It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Statisticians reject global cooling

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 09:57 AM

WASHINGTON – Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? You may have seen some news reports on the Internet or heard about it from a provocative new book. Only one problem: It's not true, according to an analysis of the numbers done by several independent statisticians for The Associated Press.

So global warming is still happening even though the earths cooling? I'm sorry i reall don't get this logic at all. What you guys think?

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 28/10/2009 by Mirthful Me]

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:09 AM
The beneficiaries of Cap & Trade - and other "global warming" moneymakers REALLY want us to believe the globe is warming so they can make money.

Thus... This tripe.

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:21 AM
Since statisticians did not take the data used all they are doing is looking at data collected and doctored by global warming believers.

Garbage in garbage out. proves nothing disproves nothing. garbage by the media that knows nothing and are falling for the global warming BS

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:24 AM
Global Warming is a hoax, a world wide scam (just like scientology) their is no proof to it. Back in the 70's their was the fear of global cooling, and in the 20's and 30's was when global warming was first introduced (so I've been told). It's all about control so the socialist elitists can control and dictate our lives.

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:26 AM
Too stupid for words, in uk our summers have been getting worse since 1998.

What ever is going on, global warming by man, does not exist.

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Ominousbeing

WASHINGTON – Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? You may have seen some news reports on the Internet or heard about it from a provocative new book. Only one problem: It's not true, according to an analysis of the numbers done by several independent statisticians for The Associated Press.

So global warming is still happening even though the earths cooling? I'm sorry i reall don't get this logic at all. What you guys think?

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 28/10/2009 by Mirthful Me]

No, the Earth is not "cooling". From your own article you posted:

ince 1998, temperatures have dipped, soared, fallen again and are now rising once more. Records kept by the British meteorological office and satellite data used by climate skeptics still show 1998 as the hottest year. However, data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA show 2005 has topped 1998. Published peer-reviewed scientific research generally cites temperatures measured by ground sensors, which are from NOAA, NASA and the British, more than the satellite data

"The last 10 years are the warmest 10-year period of the modern record," said NOAA climate monitoring chief Deke Arndt. "Even if you analyze the trend during that 10 years, the trend is actually positive, which means warming."

Earth's temperature will fluctuate on a yearly basis because our weather patterns are insanely complex and fluid. Taken as a whole, the Earth has gradually climbed in average temperature since 1880. The only set of data that accurately says the Earth is "cooling" is the decade of 1998-2008 because 1998 and 2005 were the warmest years on record. Because 2006, 2007, and 2008, weren't as hot as 1998 or 2005, the data set looks like the Earth's temperature, on average, is getting cooler.

However, if you make the data set include 1997-2008 the "cooling" of the Earth's average temperatures disappears. If the data set is made from 1999-2009, there is a positive upward tick in the Earth's temperature.

Don't be fooled by people with an agenda. The Earth is warming. Humans are accelerating this warming. Those are the facts.

Cap and Trade is driven by ideology. Just like the the Church used a good man's name (Jesus) to justify the crusades, there are certain corporations that use real science to justify faulty legislation.

However, there are just as many corporations on the other side of the coin that stand to lose from tighter regulations, smarter energy consumption, and greener living. Those people are the ones trying to distort the facts and put us all in future danger because they fear the legislation from the "green" lobby. I fear them the most, because so far they've been wonderfully successfull in keeping most people ignorant as to the facts.

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:42 AM
there are suposedly periods of global cooling associated with the temperature rises in consecutive 2-7 year cycles up to the year 2100,
so with the warming can also come cooling, from 4 degrees lower to around 6 degrees higher, also the melting of the ice caps can cool the warmer parts and do the opposite to the cooler parts, sea level rise up to .6 metre could be also expected by then.
Things could also get worse sooner or later depending on other factors involved with climate changes.
there is no dis-info only better understanding of things to come for future generations. my opinion anyway.

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 12:57 PM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

The problem is that both sides are trying to force their own interpretation of the data.

Weather changes from year to year. That much is a fact, as it has been happening since human memory. There will be years where the weather is cold, and there will be years when the weather is warm. There will be dry spells and wet spells. There will be windy days and calm days.

This statistical 'noise' means it is very hard to determine any deviation form the normal fluctuations.

For instance: I can take the temperature reading at 6:00AM and compare it to the temperature reading at noon. If I project a linear extrapolation to midnight, it will tell me (on most days) that it will be extremely warm at midnight. Yet, when midnight comes, it will be cooler than it was at noon. The problem wasn't with the data, but with the application of it.

Conversely, if I take the temperature at noon as a base point, and linearly project past midnight, it is probable that I will 'discover' that tomorrow is going to be extremely cold. Strangely enough, this projection as well will prove inaccurate the vast majority of the time. Again, the data is sound, but the application of it is not.

The problem with Global Warming alarmists is that they took the base point as one of the coolest periods in our recent history, and began projecting through current readings. That, just like in my first example above, has led to wild speculation on how much of a massive temperature increase there may be over the next century. This has then been taken farther to try and determine what effects this massive temperature rise would do to the planet. The initial projection, however, is highly suspect due to the projection method used. Therefore all the other projections such as sea level rise are completely garbage, based on an improper assessment of the data.

Now, since the proponents of Global Warming have cherry-picked their starting point and used linear projection, is it any wonder that the opponents have done the same? Yes, 1998 was the warmest year on record during the last few decades. That indicates it is a bad starting point for projections, just as picking one of the coldest years was a bad starting point for the proponents. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and all that.

Back to my first examples, we know that temperatures normally rise during the daytime and fall during the nighttime. the graph of temperature vs. time resembles a rough sine wave graph. We also know that few things in nature ever follow a linear projection; instead they, like day-to-day temperatures, follow periodic curves. now, if we apply the concept of periodic sine wave curves to the temperature readings we have, we can see that starting with the base points used, there is a slow but accelerating rise in temperature, which then begins to decelerate and finally appears to level off to a relatively flat line over the last 8-10 years. This is indicative of a sine wave graph that has peaked and will now begin to slowly decrease. As some examples, this first image is from

external image

As you can see, this graph indicates the last 150 or so years of temperature changes. You can also see that this graph is showing a fairly steady upward trend since ca. 1950. Or is it? The increase actually began ca. 1910, peaked ca. 1940, dropped to ca. 1950, and then rose to ca. 2000. From 2000 to present it has been in a slow descent.

This does not mean that the earth will rise by many degrees over the next century, nor does it mean that we are heading for an ice age. It means that we were in a period of warming, which has now tapered off and may, based on non-linear projection, result in a slow correction downward again. In other words, this could just as easily be a part of a regular semi-sinusoidal waveform.

Now, let's look at this image from

external image

Here we see a longer time period, long enough for us to clearly see a semi-regular series of temperature rises and drops. The latest period seems to be more jagged and irregular than the others, but consider that we have had much more accurate and complete data during that time. That would indicate that the irregularity shown is due to what is commonly called 'noise' in statistics. So the major trend is what we are interested in, not the irregularities.

You will notice that we are around the time that historical temperatures have peaked and again begun a fall. This agrees with the assessment of the first graph.

Now, from

external image

We can see here an even longer time period, which shows that the waveform is not very sinusoidal, but is a repeating function nonetheless. It contains short crests of higher temperature, followed by a quick fall, then a period of mild temperatures followed by another fall, then a period of more or less steady rise back to a crest. We appear to be at a regular crest.

This also shows the infamous 'hockey stick' showing CO2 levels spiking in modern times. This CO2 spike is not and has not been under serious dispute. However, it also does not seem to indicate a serious warming trend beyond what occurs naturally over time. If there were a close link between CO2 and warming, our temperatures would show some sort of spike to coincide with the spike in CO2 levels. This is simply not the case.

One more point to this graph: If one closely examines the link between CO2 and temperatures, one will see that the CO2 increases, while they do seem to follow temperature rises, actually lag ahead of the temperatures. That is, the temperature rises happen prior to the CO2 level increases. this dismisses the idea that CO2 levels cause temperature increases. A cause must precede effect. It would be more believable to state that temperature increases cause rising CO2 levels, although we still have no definitive proof of this either; both could be the result of the mechanism that creates the fluctuations, and otherwise unrelated.

Only time will tell if this analysis is accurate, as only time will tell if the claims by the IPCC are accurate. But in the absence of reliable predictions to date (so far Florida is not an island chain), I see no reason for the panic and hysteria and fear-mongering put forward by the IPCC, Albert Gore Jr., and the environmentalist movements.

Unless, that is, they want something from us...


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

Edit: to fix images... well, try to...

[edit on 10/28/2009 by TheRedneck]

posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 08:10 PM

Originally posted by Avenginggecko

Don't be fooled by people with an agenda. The Earth is warming. Humans are accelerating this warming. Those are the facts.

That seems to be "YOUR" ideology, but it is not true. Mankind IS NOT responsible for Climate Change, sorry to say.

The fact is that in the Troposphere, where most weather events occur and the atmospheric layer that affects surface temperatures, WATER VAPOR is the main greenhouse gas, and water vapor contributes around 95%-98% of the greenhouse effect.

During warming cycles, which is what we were going through, water vapor levels increase naturally, hence there is a feedback loop by WATER VAPOR which is 99.99% NATURAL....

In other words the fact is that Climate Change has been, and continues to be NATURAL.

BTW, it is a know fact that since 1845 the earth's magnetic field has fluctuated, and has been weakening more than has occurred for not only thousands, but for tens of thousands of years.

Here is a graph which points to the weakening fluctuation state in which the magnetic field of the Earth is at now.

BTW the year 0 is where we are at more or less.

Here is a graph of the Sargasso sea temperatures for the past 3,000 years until 1999.

Remember that 1998 was equal in temperature to 2005, and both are supposed to be the warmest years to date.

Now, let's take a look at the fluctuation of the Earth's magnetic field in a station in Lenwick, England.

Is it a coincidence that at the same time that the Earth was cooling during the 1930s and 1940s the magnetic field seemed to have been weakened more?

BTW, my picture is much larger than it shows when posted. It is too big hence you can see what happens during the 1980's, and 1990's where the magnetic field of the Earth gets stronger, but there are fluctuations.

Now, let'stake a look at a graph of the last 11,000 years and the different Climate Change events we have been experiencing during that time.

And last, but not least, let's look at the correlation of CO2 with temperatures for the last 600 million years and see how they coincide.

[edit on 29-10-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

new topics

top topics


log in