Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

Full story: Newsday 47,074
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Full Story
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41311 Nov 14, 2013
Cut n Paste wrote:
"Cowtan & Way investigate the claim of a global surface warming 'pause' over the past 16 years by examining the trends from 1997 through 2012. While HadCRUT4 only estimates the surface warming trend at 0.046°C per decade during that time, and NASA puts it at 0.080°C per decade, the new kriging and hybrid data sets estimate the trend during this time at 0.11 and 0.12°C per decade, respectively."
Yes, the latest ESTIMATES prove that as CO2 (the main driver in CC) goes up so do Temps. Further validation of the scientific consensus in AGW theory.
The contradictions continue....

Bozo just posted a link lamenting short term trends, "Also; The public debate about the alleged “warming pause” was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years"

...then you cite what?

A study of a short term trend.

LOL
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41312 Nov 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Facts and numbers are of no interest to you!
And being a global warming hypocrite means nothing to you.

Do your part... sit in the dark.

LOL
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#41313 Nov 14, 2013
Irrational troll ignored!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#41314 Nov 14, 2013
This is a beautiful new study by an English and a Canadian:

Incomplete global coverage is a potential source of bias in global temperature reconstructions if the unsampled regions are not uniformly distributed over the planet's surface. The widely used HadCRUT4 dataset covers on average about 84% of the globe over recent decades, with the unsampled regions being concentrated at the poles and over Africa. Three existing reconstructions with near-global coverage are examined, each suggesting that HadCRUT4 is subject to bias due to its treatment of unobserved regions.


Two alternative approaches for reconstructing global temperatures are explored, one based on an optimal interpolation algorithm and the other a hybrid method incorporating additional information from the satellite temperature record. The methods are validated on the basis of their skill at reconstructing omitted sets of observations. Both methods provide superior results than excluding the unsampled regions, with the hybrid method showing particular skill around the regions where no observations are available.


Temperature trends are compared for the hybrid global temperature reconstruction and the raw HadCRUT4 data. The widely quoted trend since 1997 in the hybrid global reconstruction is two and a half times greater than the corresponding trend in the coverage-biased HadCRUT4 data. Coverage bias causes a cool bias in recent temperatures relative to the late 1990s which increases from around 1998 to the present. Trends starting in 1997 or 1998 are particularly biased with respect to the global trend. The issue is exacerbated by the strong El Niño event of 1997-1998, which also tends to suppress trends starting during those years.

You can also read about it in other sites such as

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warmin...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41315 Nov 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
This is a beautiful new study by an English and a Canadian:
Incomplete global coverage is a potential source of bias in global temperature reconstructions if the unsampled regions are not uniformly distributed over the planet's surface. The widely used HadCRUT4 dataset covers on average about 84% of the globe over recent decades, with the unsampled regions being concentrated at the poles and over Africa. Three existing reconstructions with near-global coverage are examined, each suggesting that HadCRUT4 is subject to bias due to its treatment of unobserved regions.
Two alternative approaches for reconstructing global temperatures are explored, one based on an optimal interpolation algorithm and the other a hybrid method incorporating additional information from the satellite temperature record. The methods are validated on the basis of their skill at reconstructing omitted sets of observations. Both methods provide superior results than excluding the unsampled regions, with the hybrid method showing particular skill around the regions where no observations are available.
Temperature trends are compared for the hybrid global temperature reconstruction and the raw HadCRUT4 data. The widely quoted trend since 1997 in the hybrid global reconstruction is two and a half times greater than the corresponding trend in the coverage-biased HadCRUT4 data. Coverage bias causes a cool bias in recent temperatures relative to the late 1990s which increases from around 1998 to the present. Trends starting in 1997 or 1998 are particularly biased with respect to the global trend. The issue is exacerbated by the strong El Niño event of 1997-1998, which also tends to suppress trends starting during those years.
You can also read about it in other sites such as
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warmin...
Also from skeptical science;


How to use short timeframes to distort reality: a guide to cherrypicking

http://www.skepticalscience.com/cherrypicking...

Hmmm... 1997 to date... sounds like a 'short term trend' analysis.

d'Oh!

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#41316 Nov 14, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
The contradictions continue....
Bozo just posted a link lamenting short term trends, "Also; The public debate about the alleged “warming pause” was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years"
...then you cite what?
A study of a short term trend.
LOL
I suspect that you have a reading comprehension problem.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#41317 Nov 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
This is a beautiful new study by an English and a Canadian:
Incomplete global coverage is a potential source of bias in global temperature reconstructions if the unsampled regions are not uniformly distributed over the planet's surface. The widely used HadCRUT4 dataset covers on average about 84% of the globe over recent decades, with the unsampled regions being concentrated at the poles and over Africa. Three existing reconstructions with near-global coverage are examined, each suggesting that HadCRUT4 is subject to bias due to its treatment of unobserved regions.
Two alternative approaches for reconstructing global temperatures are explored, one based on an optimal interpolation algorithm and the other a hybrid method incorporating additional information from the satellite temperature record. The methods are validated on the basis of their skill at reconstructing omitted sets of observations. Both methods provide superior results than excluding the unsampled regions, with the hybrid method showing particular skill around the regions where no observations are available.
Temperature trends are compared for the hybrid global temperature reconstruction and the raw HadCRUT4 data. The widely quoted trend since 1997 in the hybrid global reconstruction is two and a half times greater than the corresponding trend in the coverage-biased HadCRUT4 data. Coverage bias causes a cool bias in recent temperatures relative to the late 1990s which increases from around 1998 to the present. Trends starting in 1997 or 1998 are particularly biased with respect to the global trend. The issue is exacerbated by the strong El Niño event of 1997-1998, which also tends to suppress trends starting during those years.
You can also read about it in other sites such as
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warmin...
See the abstract, folks.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41318 Nov 14, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
I suspect that you have a reading comprehension problem.
Not at all dimwit.

Just trying to hold warmists to some sort of standards.

LOL
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#41319 Nov 14, 2013
LOL. Look at the troll action. WOW. They love those judgeits with their trolling action.

Nice.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41320 Nov 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
LOL. Look at the troll action. WOW. They love those judgeits with their trolling action.
Nice.
You think so little of litesong.

Don't feel bad -- I don't either.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41321 Nov 14, 2013
Speaking of short term trends...

Every month SpaceBlues was citing NOAA temperature records with glee... cuz they were showing increases.

But he stopped doing that. Wonder why?

"The average temperature for the contiguous United States during October was 53.6°F, 0.6°F below the 20thcentury average, making it the 37th coolest October on record."

"The year-to-date contiguous U.S. temperature was 55.7°F, 0.7°F above the 20th century average, and the 32nd warmest January-October on record."

"When comparing the national temperature departure from average for the January-October period as calculated by NCDC's operational dataset (USHCN) to the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), the USHCN temperature anomaly was 0.05°F less than the USCRN anomaly value. The USHCN-based temperature was 0.16°F below the 1981-2010 average and the USCRN-based temperature was 0.11°F below the 1981-2010 average."

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2013/1...

37th, 23rd... not even Top 10 stuff here.

Shucks... nothing like some inconvenient 'truth', is there?

LOL
litesong

Monroe, WA

#41322 Nov 14, 2013
motheaten wrote:
jackass loon
Jackalope......
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41323 Nov 14, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
loon
litesong

Monroe, WA

#41324 Nov 14, 2013
motheaten wrote:
.... hold AGW advocates to some sort of standards.
Once education standards are sorted, toxic topix AGW deniers hold almost no science & mathematics degrees, & no science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra, or pre-calc in their poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#41325 Nov 14, 2013
Mothra wrote:
Speaking of short term trends...
Every month SpaceBlues was citing NOAA temperature records with glee... cuz they were showing increases.
But he stopped doing that. Wonder why?
"The average temperature for the contiguous United States during October was 53.6°F, 0.6°F below the 20thcentury average, making it the 37th coolest October on record."
"The year-to-date contiguous U.S. temperature was 55.7°F, 0.7°F above the 20th century average, and the 32nd warmest January-October on record."
"When comparing the national temperature departure from average for the January-October period as calculated by NCDC's operational dataset (USHCN) to the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), the USHCN temperature anomaly was 0.05°F less than the USCRN anomaly value. The USHCN-based temperature was 0.16°F below the 1981-2010 average and the USCRN-based temperature was 0.11°F below the 1981-2010 average."
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2013/1...
37th, 23rd... not even Top 10 stuff here.
Shucks... nothing like some inconvenient 'truth', is there?
LOL
What is so difficult a bout this?
A new study by British and Canadian researchers shows that the global temperature rise of the past 15 years has been greatly underestimated. The reason is the data gaps in the weather station network, especially in the Arctic. If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

