Some blue, but a lot of orange and red. Only a complete idiot or a liar like Dubyne would say it is cooling!

Seasonal distribution is interesting:

You mean even the Southern Hemisphere, where Phil Jones, CRU, has said was mostly made up until the 1950's. Although others say the 70's.

perhaps the ten stations in the Southern hemisphere making up the entire longterm temperature?

We have been warming, lee, well spotted!

That warming has taken place despite natural factors cooling us:

1. Milankovitch cycles are cooling us

2. The sun has been a bit quiet since the 1980s and that is cooling us.

3. Anthropogenic aerosols are cooling us

Despite that, we have warmed 1°C since 1880, 0.6°C of that since 1990—AGW is responsible for > 100% of observed warming.

lee wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 12:06pm:




Monk always ignores all those predictions of no ice at the North Pole.   

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 12:31pm:



Poor petal Can't even ignore a typo.

And that bit of warming hasn't.   The catastrophe is always somewhat in the future.

Even Arctic ice isn't following the meme. Or sea level rise.

"A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000."

https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0

Not even close.

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 12:31pm:


No but he also didn't foresee the anticipated problem of horse poo drowning cities worldwide.

"By the late 1800s, large cities all around the world were “drowning in horse manure”. In order for these cities to function, they were dependent on thousands of horses for the transport of both people and goods."

https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great-Horse-Manure-Crisis...

But as far as I can tell no-one aid he was a seer. Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 12:31pm:



Poor petal. Al lot of failed climate prophesies and he calls everyone else gullible.

Put this into context—temperatures over the past 8000 years. We see the cooling due Milankovitch cycles starting, then the rapid warming from burning of fossil fuels:

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 1:50pm:


Really over the top hubris. We don't know.

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 1:50pm:


You mean climate phenomena are not dynamic? It should have been getting colder? It should have precipitated more?

Aah Marcott 2013. Realising that the Southern Hemisphere is largely made up.

"Tom,
        The issue Ray alludes to is that in addition to the issue of many more drifters providing measurements over the last 5-10 years, the measurements are coming in from places where we didn't have much ship data in the past. For much of the SH       between 40 and 60S the normals are mostly made up as there is very little ship data there.

Whatever causes the divergence in your plot it is down to the ocean.

You could try doing an additional plot. Download from the CRU web site the series for SH land. It doesn't matter if is from CRUTEM3 or CRUTEM3v (the former would be better). If that still has the divergence, then it is the oceans causing the problem. What you're seeing is too rapid to be real.

Cheers
Phil"

part of email 2729

http://di2.nu/foia/foia2011/mail/2729.txt

So about 80% of the SH was poorly sampled. and yet you want to hang your hat on those predictions.

But i digress -What was it he said on that interview on real climate? -

"Yet if we plot temperature anomaly data since 1880 at the same locations as the 73 sites used in our paleotemperature study, we see that the data are scattered and the trend is unclear. "

But if they mash merged together they find what they want.

" Our global paleotemperature reconstruction includes a so-called “uptick” in temperatures during the 20th-century. However, in the paper we make the point that this particular feature is of shorter duration than the inherent smoothing in our statistical averaging procedure, and that it is based on only a few available paleo-reconstructions of the type we used. Thus, the 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions."

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/03/response-by-marcott-et-al/

Can I have veg with that?

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 3:17pm:



Monk - what are you going to say if the coming winter
in the Northern hemisphere is the worst & coldest in recorded human history?
I'm talking about going back for 10,000 years.

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 3:17pm:



only with the hokey (sic) stick.

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 3:21pm:



Monk - listen up -

they say in boxing - when someone gets knocked out -
it happens!


If it's true that mankind has altered the climate
it may not warm up at all -
if you would have bothered to read the closed loop weather system papers
that I linked to you one time you'd find out
that it's more complex than your simple mind can cope with.

If you would have read Robert Felix's book -
not by Fire but by Ice -
you'd see it happens - it's happened before many times.

Within a short period of time -
no more than 3 years - the world can enter an ice age
of catastrophic proportions.
Maybe man will trigger it?
The closed system will go in the opposite direction if you try to warm
the climate & head into an ice age -
I hope not - but it happens.

