Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 12:48pm PT
|
Chief, surely you can find a source that shows the November data to be wrong.
After all, it comes from a blog, so it has to be wrong.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 12:53pm PT
|
this is so damn funny
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 12:56pm PT
|
LOL, only the 2nd highest land November temp on record.
Does that mean Novembers are cooling, Chief?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:01pm PT
|
Where's your graph of November temps, Chief?
Surely this is wrong, since it comes from a blog.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:04pm PT
|
And your point?
The graph is land + ocean surface November temps.
Why would the 2nd highest November land temp be something for a denier to crow about?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:07pm PT
|
That's not true. He occasionally uses his own words to engage others. I've seen it... several times. Disastrous results.
Embarrassing.
The arrogance I see from you, rick, poedke is something I really can't understand. You have been disproved over and over again. You show very limited understanding of the subject but anyway you guys seem to believe that you really are better than everyone else in some way.
Where do you really put your self on a scale if monolith posts with disastrous results? Lets say that you think that monoliths posts are level 2 on a scale between 1 and 10, where do you put your own posts?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:27pm PT
|
Why would the 2nd highest November land temp be something for a denier to crow about?
Because it is a negative trend (with some use of that word)! We all know that any negative trend (independent how long of course) is interesting and show that AGW is a hoax.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:28pm PT
|
Good point. It's hard for me to think like a denier.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:32pm PT
|
What does NOAA/NCDC say about November land + ocean temps, Chief?
One is for land + ocean.
The other is land.
Should I get a fifth grader to explain it to you?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:42pm PT
|
I expected that you thought that.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:47pm PT
|
"Good Point.It's hard for me to think like a denier"
+11
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 02:02pm PT
|
What does NOAA/NCDC say about November land + ocean temps, Chief?
Wait, I know that one. Both NOAA/NCDC and NASA data (two separate surface-temperature indexes) show this November, globally, as the warmest November on record. The third main surface temperature index, HadCRUT4, has not yet published November figures.
Following some other key indicators: global ocean heat content data have been updated through July-September of this year. The latest 3-month estimates for 0-700 and 0-2000 meters are the 5th-highest and 3-highest, respectively, in those series. The other top values occurred mainly within the past two years.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 02:17pm PT
|
Again.... read.
The two are for SURFACE/LAND TEMPS only.
The two Gov't entities do not agree with each other.
Which one is correct, if either?
So the oceans don't have a surface?
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 02:22pm PT
|
Onan is a minor biblical person in the Book of Genesis Chapter 38, who was the second son of Judah. Like his older brother, Er, Onan was killed by Yahweh.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 02:31pm PT
|
Think about the post..
I have. Whats your point? That you are always wrong?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 02:49pm PT
|
The arctic sea ice area rebounded spectacularly, with minimum extent coming in 50% higher than the record low in 2012. The 2013 Arctic extent was also greater than 5 of the last 6 minimums.
I just found this and similar arguments very strange and useless.
I just can't understand how people can look at a time series with a large variance and only seem to care about the last few data points. What is the importance of one year of recovery when the data is full of similar recoveries even though the trend is obviously decreasing?
Why should the "recovery" 2013 be any difference from the "recovery" from the 2007 minimum that finally resulted in a new record low 2012?
How can people seem to suggest that this one year trend implies in any way that the very clear long term trend is broken?
I just cant understand it. It just seems very stupid to me.
I have also realized that my points above are going to be ignored by people like, sketch, ron and the chief.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 03:09pm PT
|
If there were any honesty behind the Arctic-sea-ice-recovery talking point, the same people would have been telling us "global warming is here!" last year, when Arctic sea ice reached all-time lows. Or in 2007 when it broke previous records too. Or in 2010 and 2011 when sea ice dropped back from another brief but ballyhooed "recovery." But of course they did not.
So what's happening right now? This (southern) spring has been unseasonably cold in the Antarctic, so the ice melt there is going relatively slow -- sea ice area declined only 1 million km^2 in the most recent 7-day period (Dec 9-15), leaving it about 1 million km^2 above average for this date.
As I mentioned upthread, there have been a number of recent studies focusing on what's happening with Antarctic sea ice, presented at the recent AGU. Several of those sought systematic physical drivers for an upward trend, but one of the best analyses showed that the trend itself is well within recent natural variability for southern ice (unlike the stronger and longer-lived northern trend).
Meanwhile, with the polar night in full force up north it has been plenty cold to freeze water, and yet warmer than usual for this time of year. As a result northern sea ice area (12/16) is about 560,000 km^2 below average for the date. I'm paying close attention to all this because a sea ice paper is third item on my do-list today.
|
|
Cragar
climber
MSLA - MT
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 03:20pm PT
|
Can you give some examples a minimum exceeding the previous minimum by 50%? Can you give an example of any minimum exceeding the record low by 50%?
Is this what you would consider - 'apples to apples'? If so, how?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 03:25pm PT
|
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 03:30pm PT
|
Sketch, sorry I just can't consider the variance in the data especially meaningful. My problem is maybe that I have analyzed data and have some education in data analysis.
What you say are also things that is more likely to happen when the signal is smaller. I can see how people in the future claim a record recovery of thousands of percents because the previous record was almost zero.
As chiloe pointed out. I guess that you considered last year record low as a clear indication of the truth of agw... It must be hard to change opinion every time a signal change slope or the weather at your home change.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!