Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2014 - 02:04pm PT
|
FYI The study backs up the 99.7% claim.
My comment was about the study, not a blog.
My main problem with this study ...
What study Sketch?
No surprise, no reference to a study that you say backs up your lying blog.
Stop the lying Sketch.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:04pm PT
|
I played around with the woodfortrees plot and have a question to rick et al.
Why is it that the trends from for example 96 or 85 are almost identical for gistemp and UAH even though gistemp is from nasa that can't be trusted and is based on very badly placed thermometers, smoothed and adjusted to show a warming trend (I probably missed many bad things with that dataset), in short Hansen has been involved, and UAH that is from two very honest and truth speaking scientists, Spencer and Cristy, and based on accurate satellite data?
Or is it that the only trustworthy temperature data is RSS?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:06pm PT
|
Sketch still doesn't understand ocean heat content, even after Ed's lesson.
Oh, my.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:17pm PT
|
In fact, Cook’s paper provides the clearest available statistical evidence that there is scarcely any explicit support among scientists for the consensus that the IPCC, politicians, bureaucrats, academics and the media have so long and so falsely proclaimed. That was not the outcome Cook had hoped for, and it was not the outcome he had stated in his paper, but it was the outcome he had really found.
Nice argument. I am sure that the same argument could be used to show that there is scarcely any explicit support among scientists for consensus in most areas were a scientific consensus exist.
It is just that it really isn't that common to write down everything known in the abstract of a research paper. I guess that very few abstract for papers in physics state that Newtons laws works on low speeds on earth.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:23pm PT
|
Let's hope you know that a tiny amount of temp change in the oceans represents a huge amount of energy that can impact the atmosphere.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:25pm PT
|
Sketch, you are not even funny. Do you really believe that you have a point when you seem to think that the fact that the temperature change is small is more important than the change in energy?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:34pm PT
|
Interesting that hadsst3 had its highest value recently and that hadsst2 recently had the highest value except for 1998. So it might not only be noaa, nasa that has measured high temperatures.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:39pm PT
|
One new trend seems to be to plot as many plots as possibly in one graph...
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2014 - 02:42pm PT
|
Did you really not grasp this was the study I was talking about?
There are several studies on AWG agreement in the scientific community. Do I need to cite a partial list for you?
I've read that Cook study. Nowhere does it back up the BS on the blog that you quoted. In fact, it says this in the Conclusion:
The number of papers rejecting AGW is a miniscule proportion of the published research, with the percentage slightly decreasing over time. Among papers expressing a position on AGW, an overwhelming percentage (97.2% based on self-ratings, 97.1% based on abstract ratings) endorses the scientific consensus on AGW.
Furthermore, I posted a more recent survey that backs up this conclusion.
So again I ask you to show where the Cook study backs up the claim made in the anti-science blog you so love.
FYI The study backs up the 99.7% claim.
Or did you just make that part up?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:44pm PT
|
The chief, if you plotted one data set in one graph you might be able to see the details in the data set.
The last sample in hadsst2 is higher than all other samples except maybe 1998.
The highest value in the hadsst3 dataset is from one or two months ago.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:46pm PT
|
Can Sketch or someone else try to explain to me what the chief is trying to say with his graphs?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:49pm PT
|
Sorry, I have no idea what you are trying to say. Your own data show that you were wrong and now are ju just rambling about something.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:53pm PT
|
Those are not yearly averages, Chief.
Again, comparing apples to oranges.
Hadcrut4 has 2010 as the highest year temp, even though 1998 has a higher spike.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 02:58pm PT
|
Prove you wrong to you?
LOL!
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2014 - 03:00pm PT
|
Sketch is full of crap, the Cook study does not support what Legates et al (2013) claim.
Here's a look at the Legates paper (posted on Sketch's favorite anti-science blog):
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/03/cooks-97-consensus-disproven-by-a-new-paper-showing-major-math-errors/
What does Legates find? Word games, that's what:
“Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” [Emphasis added]
The new paper by the leading climatologist Dr David Legates and his colleagues, published in the respected Science and Education journal, now in its 21st year of publication, reveals that Cook had not considered whether scientists and their published papers had said climate change was “dangerous”.
Yes, because the papers did not include the precise work "dangerous," they were thrown out of consideration by Legates.
Word games, that's what you get out of the deniers. Because that's all they can fight with, they cannot use scientific fact.
But get this, the Cook study finds:
Western Fuels Association conducted a $510 000 campaign whose primary goal was to 'reposition global warming as theory (not fact)'.
Got any more lies for us Sketch?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2014 - 03:11pm PT
|
Got any more lies for us Sketch?
Sketch answers in the affirmative.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 - 05:43pm PT
|
Evidence of freshwater effects in the Antarctic, where
A surge in freshwater at the surface may have shut down mixing of water layers in the Weddell Sea.
In 1974, just a couple years after the launch of the first Landsat satellite, scientists noticed something odd in the Weddell Sea near Antarctica. There was a large ice-free area, called a polynya, in the middle of the ice pack. The polynya, which covered an area as large as New Zealand, reappeared in the winters of 1975 and 1976 but has not been seen since.
Scientists interpreted the polynya’s disappearance as a sign that its formation was a naturally rare event. But researchers reporting in Nature Climate Change disagree, saying that the polynya’s appearance used to be far more common and that climate change is now suppressing its formation.
What’s more, the polynya’s absence could have implications for the vast conveyor belt of ocean currents that move heat around the globe.
Surface seawater around the poles tends to be relatively fresh due to precipitation and the fact that sea ice melts into it, which makes it very cold. As a result, below the surface is a layer of slightly warmer and more saline water not infiltrated by melting ice and precipitation. This higher salinity makes it denser than water at the surface.
Scientists think that the Weddell polynya can form when ocean currents push these denser subsurface waters against an underwater mountain chain known as the Maud Rise. This forces the water up to the surface, where it mixes with and warms colder surface waters. While it doesn’t warm the top layer of water enough for a person to comfortably bathe in, it's enough to prevent ice from forming. But at a cost—the heat from the upwelling subsurface water dissipates into the atmosphere soon after it reaches the surface This loss of heat forces the now-cool but still dense water to sink some 3,000 meters to feed a huge, super-cold underwater ocean current known as Antarctic Bottom Water.
Antarctic Bottom Water spreads across the global oceans at depths of 3,000 meters and more, delivering oxygen into these deep places. It’s also one of the drivers of global thermohaline circulation, the great ocean conveyor belt that moves heat from the equator towards the poles.
But for the mixing to occur in the Weddell Sea, the top layer of ocean water must become denser than the layer below it so that the waters can sink.
To find out what has been going on in the Weddell Sea, Casimir de Lavergne of McGill University in Montreal and colleagues began by analyzing temperature and salinity measurements collected by ships and robotic floats in this region since 1956—tens of thousands of data points. The researchers could see that the surface layer of water at the site of the Weddell polynya has been getting less salty since the 1950s. Freshwater is less dense than saltwater, and it acts as a lid on the Weddell system, trapping the subsurface warm waters and preventing them from reaching the surface. That in turn, stops the mixing that produces Antarctic Bottom Water at that site.
That increase in freshwater is coming from two sources: Climate change has amplified the global water cycle, increasing both evaporation and precipitation. And Antarctic glaciers have been calving and melting at a greater rate. Both of these sources end up contributing more freshwater to the Weddell Sea than what the area experienced in the past, the researchers note.
...
A weakening of the mixing of water in the Weddell Sea could explain, at least in part, a shrinking in Antarctic Bottom Waters reported in 2012. “Reduced convection would reduce the rate of Antarctic Bottom Water formation,” says de Lavergne. That “could cause a weakening in the lower branch of the thermohaline circulation.”
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/climate-change-felt-deep-waters-antarctica-180949939/?no-ist
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 25, 2014 - 01:14am PT
|
I don't know what the chief is screaming about but looking at some temperature data you found the following:
gistemp and hadcrut4 looks very similar (at least if you look at the yearly average)
uah also looks similar excepts higher peaks 1998 and 2010 and also lower peaks some years.
hadcrut4 is only updated through aug.
year to date (aug) for hadcrut is the third hottest year but it is definitely possibly that it is going to be a record year (the mean so far for this year is actually the highest mean recorded).
Mai, June and August this year is the hottest Mai, June and August on record for hadcrut4.
So I guess that the only temperature record that can be trusted is RSS. The other once just show to much warming which is definite proof of their inaccuracies.
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Oct 25, 2014 - 06:43am PT
|
Hello Sketch!
Can you tell me why your sound bytes there about the so-called "pause" specify "atmospheric" warming? You know, as opposed to "global warming".
I ask because it reads as a ridiculous attempt to overlook the continued warming of the oceans, by sticking an "atmospheric" in there. After all, the "pause" argument collapses right there on the beach!
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Oct 25, 2014 - 07:15am PT
|
Once again, Chief is up before sunrise, spreading his usual cheery melarkey. It's a good thing he gets an early start, lol.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!