http://www.realclimate.org/images//Cowtan.png
heavytune

Seattle, WA

#41326 Nov 14, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Once education standards are sorted, toxic topix AGW deniers hold almost no science & mathematics degrees, & no science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra, or pre-calc in their poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.
oh 'litesong', we know how hard it was for you to be in the 'special class' for so many years. if only they would have taught you some common sense. too late now. you must be one of obama's advisers, from what you post. funny stuff.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#41327 Nov 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>hahahaha awwwww
Aren't you a lovely sensationalist!
you mean realist, son.
Coal is King

Hopkinsville, KY

#41328 Nov 14, 2013
More voices from the coalfields.

From Jeffersonville, KY:

“Coal is not the problem .The problem is that democrat in Washington that all these democrats like you said to vote for .If wind power worked with all the hot air Obama has been blowing our energy problem would be solved.Obama is not a Biblical leader and we are set up for failure. Obama is going to enslave us and we are headed for a socialist regime. The man doesn't pray to the one true living God in my opinion!I think Obama Husein plans on bankrupting our banks and destroying our nation.”

“This is more than losing our money or our way of living, its losing our world.Its like losing the world we were raised in .We dont want Obamas world of socialism.We want a capitalist world and work with our own hands.I think that is as industrial as it gets.We need every form of industry but we need coal. This is a war to stop us from becoming more industrious .The "blessing"would be the end of Obamas term!”

From Corbin, KY:

“I was watching the news the other day & they had a farmer or farmers they grow corn. Weather has been so bad this year it's not growing. They have pay for it to feed their pigs & since the Goverment has pushed so many fuel companies to have the corn fuel (whatever) the price is very high. That wouldn't be an issue if the Goverment wasn't determined to get of coal as a power source. Right? I mean it is affecting the whole country right now. Not just this area.”

From Columbus, OH:

“Coal miners are people who want to WORK, not be on welfare, food stamps, unemployment ect. For those who say get another job. Well those aren't out there. This event is to support our miners in hopes of bringing attention as far as to the white house, so they don't lose their jobs. Yes, this won't solve the problem. But it is a start in getting attention through strength in numbers. No one thinks this will fix it but I can assure you that everyone in that line will also be voting and that will make a difference. Bottom line is, anyone who cuts down a hard working person or a person trying to help people they don't even know, is pathetic. We need our jobs and we appreciate all the support but feel sorry for someone who doesn't respect their neighbors when they are scared and need help. Me and my family will be in that "silly" line on saturday, because we support our friends, family, neighbors and our community!”
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41329 Nov 14, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Once education standards are sorted, toxic topix AGW deniers hold almost no science & mathematics degrees, & no science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra, or pre-calc in their poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.
Gawd you're just a freaking idiot.

loon.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#41330 Nov 14, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
What is so difficult a bout this?
A new study by British and Canadian researchers shows that the global temperature rise of the past 15 years has been greatly underestimated. The reason is the data gaps in the weather station network, especially in the Arctic. If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.
http://www.realclimate.org/images//Cowtan.png
Also from skeptical science;

How to use short timeframes to distort reality: a guide to cherrypicking

http://www.skepticalscience.com/cherrypicking ...

Hmmm... 15 years... sounds like a 'short term trend' analysis.

d'Oh!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Abby 10-2 3 min edogxxx 1
Amy 10-2 4 min edogxxx 1
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min TheIndependentMaj... 1,115,628
Rauner, Quinn clash on Obamacare expansion ahea... 38 min Le Jimbo 1
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 49 min Rogue Scholar 05 178,618
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr Mandela 68,566
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 1 hr KiMare 50,064
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 8 hr Mister Tonka 98,373
Chicago Dating
Find my Match

Chicago Jobs

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]