Australian Politics Forum - Rapid plankton growth

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #45 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 8:29am

The_Barnacle wrote on Mar 24^th, 2016 at 10:10am:

lee wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2016 at 1:54pm:

Actually if you look at the graphs they are accurate. It just depends on the CO2 scale used to show the "warming".

No they are not
In particular this one which Ajax has been using is particularly dishonest.

http://i63.tinypic.com/2eanj9t.jpg

It shows that there has been no warming since 1980, something that not even the most ardent denialist would claim. I have been asking Ajax for an explanation for this but he seems to be avoiding the question.

Why is it dishonest barnacle..?? because you present us with your dishonest graphs you think everyone is like you dishonest....!!!!!

Ok I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you just don't know any better and follow the Anthropogenic Global Warming religion verbatim.

The graph on the left is the UAH satellite based temperature of the global lower atmosphere.

From this site.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

Compare the running centred 13 month average of the graph on the left (in red) to the graph on the right, do you see any similarities barnacle.....???

The graph on the right is from Prof. Murry Salby's video presentation in Hamburg on the 18th April 2013 where he has combined this temperature graph with the then current CO2 levels, to show the observations of both at that time (2013) on the one graph.

Watch this video barnacle and educate yourself.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 25^th, 2016 at 8:51am by Ajax »

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2217 Gender:	Re: Rapid plankton growth Reply #46 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 8:59am The evolution of global surface temperatures can not be measured by satellite. Apart from that, there is a lot more noise in the data.
Back to top	IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #47 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 9:05am

John_Taverner wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 8:59am:

The evolution of global surface temperatures can not be measured by satellite. Apart from that, there is a lot more noise in the data.

Is that right professor, talk about cherry picking.

You alarmist are a real joke.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/02/18/satellites-not-good-enough-to-tell-us-glob...

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2217 Gender:	Re: Rapid plankton growth Reply #48 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 10:57am Quoting that idiot Watts again.
Back to top	IP Logged

The_Barnacle

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #49 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:10am

Ajax wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 8:29am:

The graph on the left is the UAH satellite based temperature of the global lower atmosphere.

From this site.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

Compare the running centred 13 month average of the graph on the left (in red) to the graph on the right, do you see any similarities barnacle.....???

Interestingly this blogger adjusts the data

Quote:

One might ask, Why do the satellite data have to be adjusted at all? Since 1979 we have had 15 satellites that lasted various lengths of time, having slightly different calibration (requiring intercalibration between satellites), some of which drifted in their calibration, slightly different channel frequencies (and thus weighting functions), and generally on satellite platforms whose orbits drift and thus observe at somewhat different local times of day in different years. All data adjustments required to correct for these changes involve decisions regarding methodology, and different methodologies will lead to somewhat different results. .

So it is ok for denialist bloggers to adjust their data but it is not ok for climate scientists to homogenize data?

The satellite data measures temperature in the Lower Troposphere rather than the surface and it turns out that the adjustments were incorrect.

Quote:

John Christy and Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama published a series of papers starting about 1990 that implied the troposphere was warming at a much slower rate than the surface temperature record and climate models indicated Spencer and Christy (1992). One early version of their data even showed a cooling trend (Christy et al. 1995).

Several groups of scientists began looking closely at this discrepancy. With so many other pieces of evidence indicating warming, it seemed unlikely that the troposphere would not be warming. Errors were discovered in the methods the UAH group used to adjust the data.

There are differences between the sensors that were onboard each satellite and merging this data to one continuous record is not easily done. It was nearly 13 years after the orginal papers that the adjustments that Christy and Spencer originally applied were found to be incorrect. Mears et al. (2003) and Mears et al. (2005).

When the correct adjustments to the data were applied the data matched much more closely the trends expected by climate models. It was also more consistent with the historical record of troposphere temperatures obtained from weather balloons. As better methods to adjust for biases in instruments and orbital changes have been developed, the differences between the surface temperature record and the troposphere have steadily decreased.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/satellite-measurements-warming-troposphere.htm

So you have cherry picked your graph from a satellite measuring temperatures in the lower troposphere that has been incorrectly adjusted. All other graphs from surface temperature and other sources show a warming since 1980 which aligns quite well with the increase in CO2.

