

 

[IanC]

Hahahaha. ARGO shows almost no warming (admittedly only from 2004) and satellites show less than no warming for the range of Karl's paper. Yet we are being told there has been warming.

Can you spell reanalysis? I knew you could.

Copying claims from a Monckton article on WUWT is really scraping bottom.

Should I have asked you to spell Trenberth's name too? Funny how Trenberth manage to rearrange the ocean data and it suddenly fit sooooooo much better. Volcanic signals that weren't there before just magically appeared. Since he got away with it so easily one of his buddies thought he might just take a crack at it. A little selective adjusting and... Voila! A somewhat plausible excuse for the Pause. At least for now.

Just like the Colorado sea level records. When SLR levels dropped they went offline for a couple of months and came back with a new (higher ) dataset and a shiny new adjustment for GIA.

How many of these public relations disasters will have to be fixed before the whole thing collapses? I must admit I should have been able predict this. I just didn't think they had the gall to try it after all the bad publicity lately over homogenization and such.

 

[Ernie S.]

Going to be interesting to see what that 'Pause' looks like by the end of this year.

Fudge a few more numbers and lose the raw data and the IPCC can say whatever the **** the money tells them to say.

 

[Ernie S.]

Our Science institutions can't afford to have 38-50% of our country saying they're corrupt. Science isn't about politics but fact!!!

The last thing I want to see is for these institutions that do a good job be harmed..In fact, it was the republicans that not too long ago that were the most likely to support nasa the most out of both parties, so it brings great sadness to see the change of heart now...But they really have a long road ahead attempting to explain why 15 years of steady land temperatures never happened and why they needed the change???

Did they find extra warming in the arctic?
Did they find more warming over the oceans?
Where they able to show that areas over northeast Russia had warmed more??

Way to many people are pissed off to ignore this reality....Enough to elect leaders that would defund and would rather not have that warning that has saved tens of thousands of lives. It is up to these institutions and people that love them to get serious.

What 10s of thousands of lives have been saved by climate "science"?

 

[skookerasbil]

So this is the new way to fubar peoples brains on this...........have 44 different temperature measurements and pick the ones that conform with your shit!!!

These frauds don't have a chance unless they screw with the data............and imagine the contingent who buys this crap!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Lets all not get caught up in the minutia that is frequently what emerges in this forum!!!


More Proof the skeptics are WINNING US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


Would anybody like me to post up the Obama EIA projection graph on energy out to 2050??!!


lOsInG



[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/Cartman20Kicks20a20Field20Goal.gif.html][/URL]

 

[IanC]

What science? Climatology today is science fiction but precious little science.

Please stick to the topic. Do you think it's sensible to determine global average surface temperature by ignoring all the actual surface temperature measurements, and instead using very dubious measurements of the temperature at 14,000 feet?

If you have specific problems with the Karl15 paper, I suggest you do some science. It would be a new approach for the deniers here, a break from their constant snide remarks, political rants and conspiracy theories. Write up your critique, show your analysis, and submit it to the journal for a healthy scientific debate. Not specifically you, anybody on your side. The world awaits your brilliance.

Where did Karl find the extra warmth this past decade?

hey Matt- I think the main correction came from adjustments to SSTs. Lindzen (and others) point out that the mix of data types has been changing over the decades, and the way they are dealt with has left an artifact in the Karl15 dataset. Curry agrees and has a good article up describing this.

 

[Crick]

The full text of Karl et al is available. There's no need to guess what he says.

Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus

From the second paragraph:

"Changes of particular importance include: (i) an increasing amount of ocean data from buoys, which are slightly different than data from ships; (ii) an increasing amount of ship data from engine intake thermometers, which are slightly different than data from bucket sea-water temperatures; and (iii) a large increase in land-station data that enables better analysis of key regions that may be warming faster or slower than the global average. We address all three of these, none of which were included in our previous analysis used in the IPCC report (1)."

To what "artifact" in the Karl data do you refer?

 

[IanC]

The full text of Karl et al is available. There's no need to guess what he says.

Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus

From the second paragraph:

"Changes of particular importance include: (i) an increasing amount of ocean data from buoys, which are slightly different than data from ships; (ii) an increasing amount of ship data from engine intake thermometers, which are slightly different than data from bucket sea-water temperatures; and (iii) a large increase in land-station data that enables better analysis of key regions that may be warming faster or slower than the global average. We address all three of these, none of which were included in our previous analysis used in the IPCC report (1)."

To what "artifact" in the Karl data do you refer?

have you read any of the criticisms of Karl15? I am not asking you or anyone else to agree with them, just to parse them and see whether there is any validity to the actual points brought up.

As usual, you seem to agree with anything new that comes out. you discard your previous position like a pair of dirty socks and jump into a new one. Karl has made new assumptions in an already ambiguous field. are they correct? I have my doubts and so do many others with the expertise to actually find the faults.

 

[Crick]

I just saw Karl for the first time yesterday. If you have links to something you'd like read, let's see them.

What position do you believe I've discarded? I still hold BTK's finding that a great deal of SST has gone into he deep ocean and I do not find that in conflict with Karl.

 

[mamooth]

Should I have asked you to spell Trenberth's name too?

Trenberth? Why bring him up?

Oh, I get it, you're talking about that denier myth. Those in the denier fantasy bubble will even deny that the surface temperatures have always showed steady warming. Instead, in denier mythology, there's a story of a pause, and then a story of how one devlish man, Trenberth, explained away the pause. However, nobody outside the cult cares about such fairy tales.

Funny how Trenberth manage to rearrange the ocean data and it suddenly fit sooooooo much better. Volcanic signals that weren't there before just magically appeared. Since he got away with it so easily one of his buddies thought he might just take a crack at it. A little selective adjusting and... Voila! A somewhat plausible excuse for the Pause. At least for now.

Funny how nobody cares about your endless conspiracy theories. Which you'll claim are not conspiracy theories. The whole world is faking data, but that isn't a conspiracy theory.

Just like the Colorado sea level records. When SLR levels dropped they went offline for a couple of months and came back with a new (higher ) dataset and a shiny new adjustment for GIA.

I'm sure that conspiracy theory draws rave reviews in Denierstan, but again, nobody else cares.

How many of these public relations disasters will have to be fixed before the whole thing collapses?

Hate to break it to you, but it's already collapsed on you. Your side was caught faking everything too many times. Hence, you're ignored now.

I must admit I should have been able predict this. I just didn't think they had the gall to try it after all the bad publicity lately over homogenization and such.

You're not ignored because of a global socialist plot. You're ignored for the same reason moon landing hoaxers are ignored. Enjoy your future of being even more savagely ignored.