A Spot Check of Global Warming

NY Times ^ | January 10, 2008 | John Tierney

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH

---

Good data...

[Robert A Cook PE]

CO2 levels linearly increase with time, with a very slight but measurable oscillation each spring to summer period as plant life increases (in the northern hemisphere.) This increase in plant life reduces CO2 by a predictable amount. Note that the INCREASE in CO2 of 30% since the first measurements in 1970's HAS NOT meant an increase in temperatures - past the cyclical 1/2 of one degree that naturally occurs. That is, if Kyoto is so vital that "freezing" CO2 levels at their present levels is so important, then the predicted temperature increase would be limited to LESS THAN 1/10 of ONE degree. Yet we have a natural oscillation of 1/2 of one degree.

Further, a KNOWN increase in CO2 of over 10% (from 1996 through 2008!) has NOT meant any detectable increase in temperatures!

At stations in the southern hemisphere (with an opposite winter-summer growing period) the same slight CO2 oscillation happens, but in the reversed months.

What has ONLY happened in the 1972-1998 period is a increase in CO2 with an increase in temperatures: at EVERY other period since 1890’s, temperatures have NOT tracked with CO2: temp’s go up, CO2 remains the same; temps go down, CO2 increases; CO2 increases, temps stay the same.

Pick ANY 27 year period since the 1990’s, and the CO2-temperature relationship can be ANYTHING you want it to be.

[Peter W. Kessler]

It’s been very warm here, but it was very cold a few days last week. It’s raining today. It’ll get colder, then it’ll get warmer as spring approaches. Then, when summer comes, it’ll be hot some days, cooler others. And, there will be rainy days.

[The Great RJ]

Rather than look at a seven year range of data, let us see how the Gore climate consensus holds up to historical data for the last century. I am certain the predictions would be nowhere close to actual observed results.

[BJungNan]

It’s been very warm here, but it was very cold a few days last week. It’s raining today. It’ll get colder, then it’ll get warmer as spring approaches. Then, when summer comes, it’ll be hot some days, cooler others. And, there will be rainy days.

Hmmm, very suspicious. Definately could be a sign of global warming. We should spend several billion on this.

[RightWhale]

My stock broker until his retirement used to draw straight lines through his stock charts and talk about moving averages. Maybe he still does, I don’t know. These charts look like stock charts, so the analysis was probably done by a stock broker.

[Robert A Cook PE]

You get a very, very different “result” from a sine wave: Even a second-order or third order curve evokes a very different result.

But a flat line? No. That’s NOT the way to fit this kind of data.

A “simple sloped line? Like they tried here?
Again: It ONLY fits their scenario of a constantly (or accelerating!) temp increase. The AGW extremists CAN’T afford (literally!) to allow any other answer to be seen.

[RightWhale]

Sorry, we don’t do parabolas or other conics here. We were issued only these straightedges. Least squares or forget it.

[Entrepreneur]

From Eye-opener on Global Warming

[Calvin Locke]

The "average" temperature is also pretty useless. I heard one scientist say the slight warming has been in the winter months, so the heating needs have been reduced, and the growing seasons extended.

The increase has not affected Summer temps.

[cogitator]

RealClimate responded to this very quickly, with an extended response from Roger Pielke Jr. :

Uncertainty, noise and the art of model-data comparison

[expat_panama]

Excellent!

[neverdem]

Thanks for the link.

[cogitator]

Thanks for the link.

At your service.

[neverdem]

Please ping me if you get a response because the manmade link is the important part; logic and hard numbers are rare with this topic.

Comment# 29 has a graph of CO2 versus time.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Thank you.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I'll answer that question. 1998 had the highest temperature in the last 80 years.

I believe that assertion has been shot down!

[JustDoItAlways]

The whole discussion is MOOT because we cannot trust the temperature measurements going back 100 years.

The original temperature data has been adjusted and re-adjusted and twisted a dozen times by the global warming advocates (who are also the agencies of record for the temperature records.)

The only data which can be trusted is the lower atmosphere temperature figures from the satellites since 1979 shown here.

[norwaypinesavage]

"I believe that assertion has been shot down!"

The assertion that was shot down was that 1998 was the highest US temperature on record. Father Hansen of NASA GISS had declared that 1998 was the hottest ever. It was later shown that he made a mistake in his math, and that 1934 was actually hotter than 1998. Of course, none of us make a mistake in math, 1998-1934 = 80.

[cogitator]

I believe that assertion has been shot down!

Only changed for the United States. Globally 1998 still ranks first, and that won't change. I promise.