Poor petal clinging lovingly, despairingly at Mann et al. Despite the lack of SH data for much or the period.

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 15^th, 2019 at 5:27pm:



So consensus is now science.

But tell us more about your Marcott graph that you are so proud of. And how the "hockey stick end is not "robust."

*

lee wrote on Sep 16^th, 2019 at 9:52pm:



Monk doesn't know.

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 1:42pm:



Hi Monk,
what about Robert Felix?

"CHINESE SCIENTISTS WARN OF IMMINENT GLOBAL COOLING"

"The paper, which has been accepted for publication by the online Journal of Geophysical Research, found that winds from Arctic Siberia have been growing weaker for thousands of years, the conifer tree line has been retreating north, and there has been a steady rise in biodiversity in a general warming trend that continues today. "

"“Driving forces include the sun, the atmosphere, and its interaction with the ocean,” Wu explained. “We have detected no evidence of human influence. But that doesn’t mean we can just relax and do nothing.” "

"After more than 13 years of dedicated research across volcanic lakes in the wilderness of the Greater Khingan Mountain Range in Inner Mongolia, the scientists collected and crunched climate data spanning as far back as 10,000 years.

And their findings confirmed an earlier study by a separate team of Chinese scientists, published in 2014, which first detected the 500-year cyclical pattern of China’s summer monsoons and linked it to solar activity.

The 2014 paper, which drew on 5,000 years’ worth of proxy data, suggested the current warm phase would end within the next several decades, ushering in a brutal 250-year cooling phase."

https://electroverse.net/chinese-scientists-warn-of-imminent-global-cooling/

lee wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 3:51pm:



Thanks Lee -
it also says

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 4:23pm:



Some deep searching obviously -

"The Journal of Geophysical Research is a peer-reviewed scientific journal. It is the flagship journal of the American Geophysical Union.[1] It contains original research on the physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the understanding of the Earth, Sun, and solar system. It has seven sections: A (Space Physics), B (Solid Earth), C (Oceans), D (Atmospheres), E (Planets), F (Earth Surface), and G (Biogeosciences). All current and back issues are available online for subscribers."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Geophysical_Research

"AGU publishes 22 highly respected, peer-reviewed scientific journals covering research in the Earth and space sciences; Eos.org, an online news site (accompanied by a monthly magazine); and award-winning books."

https://publications.agu.org/journals/

That really must have been a comprehensive search you partook.

You do understand "online" was not capitalised, it didn't form part of the publication name.

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 7:20pm:



poor petal. here's a hanky.

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 7:20pm:



I see you have diminished capacity for cognitive reading. Do you understand the phrase "has been accepted for publication"?  Do you understand the difference between that and "has been published"?

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 7:20pm:



Perhaps you should Google AGU or American Geophysical Union publications. But perhaps you can't find it, you do seem to have troubles.

You don't even understand the journal was named "Journal of Geophysical Research" not  "American Geophysical Union", that is the publisher.


Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 7:20pm:



Seems to me you don't have a clue. Are you sure you are not a Jovial Monk  sock. perhaps a bit more Port.

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 18^th, 2019 at 7:52am:



And then corroborated with the AGU.  You have heard of checking sources? That was done.

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 18^th, 2019 at 7:52am:


I did. You just can't find it.

here is a link to Google Scholar -

https://scholar.google.com.au/citations?user=nXBPO9YAAAAJ&hl=en

Enjoy

Google is your friend,

lee wrote on Sep 18^th, 2019 at 12:43pm:


He thinks can turn up and whip me
when all I do is balance the ledger
with both sides of the argument.

Bobby. wrote on Sep 18^th, 2019 at 12:54pm:


What balance?
You actively silence other users when they don't agree with your views?
You actively quote bloggers/youtubers over scientists

You're about as balanced as a 300kg man standing on a pogo-stick.

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 18^th, 2019 at 2:15pm:



You have actively been silenced?

Debunking David Dubyne wrote on Sep 18^th, 2019 at 2:15pm:



Whereas you actively quote... no-one.