topend geo wrote on Mar 8^th, 2012 at 9:31am:


Again what is your point. There is enough evidence to suggest our climate is shifting at a rate not expected during an interglacial period.

The Mann hockey-stick is not discredited simply because enough deniers say it is so. An independent assessment of Mann's hockey stick was conducted by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (Wahl 2007). They confirmed the principal results of the original hockey stick.



Temperature reconstruction after temperature reconstruction whether it be boreholes, ice cores, coral, lake sediments, glaciers, boreholes or stalagmites have backed Mann's original study. Most recently Lungqvist 2010.



To suggest that the world is starting to cool requires you to ignore what is happening to our oceans. Lets look at what is happening to our atmosphere when 90% of the heat is accumulating in our oceans. It takes a fair chunk of ignorance to gain any succour from what has been happening to to our atmospheric temperatures over the last few years.



We have gone through three La Nina years in rapid succession, yet there has been no long term cooling. Each La Nina year is hotter than the next with 2010 being the hottest year on record. (NASA) Don't tell me the planet is not warming. Ask a physicist to expain it to you.





Open you eyes and have a look at what is happening to our planet. Have a look at the artic sea ice volume anomaly.

topend geo wrote on Mar 8^th, 2012 at 11:30am:


Let me point you to Foster and Rahmstorf (2011)

Quote:

pretty pictures!
Come now, you seriously suggesting that cut+pasting measurements derived from differing sources, THEN omitting the last 10 years of data onto a graph generated by a multitude of different methods is scientifically valid??

I

topend geo wrote on Mar 8^th, 2012 at 3:55pm:


So you are saying short term cooling debunks a long term warming trend. Global warming is not monotonic and you know it, climate scientists expect short term cooling trends from time to time. A drop in solar activity has a cooling effect and so too does a La Nina event. Climate scientists expect short term periods of cooling from time to time. Exclude these effects as Foster and Rahmstorf have done and you can see the the warming trend has not disappeared. Have a good look at their paper they are using data sets that include the past 10 years.

Notice how in the last 10 years each successive La Nina event is getting warming. Notice that NASA has tied 2010 with 2005 as the hottest years on record.

Notice how the arctic ice volume has declined over the last 10 years. Notice how the worlds oceans have trapped more heat over the last 10 years.

To hide behind short term cooling events is just stupid. Stupid and entirely predictable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khikoh3sJg8

If it is bad science why has the result been confirmed reconstruction after reconstruction.

Have a look at the past 2 milleniums. It is abnormal for that timeframe and there are no other forcings that we have been able to identify. It is why insurance companies and the US Navy are planning for the consequences. It is why there is a dearth of climate scientists who deny anthropogenic global warming. To not listen to the experts would be irrational.

http://climatecrocks.com/2011/12/05/new-video-no-its-not-about-the-hockey-stick/

You've gotta be joking. I bet you can't even explain why there might be correlation, which by the way there isn't.

topend geo wrote on Mar 10^th, 2012 at 3:37am:


Of course I read it. I'll post the offending paragraph.
Quote:


There is also a temperature anomaly map from 2005, from which we are meant to do some sort of visual correlation analysis. I didn't confuse it with a scientific paper which is why I didn't mention the review process.

I hope your next link has a little more meat on it.

topend geo wrote on Mar 10^th, 2012 at 3:37am: