Australian Politics Forum - Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?
Reply #30 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 1:15pm

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2012 at 11:13am:

hadrian_now wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2012 at 11:02am:

Met Office Quietly Releases Missing Data

Global Warming Stopped 16 Years Ago
- Guest Column--Dr. Benny Peiser (Bio and Archives) Monday, October 15, 2012

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week. The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.The new data, compiled from more than 3,000 measuring points on land and sea, was issued quietly on the internet, without any media fanfare, and, until today, it has not been reported. This stands in sharp contrast to the release of the previous figures six months ago, which went only to the end of 2010 – a very warm year.—David Rose, Mail on Sunday, 14 October 2012

Global warming stopped 15 years ago and the average temperature has not risen at all since 1997, the Met Office said last night. But critics said the Met Office had released the figures onto the internet without publicity – in contrast to the attention it gave to those released six months ago that reinforced the case for global warming. Those figures went up to 2010 – the hottest year on record – and showed a continuing warming trend. Dr Benny Peiser of Lord Lawson’s Global Warming Policy Foundation said: “It is quite scandalous that the Met Office is misleading the public. The latest data proves beyond any doubt that there has been no warming [trend] over the past 16 years.”—John Ingham, Daily Express, 15 October 2012

The data confirms the existence of a ‘pause’ in the warming. The impact of this pause within the climate dynamic community has been to focus increased attention on the impact of natural variability, particularly the impact of internal multi-decadal oscillations in the ocean. The new climate model calculations for the AR5 have focused on trying to assess what it would take to accurately simulate these multi-decadal ocean oscillations and how predictable they might be. These new observations and climate modeling results will hopefully impact the the IPCC AR5 deliberations so that we do not see the same overly confident consensus statements that we saw in the AR4. —Judith Curry, Georgia Tech University, 14 October 2012

The Met Office says that the world has warmed by 0.03 deg C per decade since 1997 based on their calculation of the gradient in the Hadcrut4 dataset. But what the Met Office doesn’t say is that this is statistically insignificant. There is no case to be made for a statistically significant increase in global temperatures as given in the Hadcrut4 dataset between 1997 and August 2012. The Met Office says the 15-year standstill is not unusual. This is true but again the Met Office is being economical with the truth.—David Whitehouse, The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 15 October 2012

Does it matter that campaigners and the media are actively peddling disinformation? For the most part, probably not, as the public is by now used to such nonsense on just about every subject from unemployment figures to Barack Obama’s birth certificate. But there is one group that should be very concerned about the spreading of rampant misinformation: the scientific community. It is, of course, thrilling to appear in the media and get caught up in highly politicized debates. But leading scientists and scientific organizations that contribute to a campaign of misinformation — even in pursuit of a worthy goal like responding effectively to climate change — may find that the credibility of science itself is put at risk by supporting scientifically unsupportable claims in pursuit of a political agenda.—Roger Pielke Jr, Denver Post, 12 October 2012

Thanks, interesting and actually up to date.

Quote:

Six articles explain why different aspects of Rose's article are unfounded:

Number 1. On the same day that The Mail on Sunday published Rose's article, The Met Office released a public statement on its blog, correcting claims in Rose's article about what the Hadcrut4 dataset does or doesn't show about climate change. The post included the Met Office's full response to Rose's direct - and in some cases leading - questions, exposing Rose's misrepresentation of the science.

http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october...

Number 2. Rose picked part of a graph that appeared to support his argument, so ThinkProgress published an article on Monday with ten charts that clearly show that global warming didn't stop 16 years ago, including how much global warming is going into other components of the climate system, notably the oceans.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2010/12/08/207156/daily-mail-david-rose-destroy...

Number 3. On Tuesday, the Guardian re-published a deconstruction of Rose's argument by Dana Nuccitelli, an environmental scientist and contributor to Australian fact checking website Skeptical Science. Nuccetelli published a scientific paper with colleagues a few days before the Mail on Sunday's article, which pre-bunked Rose's claims. The Guardian article also criticises Rose's other interviewee, Professor Judith Curry, for her interpretation of the role of natural climate variability and her attack on climate models.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/16/daily-mail-global-warming-stop...