So once again Ajax. Your graphs are discredited

Back to top

Capture_009.JPG (63 KB | 33 )

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 21708 Gender:	Re: Rapid plankton growth Reply #50 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:37am John_Taverner wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 8:59am: The evolution of global surface temperatures can not be measured by satellite. Apart from that, there is a lot more noise in the data. But they can be used for SST's?
Back to top	IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 21708
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth, based pu
Reply #51 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:54am

The_Barnacle wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:10am:

So it is ok for denialist bloggers to adjust their data but it is not ok for climate scientists to homogenize data?

Please define "climate scientist".

The_Barnacle wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:10am:

With so many other pieces of evidence indicating warming, it seemed unlikely that the troposphere would not be warming. Errors were discovered in the methods the UAH group used to adjust the data.

Please compare to RSS data.

The_Barnacle wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:10am:

All other graphs from surface temperature and other sources show a warming since 1980 which aligns quite well with the increase in CO2.

Ah yes the surface "data" and other sources. The historical "data".

NOAA - "The global average temperature of 62.45 degrees Fahrenheit for 1997 was the warmest year on record"

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/199713

NOAA - "the average global temperature across land and ocean surface areas for 2015 was 0.90°C (1.62°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F)"

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201513

That would make 2015 58.62°F. (1.62°F + 57.0°F)

AGW caused temperature rise of 62.45°F - 58.62°F or

-3.83°F

based on the historical data from NOAA.

And this equates well with CO2 increase?

Back to top

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #52 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 12:03pm

Barnacle your dishonest graph for you to ponder.

Quote:

The CRU graph. Note that it is calibrated in tenths of a degree Celsius and that even that tiny amount of warming started long before the late 20th century. The horizontal line is totally arbitrary, just a visual trick. The whole graph would be a horizontal line if it were calibrated in whole degrees -- thus showing ZERO warming

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

Cherrypicking is bad -- except when I do it

That seems to be the Warmist idea. The amusing Phil Plait has praised to the skies a long article by Tamino, an inveterate Warmist, which sets out incontrovertible evidence that global warming is real. So I had a look at that article. Tamino says:

"The satellite data for temperature in the troposphere is what senator Ted Cruz likes to use when he claims global warming isn’t happening. But he doesn’t show all of it — just the part after 1997. That way, he can start his graphs with that big fluctuation in 1997-1998, so that fluctuation will look like it’s part of the trend. It isn’t. But Ted Cruz wants you to think it is, so he won’t show you what happened before that — proper context would reveal how shallow his argument is."

So it's bad to choose your starting points for a graph. But Tamino himself does exactly that. His first graph starts from 1880 and his next one starts in 1970. And so it goes. He has many graphs and many different starting points for them. They start wherever he needs them to start to make his case. I won't reproduce anything further from his article but you can log on and see for yourself.

Tamino is very good at lying with statistics. It would be amusing to see him start all his graphs from 1880. In fact, if you look at his graph that does start from 1880, you can clearly see that warming levelled out from around the year 2000. There was a rise last year but that was due to the El Nino weather cycle. So there was some slight warming in C20 but none in the present century. Will it resume? Nobody knows.

Read the rest here.

http://antigreen.blogspot.com.au/2016/03/cherrypicking-is-bad-except-when-i-do.h...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/07/25/yet-even-more-nonsense-from-grant-foster-t...

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 25^th, 2016 at 12:40pm by Ajax »

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

Ajax Gold Member Offline CO2 has never controlled temperature on Earth Posts: 11070 Australia Gender:	Re: Rapid plankton growth Reply #53 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 12:08pm John_Taverner wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 10:57am: Quoting that idiot Watts again. Professor we want facts not pseudo science found on skeptical science blog.
Back to top	1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax 2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #54 - Mar 25^th, 2016 at 12:32pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 11:10am:

[quote]John Christy and Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama published a series of papers starting about 1990 that implied the troposphere was warming at a much slower rate than the surface temperature record and climate models indicated Spencer and Christy (1992). One early version of their data even showed a cooling trend (Christy et al. 1995).

Several groups of scientists began looking closely at this discrepancy. With so many other pieces of evidence indicating warming, it seemed unlikely that the troposphere would not be warming. Errors were discovered in the methods the UAH group used to adjust the data.

