Hi,and thanks for the informative posts.
Originally posted by jakyll
Which can be disputed.
Anyone who thinks global warming has stopped has their head in the sand.
The evidence is clear -- the long-term trend is that global temperatures are rising, and humans are largely responsible for this rise. Global warming does not mean that each year will be warmer than the last. Natural phenomena will mean that some years will be much warmer and others cooler.
You only need to look at 1998 to see a record-breaking warm year caused by a very strong El Niño. In the last couple of years, the underlying warming is partially masked caused by a strong La Niña. Despite this, 11 of the last 13 years were the warmest ever recorded.
Average global temperatures are now some 0.75°C warmer than they were 100 years ago. Since the mid-1970s, the increase in temperature has averaged more than 0.15°C per decade.
Considering people like Arrhenius were suggesting there was a problem in the 19th century, I guess it has taken over 100 years to convince the majority.
I guess you never read the stuff you posted.
I'm a bit preoccupied with other threads at the moment so i don't mind at all. 
Originally posted by TheRedneck
Perhaps. But in the 1970s/1980s the concern was global cooling.
I suppose I could research back through the archival writings of men and women of science and find someone who supported about anything. I believe it was Galileo who designed a helicopter way back before the Wright Brothers were a twinkle in the eye of Mr. Wright. But I really don't have the time free to undertake such a moot endeavor. What is important is not what men think, but what is true. We are not limited by the sound barrier to velocities less than Mach 1, regardless of what scientists once believed. Blood is necessary for a patient to heal, regardless of how fervently doctors once argued for bleeding as a cure for illness. And Chris Columbus didn't fall off the edge of the world as quite a few in his time swore he would do.
Originally posted by jakyll
I used that link to show that if they're not taking proper readings in one year then you an assume that is same for the other years,and maybe even some other places round the globe who use similar equipment etc.
To a handful of scientists.
The two situations are in no way comparable.
Did you actually set me up for that?maybe you got one good laugh out of it.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by melatonin
To a handful of scientists.
The two situations are in no way comparable.
Ummm... no.
I am no kid, melatonin; I was there. I did not read about the global cooling scare; I lived it. And it was every bit as much of a consensus as today's debate about global warming. The only thing that differentiated it from today's scare was the direction that future temperatures were to take.
But Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Centre surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends.Link to news report on the study
"People have long claimed that scientists in the 1970s were convinced a new ice age was imminent. But in fact, many researchers at the time were already more concerned about the long-term risks of global warming."
Along with Peterson, the study was also authored written by William Connolly of the British Antarctic Survey and John Fleck of The Albuquerque Journal. The research will be published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.
How about the ozone scare? Oh, I was alive for that one too. We were all going to die from skin cancer because the ozone was going to stop existing due to CFCs. I haven't heard much about the ozone hole in the last decade or so. I suppose, in this obviously flawed redneck logic I use, that the reason is there was no catastrophe about to befall humanity. The hole closed back up, commencing before CFCs were outlawed. But, hey, DuPont got what they wanted; a new patentable refrigerant to replace the CFC-based one that the patent was expiring on.
The way to stop the formation, growth and spread of ozone thinning is to reduce the production of those chemicals that cause the destruction of ozone, namely CFC's and nitrogen oxides.
In 1987, the Montreal Protocol was signed by many nations whereby those nations that signed agreed to reduce their emissions of CFC's to a half (of the 1987 levels) by 2000.
Potential problems come from nations that do not see the reduction of CFC's to be a priority, and also from the huge quantity of refrigeration and air conditioning systems in the world that still contain CFC's. If they are not disposed of correctly, then the CFC's will escape into the atmosphere and continue to destroy ozone.
The problem is far from settled and is under investigation by research teams all over the world. The latest estimates are that as long as production and release of CFC's is regulated properly, global ozone levels should recover by 2050.
NASA Earth Observatory-On September 12, 2008, the Antarctic ozone hole reached its maximum size for the year. Represented by blues and purples in this image from the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) on NASA’s Aura satellite, the ozone hole covered about 27 million square kilometers, making it larger than North America, which is about 25 million square kilometers. Though larger than it was in 2007, the 2008 ozone hole was still smaller than the record set in 2006.
So today, Al Gore is trying the same thing with carbon credits. Now exactly how is it a totally different situation? Other than the fact you agree with the findings this time?Al Gore is non-existent in this argument in most countries, this is a US issue. He is seen as a spokes person on climate change and he was in an incredibly popular documentary. Which some people need to get over.
Back to the issue...
TheRedneck
Here's one you might remember: when the Patriot Act and NAFTA were good things. Yeah, that really proved out
true.
But yeah, right. I see. Throw the baby out with the bathwater because some dufus failed to correct an error knitting together data sources which led to a small correction for the time series for one data set for several years in one area of one continent on the earth. Global warming no longer exists, it was a Y2K error, lol. Look! It's gone!
CRN=5.Number.70.13%
CRN=4.Number.289.55%
CRN=3.Number.96.18%
CRN=2.Number.48.9%
CRN=1.Number.23.4%
Rated Total:526.100%
(10 unrated stations due to closure or error)
Climate Reference Network Rating Guide:
Class 1 - Flat and horizontal ground surrounded by a clear surface with a slope below 1/3 (= 2C) - Artificial heating sources = 5C) - Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface."
Class 2 - Same as Class 1 with the following differences. Surrounding Vegetation <25 centimeters. No artificial heating sources within 30m. No shading for a sun elevation >5deg.
Class 3 (error 1C) - Same as Class 2, except no artificial heating sources within 10 meters.
Class 4 (error >= 2C) - Artificial heating sources <10 meters.
Class 5 (error >= 5C) - Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface."
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by melatonin
Check your graph. The period from 2002 - 2008 looks suspiciously flat-line-ish.
You are conflating two totally different issues. I started by suggesting that 11 of the last 13yrs are the hottest recorded. You respond with the error in the processing of one small part of the US data which meant 2006 was no longer meant to be the warmest and suggest this shows my claim to not be true. Which it didn't. 11yrs of the last 13 are the warmest on record.
As shown by the historic pattern of PDOs over the past century and by corresponding global warming and cooling,the pattern is part of ongoing warm/cool cycles that last 25-30 years.Each time the PDO mode has shifted from warm to cool or cool to warm,the global climate has changed accordingly.In 1977,the PDO shifted from cool mode to warm mode and set off the global warming from 1977 to 1998,often referred to as the “Great Climate Shift.” The recent shift from PDO warm mode to cool mode is similar to the shift that occurred in the mid-1940’s and resulted in 30 years of global cooling.The global warming from ~1915 to ~1945 was also brought on by a mode shift in the PDO.Every indication points continuation of the PDO patterns of the past century and global cooling for the next 30 years.Thus,the global warming the Earth has experienced since 1977 appears to be over!
As you can see, global warming stopped in 1983, 1991, and 1998.