Number 4. Also on Tuesday this week, Media Matters, a not-for-profit organisation which corrects misinformation in the US media, issued a no-holds-barred criticism of Fox Nation for accepting Rose's story uncritically, after the Met Office had already branded it misleading.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/10/15/fox-falls-for-tabloid-science/190630

Number 5. An article yesterday by Bob Ward, Policy and Communications Director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, dug deeper into the Met Office's Hadcrut4 dataset and suggests Rose manipulated it to create a false graph. The article also describes Rose's track record for producing similar pieces for the Mail on Sunday.

http://www2.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/Media/Commentary/2012/october/myth-that-...

Number 6. Earlier today, Potholer, a Youtube channel which reports on scientific research and fact checks mainstream media coverage of science, released a video highlighting how quickly media outlets around the world accepted Rose's story without checking the source.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plcp&v=Qbn1rCZz1ow

The one from the met office has this great visual.

I must admit I find it rather amusing that people like progs who uncritically swallow this stuff in the tabloids, want to call themselves skeptics. The irony is palpable.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 4^th, 2012 at 1:38pm by MOTR »

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott? Reply #31 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 1:21pm
Back to top	Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott? Reply #32 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 1:26pm
Back to top	Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott? Reply #33 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 1:33pm
Back to top	Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?
Reply #34 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:13pm

hadrian_now wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2012 at 9:41am:

As I understand it smithy - and you'll correct mewith a reference if I'm wrong - the past 16 years have been a cooling period not warming.

You understand incorrectly.

The past 16 years have been very clearly and unambiguously warming:

Averaged over the three temperature records, the value in 2010 is 0.01 °C above the value in 2005, and 0.02 °C above 1998 (WMO, 2011). It is remarkable that the warmest year occurred during a La Nina event, which normally leads to relatively cool temperatures.
http://www.csiro.au/~/Media/CSIROau/Images/Maps%20%20Graphs/Global-average-temp-anomalies_Ind/Main.ashx
http://www.csiro.au/en/Outcomes/Climate/Has-Global-Warming-Stopped/In-detail.asp...

Not only have surface temperatures continued to warm, but more importantly - ocean temperatures have also warmed:
http://www.csiro.au/~/Media/CSIROau/Divisions/CSIRO%20Sustainable%20Ecosystems/OceanHeatContent_CSE_set/Main.ashx
http://www.csiro.au/en/Outcomes/Climate/Has-Global-Warming-Stopped/In-detail.asp...

and obviously, as ocean temperatures warm, thermal expansion means that sea level rise will also increase:

http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_hist_last_15.html

Further indications that the earth is indeed warming - especially over the past 16 years can also been seen in the measured decrease in global glacial mass balance:
http://glacierchange.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/cumulative-mass-balance.jpgw=480&h=270
http://glacierchange.wordpress.com/tag/glaciers-climate/

and the rapid decrease in Arctic sea ice:

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

hadrian_now wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2012 at 9:41am:

How can they say then that this storm is due to global warming?

It is a fairly trivial fact that adding more energy to a system will cause that system to be more energetic. Adding heat to the atmosphere leads to more moisture in the atmosphere and greater pressure differentials. That means bigger storms.

hadrian_now wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2012 at 9:41am:

I also understand that the east coast of the US has suffered more severe storms as long ago as the 1930s.

Yes. It probably has.

But this is no reason for us to ignore the very simple fact that a warming atmosphere will lead to more severe storms.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?
Reply #35 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:19pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2012 at 10:14am:

Are ppl still getting stupidly semantic about climate change? It was called global warming @ first because it was discovered that sea water temps were rising. Because so many stupid ppl didnt want to acknowledge it and kept saying "but its cold" the PC way of saying "climate change" was adopted since temperatures have all sorts of changes in all sorts of places.

SOB

errrr...no - not really.

"Climate change" and "Global warming" refer to two different things. Essentially, climate change is an impact caused by global warming.

Both terms have been in usage for many decades and both terms are still in current usage. One did not "replace" the other.

Back to top

IP Logged

olde.sault

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2913

Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?
Reply #36 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:19pm

mozzaok wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 10:47am:

The failure to address Global Warming is the shame of a generation.
For 25 years we have known we needed to reduce carbon emissions, and so far done little, shamefully little.

Are there more idiots in your family who believe carbon dioxide is causing global warming (when there has been 16 years of cooling) or, are you the only one?

If you are the only one then there's still hope for families.

Real scientists have said over and over again that the world's population emit 3% of carbon DIOXIDE which doesn't cause warming.

Stop listening to snake oil scientists like Tim Flannery.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?
Reply #37 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:27pm

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

NOAA Confirms Hurricane Sandy Was Not A Result Of Ocean Global Warming

CO2 levels for 15-year period ending Sept 2012: Increased by 30 ppm

Ocean linear temperature trend equates to: +0.007 degree increase by year 2100

Polynomial trend and 3-year average indicate a cooling is in process

CO2 levels for the 15-year period ending Sept 1997: Increased by 22 ppm

Ocean linear temperature trend equates to: +1.10 degree increase by year 2100

Polynomial trend and 3-year average confirmed a warming trend during this previous 15-year period

Conclusions: The growing increases of atmospheric CO2 levels have not caused a global warming of the oceans over the last 15 years. Global warming was not the cause of Hurricane Sandy, which was essentially a typical weather hurricane that naturally occurs.

http://www.c3headlines.com/2012/11/noaa-confirms-hurricane-sandy-was-not-a-resul...

How exactly do you conclude that "growing increases of atmospheric CO2 levels have not caused a global warming of the oceans over the last 15 years." when the NCDC NOAA data that your link refers to shows very clearly that the ocean temperature anomaly to the long term average has been positive every single year since 1977?!?!?

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/annual.ocean.90S.90N.df_1901-2000mean...

Could you explain that for us please?

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?
Reply #38 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:34pm

olde.sault wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

Are there more idiots in your family who believe carbon dioxide is causing global warming .

Sorry - but I think you will find most people now understand AGW is occurring. Your dwindling band of Jones and Bolt fans are sounding sillier every day

olde.sault wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

(when there has been 16 years of cooling) or, are you the only one?

No - there has not been 16 years of cooling. That is simply nonsense. If it wasn't - you would show us some actual data that demonstrates this. But you can't. There isn't any.

olde.sault wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

Real scientists have said over and over again that the world's population emit 3% of carbon DIOXIDE which doesn't cause warming.

Yes - real Real scientists have said over and over again that the world's population emit 3% of carbon DIOXIDE.

I have never heard a real scientist say that this will not increase the amount of longwave radiation absorbed and re-emitted back to the earth's surface.

If you know of any - please show us a link to some of their published research which demonstrates this amazing result!

olde.sault wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

Stop listening to snake oil scientists like Tim Flannery.

Could you provide a link for us to any paper published by Flannery which demonstrates him to be a "snake oil scientist"?

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott? Reply #39 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:17pm Does anyone besides progs think that this isn't going to have an impact on storm surges.
Back to top	Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged

progressiveslol Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17029	Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott? Reply #40 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:34pm MOTR wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:17pm: Does anyone besides progs think that this isn't going to have an impact on storm surges. http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/NYSLR.jpg maybe they should dredge out some of the sand that has built up in the bay That is not the sea
Back to top	IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?
Reply #41 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:54pm

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:34pm:

MOTR wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:17pm:

Does anyone besides progs think that this isn't going to have an impact on storm surges.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/NYSLR.jpg

maybe they should dredge out some of the sand that has built up in the bay

That is not the sea

What's that progs, individual sea level readings can't be used to make generalisations. How very interesting.

But the oceans aren't expanding, are they, progs?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 4^th, 2012 at 4:02pm by MOTR »

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

skippy. Gold Member Offline Posts: 20882 Gender:	Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott? Reply #42 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 4:13pm Oldsock must be related to prog, they both seem to carry the stupid and a liar gene.
Back to top	freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL Click onWWW below IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott?
Reply #43 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 4:34pm

MOTR wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:54pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:34pm:

MOTR wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 3:17pm:

Does anyone besides progs think that this isn't going to have an impact on storm surges.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/NYSLR.jpg

maybe they should dredge out some of the sand that has built up in the bay

That is not the sea

What's that progs, individual sea level readings can't be used to make generalisations. How very interesting.

http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/images/CSIRO_GMSL_figure.jpg

But the oceans aren't expanding, are they, progs?

How very interesting to use a bay as your marker. Shame you cant use the actual ocean to speak of the ocean.

Deception is the name of the game in AGW land after all.

Let me see if I can find a graph. BRB

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17029	Re: Yanks start to catch on, will Abbott? Reply #44 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 4:38pm Got it. Sure you are interested in this so you can explain the interaction of co2 with this graph as well as the one you provided.
Back to top	IP Logged