There are differences between the sensors that were onboard each satellite and merging this data to one continuous record is not easily done. It was nearly 13 years after the orginal papers that the adjustments that Christy and Spencer originally applied were found to be incorrect. Mears et al. (2003) and Mears et al. (2005).

When the correct adjustments to the data were applied the data matched much more closely the trends expected by climate models. It was also more consistent with the historical record of troposphere temperatures obtained from weather balloons. As better methods to adjust for biases in instruments and orbital changes have been developed, the differences between the surface temperature record and the troposphere have steadily decreased.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/satellite-measurements-warming-troposphere.htm

Ah yes skeptical science blog has all the WRONG answers its run by a cartoonist who should be in jail for fraud.

You know that paper he wrote that there's a 97% consensus amongst scientists about AGW.

My goodness the sources you quote no wonder you don't know weather, climate science is true or false..... Embarrassed

How about you tell us about the signature foot print of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) the undeniable evidence that AGW is true and real and only exists in the IPCC computer models.

Cause that's the only place observations can find this signature foot print.

Radiosonde data from thousands of weather balloons and satellite measurements in the tropopause have failed to find this hot spot.

Now if the key evidence that shows AGW to be true on IPCC computer models is absent from the real world by real world measurements and observations what does this mean......???

barnacle can you think for yourself................!!!!!!

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

The_Barnacle

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #55 - Mar 28^th, 2016 at 12:15pm

Ajax wrote on Mar 25^th, 2016 at 12:32pm:

barnacle can you think for yourself................!!!!!!

I certainly can, and that is why it is so easy to dismiss the blogs and crackpots that you cut and paste from.

You obviously don't understand the science behind the graphs that you use otherwise you would realise just how easily discredited they are.

Also the fact that you also believe in an Illuminati, that the moon landings were faked and 9/11 was an inside job shows that you are nothing more than a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist with non existent critical thinking skills.

Back to top

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 21708
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #56 - Mar 28^th, 2016 at 12:21pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Mar 28^th, 2016 at 12:15pm:

Also the fact that you also believe in an Illuminati

They even have their own website-

https://www.illuminatiofficial.org/does-illuminati-worship-satan-or-god/

If they believe they exist, shouldn't we?

"History of the Illuminati"

http://people.virginia.edu/~sfr/enam481/groupa/illumhist.html

"The Illuminati Cult"

http://people.virginia.edu/~sfr/enam481/groupa/illumhome.html

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 28^th, 2016 at 12:31pm by lee »

IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2217
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #57 - Mar 30^th, 2016 at 10:11am

The_Barnacle wrote on Mar 28^th, 2016 at 12:15pm:

I certainly can, and that is why it is so easy to dismiss the blogs and crackpots that you cut and paste from.

You obviously don't understand the science behind the graphs that you use otherwise you would realise just how easily discredited they are.

Also the fact that you also believe in an Illuminati, that the moon landings were faked and 9/11 was an inside job shows that you are nothing more than a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist with non existent critical thinking skills.

I think I'm wasting my time here. If these two actually had any credibility then it would just possibly be worth refuting every last bit of nonsense that they spew. The fact is that in both cases they have been refuted many times, yet they continue to regurgitate the same nonsense that has already been shown to be incorrect, while probably thinking "I wonder if I can get away with bringing this up again"

Their credibility is shot.

You don't have to dig very far below the surface to expose bloggers like Watts for the mendacious hacks that they really are. They are very good at pretending to be knowledgeable, but that's as far as it goes.

Once Watts and others have been shown to be deliberately wrong once, most ordinary people would be too embarrassed to bring them up again. It takes a very low standard of personal integrity to revisit them time and time again.

Maybe they are not dishonest. I'll give them both the benefit of the doubt.

The only alternative is that they are both as thick as two short planks, but honest.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 21708 Gender:	Re: Rapid plankton growth Reply #58 - Mar 30^th, 2016 at 12:06pm Don't go JT. At least you could explain how satellites are good for SST's.
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Rapid plankton growth
Reply #59 - Mar 30^th, 2016 at 12:20pm

lee wrote on Mar 30^th, 2016 at 12:06pm:

Don't go JT.

At least you could explain how satellites are good for SST's.

well done lee

you certainly collapsed all of JT's arguments in one shot. Well done.

I really cant believe how talented you are in this forum.

Do you practice a lot? Or is it just naked raw genius?

Incredible stuff mate. Well done

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged