Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5
Send Topic Print
Groundhog Day (Read 3588 times)
#
Gold Member
*****
Offline


A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603
Groundhog Day
Jan 22nd, 2014 at 1:52pm
 
Groundhog Day: 2013 is fourth warmest year on record

By Staff Reporter on 22 January 2014

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the US has released its global temperature analysis for 2013. It has found that the year 2013 ties with 2003 as the fourth warmest year globally since records began in 1880 and it marks the 37th consecutive year (since 1976) that the yearly global temperature was above average.

Below Australian experts respond – with reactions put together by the Australian Science Media Centre.

Emeritus Professor Ian Lowe is professor of science, technology and society at Griffith University, Queensland and President of the Australian Conservation Foundation

“The NOAA report confirms at a global scale what we know from Australian Bureau of Meteorology data released recently: the world is getting steadily warmer. While some media outlets are repeating the myth spread by deniers that there has been a pause in warming, the NOAA data confirm that the trend of global warming is continuing. It also confirms that we are seeing more extremes of weather, as the science has been warning us to expect for 25 years. This is further evidence that our governments need to pay attention to the science rather than uninformed self-appointed critics, and take concerted action, both to reduce our domestic production of greenhouse gases and to halt the disastrous proposals to expand fossil fuel exports.”

Professor Neville Nicholls is in the School of Geography and Environmental Science at Monash University, Victoria

“The warmth of recent years is even more dramatic if you look at global temperatures over land. Over land, every one of the last 13 years (2001-2013) is in the list of the warmest 14 years on record. Only one year from the 20th century (1998) is amongst the 14 warmest years over land. 1998 was the fifth warmest year over land; 2007, 2010, 2005 and 2013 were each warmer than 1998. Global temperatures over land have increased at a rate of about 1.5°C per century, over the last 15 years.”

Professor Dave Griggs is CEO of ClimateWorks Australia & Director of the Monash Sustainability Institute at Monash University

“The global temperature figures are out and it feels like groundhog day talking about what a hot year it has been, the 37th consecutive year with temperatures above the 20th century average.”

Professor John Quiggin is an Australian Research Council Laureate Fellow in the School of Economics at the University of Queensland and a member of the Climate Change Authority

“The NOAA has reported, yet again, evidence on the continuing upward trend in global temperatures. The safest prediction that can be made with respect to this news is that it will do nothing to change the actual or ostensible opinions of self-described “sceptics”, most of whom will continue to think that the occurrence of a single relatively hot year (1998) in the late 20th century implies that global warming has “stopped” or “paused” in the 21st century.

“Only someone completely ignorant of time series statistics could make such a claim. Sadly, such people are numerous, and determine the positions adopted by sections of the media and some members of the current government, as well as of conservative political parties in most English speaking countries and elsewhere. In these circumstances, there is little chance that effective action will be taken to stabilise the global climate before it is too late”
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 156212
Gender: male
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #1 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:00pm
 

" ... since records began in 1880 ... "    Grin
Back to top
 

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles
 
IP Logged
 
#
Gold Member
*****
Offline


A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #2 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:14pm
 
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:00pm:
" ... since records began in 1880 ... "    Grin

So you have no rational comment, greggerypeccary?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Rider
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2669
OnTheRoad
Gender: male
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #3 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:24pm
 
Statistically insignificant.....total wankery but I guess it'll make a headline in some obscure alarmist blog.


Tuesday, January 21, 2014

It's Official: 2013 was the 4th7th10th107th... warmest year since the Little Ice Age
Surprisingly, official government temperature records disagree on how much global warming there was in 2013 in comparison other years that are statistically-insignificant-meaningless-hundredths-of-a-degree different.

One thing is for sure, the globe has fortunately recovered from the Little Ice Age, which coincidentally ended in ~1850 at the start of the instrumental global temperature record, and which shows after UHI-artificial-warming and up-tampered data the temperature rise could have been as much as a whopping 0.7C since 1850. Not only that, the world's oceans have warmed 0.09C over the past 55 years alone!
NOAA Says 2013 Was The Fourth Warmest Year
NASA Says 2013 Was Seventh Warmest Year
RSS AMSU 2013: 10th warmest year on record
CET: 2013 was 107th warmest year on record [longest instrumental temperature record]
HADCRU [unofficial analysis]: 2013 8th warmest year on record
Report: Fed scientists accused of ‘unjustifiably adding on a whopping one degree of phantom warming to the official ‘raw’ temperature record’
Related:

New paper asks: 'Would the 'real' temperature dataset please stand up?'; finds 'We have no ability to know' the true temperature data
A new paper published in Environmental Research Letters examines 8 datasets of temperature & precipitation observations in China over the past 105 years and finds significant unexplained differences between datasets, concluding,
"Because observations coming from different datasets do have differences, which one we can believe among the various so-called ‘observed climate datasets’? Indeed, we have no ability to know the ‘truth value’"
Indeed, two of the Chinese datasets in the paper show there was essentially no warming in China from 1950-2005.

Furthermore, the paper notes that because we don't know which temperature datasets are correct [if any], climate models based upon flawed temperature data will result in erroneous "tuning" of climate models and therefore biased projections i.e. GIGO]. Excerpt from the conclusion:
All of these results bring about a new challenge in the field of climate change. So-called ‘observed climate datasets’ play important roles in driving hydrologic models, evaluating global circulation models (GCMs) and regional climate models (RCM). Because observations coming from different datasets do have differences, which one we can believe among the various so-called ‘observed climate datasets’? Indeed, we have no ability to know the ‘truth value’; what we need to do is reduce the disagreement among the ‘observed datasets’ and depress their uncertainty.
As lamented in Climategate emails by Phil Jones to James Hansen, if the Chinese stopped their commendable practice of moving thermometers away from contamination by the Urban Heat Island [UHI] effect and instead taken temperature readings contaminated by airport jet exhaust [as the rest of the world did], the Chinese temperature data would have shown more artificial warming. 

One can't deny that temperature data contradictions, contamination, errors and tampering are indeed a worldwide climate phenomenon.

Related:

Steve Goddard ‏@SteveSGoddardJan 11

Phil Jones calculates 1850 SH temperature to a precision of 0.001, based on a single thermometer in Tasmania pic.twitter.com/HSmNeeIIgr
Hide photo Reply   Retweeted   Favorite   More
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Rider
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2669
OnTheRoad
Gender: male
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #4 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:26pm
 
Is this the same noaa #?

HomeLatest News
Support And Advice
RSS Latest News
How The Prom Process Works
Support
Videos
The Model Atmosphere (PDF)
Greenhouse Effect Experiment (PDF)
Copernicus Meets The Greenhouse Effect (PDF)
Observations On Backradiation
History Of Radiation
Radiated Energy
Greenhouse Effect Refutation
Absence Of A Measurable Greenhouse Effect
New Model Of The Human Cornea
The Human Cornea's Structure
Publications
Alternative Model To Predict Global Temperatures Other Than Based On CO2
David J. Pristash
Is Sustainable Energy Even Possible At The Global Level?
David J. Pristash
Finite Element Model For Atmospheric IR-Absorption
Joseph Reynen
Back Radiation Greenhouse Effect Of 33 Kelvin Possible?
Ross McLeod
Why CO2 Has Nothing To Do With Temperature
Darko Butina
One-Way Heat Flow Formulation With Planck Absorption And Re-Emission
by Joseph Reynen
PROM
Membership Sign-Up
Username Reminder
Password Reminder
All Special Offers
Career Development
Member Promos
Forum
Members
Principles Of Association
Why PSI Is A Private Assoc.
PSI Mission Statement
Policies
AboutLogin

User Name 

Password 

Remember Me 


Forgot your password?
Forgot your username?
Create an account
HomeLatest NewsBreaking: New Climate Data Rigging Scandal Rocks US Government

JAN
19
BREAKING: NEW CLIMATE DATA RIGGING SCANDAL ROCKS US GOVERNMENT

Written by John O'Sullivan

A newly-uncovered and monumental calculating error in official US government climate data shows beyond doubt that climate scientists unjustifiably added on a whopping one degree of phantom warming to the official "raw" temperature record.  Skeptics believe the discovery may trigger the biggest of all “climate con” scandals in Congress and sound the death knell on American climate policy.

Independent data analyst, Steven Goddard, today (January 19, 2014) released his telling study of the officially adjusted and “homogenized” US temperature records relied upon by NASA, NOAA, USHCN and scientists around the world to “prove” our climate has been warming dangerously.

Goddard reports, “I spent the evening comparing graphs…and hit the NOAA motherlode.” His diligent research exposed the real reason why there is a startling disparity between the “raw” thermometer readings, as reported by measuring stations, and the “adjusted” temperatures, those that appear in official charts and government reports. In effect, the adjustments to the “raw” thermometer measurements made by the climate scientists “turns a 90 year cooling trend into a warming trend,” says the astonished Goddard.

Goddard’s plain-as-day evidence not only proves the officially-claimed one-degree increase in temperatures is entirely fictitious, it also discredits the reliability of any assertion by such agencies to possess a reliable and robust temperature record.

Goddard continues: "I discovered a huge error in their adjustments between V1 and V2. This is their current US graph. Note that there is a discontinuity at 1998, which doesn’t look right. Globally, temperatures plummeted in 1999, but they didn’t in the US graph."
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 156212
Gender: male
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #5 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:28pm
 
# wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:14pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:00pm:
" ... since records began in 1880 ... "    Grin

So you have no rational comment, greggerypeccary?



Perhaps you missed this bit: "since records began in 1880".

This thread cannot be taken seriously.

Sorry.
Back to top
 

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles
 
IP Logged
 
#
Gold Member
*****
Offline


A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #6 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:32pm
 
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:28pm:
# wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:14pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:00pm:
" ... since records began in 1880 ... "    Grin

So you have no rational comment, greggerypeccary?



Perhaps you missed this bit: "since records began in 1880".

This thread cannot be taken seriously.

Sorry.

You have good reason to be sorry.

So you still have no rational comment, greggerypeccary?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 156212
Gender: male
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #7 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:35pm
 
Rider wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:24pm:
Statistically insignificant.....total wankery



Indeed.

Some people just don't get it.
Back to top
 

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles
 
IP Logged
 
#
Gold Member
*****
Offline


A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #8 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:35pm
 
Rider wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:24pm:
Statistically insignificant.....
Plus enough more to risk being banned for spamming.

So what do the vast majority of the best qualified say? Does any organisation of reputable scientists say what you want to believe?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
#
Gold Member
*****
Offline


A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #9 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:36pm
 
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:35pm:
Rider wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:24pm:
Statistically insignificant.....total wankery



Indeed.

Some people just don't get it.
You still have nothing rational to say, greggerypeccary?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 156212
Gender: male
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #10 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm
 
# wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:36pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:35pm:
Rider wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:24pm:
Statistically insignificant.....total wankery



Indeed.

Some people just don't get it.
You still have nothing rational to say, greggerypeccary?



Of course I do.

The Earth is 4.45 billion years old.

Records dating back to 1880 are statistically insignificant.

If the Earth was only 6000 years old, as some people believe, you may have a point with this thread.

However, considering the age of our planet, those records have no significance.




Back to top
 

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles
 
IP Logged
 
#
Gold Member
*****
Offline


A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #11 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:47pm
 
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm:
# wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:36pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:35pm:
Rider wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:24pm:
Statistically insignificant.....total wankery



Indeed.

Some people just don't get it.
You still have nothing rational to say, greggerypeccary?



Of course I do.

The Earth is 4.45 billion years old.

Records dating back to 1880 are statistically insignificant.

If the Earth was only 6000 years old, as some people believe, you may have a point with this thread.

However, considering the age of our planet, those records have no significance.
I don't claim to know anything of climate science, but the vast majority of those who are best qualified in the field seem to disagree with you.

Grist might help you.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 156212
Gender: male
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #12 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:54pm
 
# wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:47pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm:
# wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:36pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:35pm:
Rider wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:24pm:
Statistically insignificant.....total wankery



Indeed.

Some people just don't get it.
You still have nothing rational to say, greggerypeccary?



Of course I do.

The Earth is 4.45 billion years old.

Records dating back to 1880 are statistically insignificant.

If the Earth was only 6000 years old, as some people believe, you may have a point with this thread.

However, considering the age of our planet, those records have no significance.
I don't claim to know anything of climate science, but the vast majority of those who are best qualified in the field seem to disagree with you.




Yes, I acknowledge that.

However, it doesn't mean that they are correct.


Back to top
 

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles
 
IP Logged
 
#
Gold Member
*****
Offline


A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #13 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 3:01pm
 
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:54pm:
# wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:47pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm:
# wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:36pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:35pm:
Rider wrote on Jan 22nd, 2014 at 2:24pm:
Statistically insignificant.....total wankery



Indeed.

Some people just don't get it.
You still have nothing rational to say, greggerypeccary?



Of course I do.

The Earth is 4.45 billion years old.

Records dating back to 1880 are statistically insignificant.

If the Earth was only 6000 years old, as some people believe, you may have a point with this thread.

However, considering the age of our planet, those records have no significance.
I don't claim to know anything of climate science, but the vast majority of those who are best qualified in the field seem to disagree with you.




Yes, I acknowledge that.

However, it doesn't mean that they are correct.
What are the probabilities? In the past, has the majority most often proven right* or wrong*.

* Simplistic binary, to pander to the limitations of the Conservative mind.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21646
Gender: male
Re: Groundhog Day
Reply #14 - Jan 22nd, 2014 at 3:01pm
 
The Russian Academy of Sciences seems to disagree on CO2 as a cause of Global Warming.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5
Send Topic Print