It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Methodology
Conclusions
originally posted by: TheRedneck
~~~continued from above~~~
As mentioned in the Methodology section, I saved this graph once every decade since 1970 in order to see how the different time periods would affect the trend lines. While the polynomial trend changed up and down, the linear trend line constantly showed a small decline until I hit the year 2000. It only showed any increase in 2000, 2010, and in the final graph at 2018. Based on the fact that the difference between the linear trend lines in the two graphs above is the period of the 1950s, it would be expected that a similar examination, based on removing the 1950s from consideration, would indicate either no change or slight warming from 1970 forward.
This is exactly what we have been told!
Now, I also ran some graphs of the growing season, as shown here:
While there is little trending shown, I did notice that the length if the growing season seemed to increase slightly during colder years! This was completely unexpected! However, it turns out that during years of cooler weather, the trend is for the winters to be a little milder while the summers are much milder, increasing the growing season. As I said, the difference is quite small and likely statistically irrelevant in this context, but I thought it was worth mentioning.
Conclusions
The data indicates that we are indeed warming as has been claimed. However, the claims are minimized by including prior time periods, showing clearly that starting analysis in 1960 maximizes any obvious linear trends and camouflages polynomial trends. If this is corrected by extending the temperature record to 1950, not only is any linear trending minimized, but the polynomial trend indicates that while we are at present warming, we can expect to begin cooling in approximately ten more years with almost level temperature trends until then. The observed warming is likely simply a portion of a long-term sinusoidal variation which is quite likely natural. Any carbon dioxide based increase appears to be minuscule compared to this cycle.
The data also indicates that any variation in growing season resulting from varying temperature trends is further minimized. The amount of warmth experienced may well affect the speed of plant growth, but it has little effect on growing season length. Thus, it is reasonable to say that any temperature changes over time we have seen thus far have had little to no effect on the viability of the ecosystem.
Additional examination is warranted. I intend to conduct a FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) analysis on the data collected to determine any periodic waveforms involved in the observed cycles. If warranted, a dynamic FFT analysis may also prove to be indicated, to examine if the observed variations are themselves changing with time. This will be implemented at some future time.
I am upgrading the dataset as new information comes available.
In closing, this is real, hard data analysis people. Now, you know what it looks like.
TheRedneck
originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: SRPrime
The TL;DR version of this is; no -- we aren't warming based on carbon.
I took the time to type it... and you can't take the time to read it?
Interesting.
TheRedneck
originally posted by: ausername
Outstanding work Redneck!
It's there whether you believe it is natural cycle, manmade, or a mix of both.
originally posted by: TheRedneck
Conclusions
The data indicates that we are indeed warming as has been claimed. However, the claims are minimized by including prior time periods, showing clearly that starting analysis in 1960 maximizes any obvious linear trends and camouflages polynomial trends. If this is corrected by extending the temperature record to 1950, not only is any linear trending minimized, but the polynomial trend indicates that while we are at present warming, we can expect to begin cooling in approximately ten more years with almost level temperature trends until then. The observed warming is likely simply a portion of a long-term sinusoidal variation which is quite likely natural. Any carbon dioxide based increase appears to be minuscule compared to this cycle.
The data also indicates that any variation in growing season resulting from varying temperature trends is further minimized. The amount of warmth experienced may well affect the speed of plant growth, but it has little effect on growing season length. Thus, it is reasonable to say that any temperature changes over time we have seen thus far have had little to no effect on the viability of the ecosystem.
originally posted by: TheRedneck
I look at it this way: in our experience, the largest indicator of average temperature is longitude. Secondary to that would be ocean currents and physical obstacles such as mountain ranges. Those are not going to change with global carbon dioxide levels.