https://www.ecowatch.com/worlds-largest-iceberg-breaks-antarctica-2653093274.htm...

yet the science says this is normal and has nothing to do with GW.. how do they know which is which?

Poor petal. Fancy trying to convince people an average of an ensemble (many) models is somehow proof that they are correct. Only one model can be correct.

freediver wrote on May 25^th, 2021 at 7:03pm:


Yes the one that NASA, climate morons that they are, endorse.

"The National Space Development Agency of Japan (NASDA) provided AMSR-E to NASA as an indispensable part of Aqua's global hydrology mission. Over the oceans, AMSR-E is measuring a number of important geophysical parameters, including sea surface temperature (SST), wind speed, atmospheric water vapor, cloud water, and rain rate. "

https://podaac.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset/AMSRE-REMSS-L2P-v7a

Wow. Not only SST's Water vapour and rain.

"Our yearly summer school focuses on the topic of "Using Satellite Observations to Advance Climate Models". Students will explore how satellite observations can be used to evaluate and improve climate models, and will hear from a range of speakers on climate model diagnostics and evaluation and remote sensing of the planet."

https://climatesciences.jpl.nasa.gov/events/31/

Maybe you should check NASA's Climate Kids site. It's only slightly above your level of understanding.

Hi FD,
would you be open to the idea that average temperatures
can normally go up and down 1 to 2 degrees
over periods of centuries?

You would be hard pressed to find a climate skeptic these days who is not a complete moron, a dedicated liar, or both. A popular lie is the claim that measured temperature data does not match predictions, usually accompanied by a plot comparing predicted average global surface temperature with measured temperatures from somewhere else, such as the ocean, the tropics, the troposphere etc. These plots often look like they were produced by a primary school student being taught to use microsoft excel, with the data stopping about a decade ago. Pointing out the obvious flaws does not seem to help, they have an endless supply of slightly different versions of the same lie.

This is what you get when you compare predicted average global surface temperature with measured average global surface temperature:

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-fut
ure-warming-projections-right/

[url]https://climate.nasa.gov/system/internal_resources/details/original/2
299_Updated_CMIP3_Model_Comparisons_Hindcast_Forecast_20210122.JPG[/url]

Here is Ajax comparing the tropics with the global average, and in the same post comparing lower troposphere temperatures with surface temperatures.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619599858/26#26

Here is Lee comparing ocean temperatures with predicted air temperatures:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619147859/24#24

Here is Lee comparing troposphere temperatures with surface temperatures, and trying to avoid providing the source:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619599858/1#1

Here is Lee comparing predictions with measured lower troposphere temperatures. The graph also shows a separate line with different measured data for the surface temperature:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619147859/17#17

Here is Lee arguing that it is valid to compare surface temperatures with lower troposphere measurements, because the lower troposphere is “where we live”.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619599858/33#33

Here is Lee providing another graph highlighting the difference between the lower troposphere and the surface:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619599858/13#13

Here is Lee comparing surface temperatures with mid troposphere measurements:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619147859/19#19

Wow!  Modelling 0.5 degrees, over 50 years, across the entite globe.

freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2021 at 5:26pm:



I am talking about average global temperatures -
isn't that what you're talking about?

You would be hard pressed to find a climate skeptic these days who is not a complete moron, a dedicated liar, or both. A popular lie is the claim that measured temperature data does not match predictions, usually accompanied by a plot comparing predicted average global surface temperature with measured temperatures from somewhere else, such as the ocean, the tropics, the troposphere etc. These plots often look like they were produced by a primary school student being taught to use microsoft excel, with the data stopping about a decade ago. Pointing out the obvious flaws does not seem to help, they have an endless supply of slightly different versions of the same lie.

This is what you get when you compare predicted average global surface temperature with measured average global surface temperature:

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-fut
ure-warming-projections-right/

[url]https://climate.nasa.gov/system/internal_resources/details/original/2
299_Updated_CMIP3_Model_Comparisons_Hindcast_Forecast_20210122.JPG[/url]

Here is Ajax comparing the tropics with the global average, and in the same post comparing lower troposphere temperatures with surface temperatures.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619599858/26#26

Here is Lee comparing ocean temperatures with predicted air temperatures:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619147859/24#24

Here is Lee comparing troposphere temperatures with surface temperatures, and trying to avoid providing the source:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619599858/1#1

Here is Lee comparing predictions with measured lower troposphere temperatures. The graph also shows a separate line with different measured data for the surface temperature:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619147859/17#17

Here is Lee arguing that it is valid to compare surface temperatures with lower troposphere measurements, because the lower troposphere is “where we live”.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619599858/33#33

Here is Lee providing another graph highlighting the difference between the lower troposphere and the surface:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619599858/13#13

Here is Lee comparing surface temperatures with mid troposphere measurements:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1619147859/19#19

Quote:


You are confused.

Bobby. wrote on May 26^th, 2021 at 10:33pm:


Sure.

If you are trying to make a point Bobby, try making it. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

freediver wrote on May 27^th, 2021 at 5:31pm:



My point is that such small changes could be normal
and have nothing to do with the CO2 we are creating.

Do you have evidence that it is not normal...........????

Quote:


That's what the science says Ajax.

There is evidence in the OP Ajax. Let us know when you figure out what it is.

freediver wrote on May 29^th, 2021 at 1:25pm:


You better go and find that hot spot around the equator FD....


https://i.ibb.co/KGfdt0y/RSS-TLT.jpg

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/07/warming-in-the-tropics-even-the-new-rss-sate...

https://i.ibb.co/wypytTj/modelsvsrealworld.jpg

Quote:


https://i.ibb.co/2KCQ5zh/reason.jpg

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/05/05/more-crowd-sourcing-please/

Here's another Ajax special relying on a graph that measures the RATE of change and comparing it to a graph that measures ACTUAL change.
Any high school student knows that theses graphs can't be compared

Do you understand the difference between atmospheric temperature and land temperature, or ocean temperature?

Why do you think your plot ends in 2014? Hint: it is not just because that is when it was presented.

As a typical climate skeptic, would you describe it as

a) clever
b) idiotic

to compare predicted global surface temperature with measured tropical troposphere temperatures?

Do you know how satellites measure atmospheric temperature?

Yes petal. That's why they use satellites. They give almost global coverage. You do understand "land temperature" is actually air (atmospheric) temperature - taken ABOVE ground?

Unlike scattered ground-based weather observing stations that measure the temperature two to three meters above land, satellites measure ground surface temperature, or skin temperature

The quote about land surface temperatures is from the link you provided about land surface temperatures Lee.

What do you mean "if that were true"? Are you not capable of reading your own link?

Do you still think land temperature means air temperature?

Quote:
Ok So now you say that the earth's satellite temperature is warmer than global earthbound temperature


Still struggling with reading comprehension I see. Do you need me to explain how to read someone's post?

Quote:
For all intents and purposes yes petal.

If you want to know what I am saying, read what I am saying. I don't know how to dumb it down any further for you.

As a typical climate skeptic, would you describe it as

I must have missed your straight answer.

You don't know what it was either, do you Lee?

As a typical climate skeptic, would you describe it as

a) clever
b) idiotic

to compare predicted global surface temperature with measured tropical troposphere temperatures?

Do you know how satellites measure atmospheric temperature?

Do all climate "skeptics" share your difficulty in giving a straight answer?

to compare predicted global surface temperature with measured tropical troposphere temperatures?

to compare predicted global surface temperature with measured tropical troposphere temperatures?

Also, how do satellites measure atmospheric temperature?

Measured Temperature in the real world from sophisticated machines like satellites and radiosonde equipment.

Quote:


Do you know how to measure atmospheric temperature with a satellite?

You left out GHG emissions.

Quote:


How much then?

Can you explain how satellites measure atmospheric temperature?

freediver wrote on Jun 20^th, 2021 at 2:06pm:


You still haven't found out for yourself...?!?!

Just google it buddy it can explain it much better than I can....

Also remember Temperature is an intensive property. That means it can't be added, subtracted or averaged - and yet that is what the "global temperature" purports to do.

What I have found is that even the scientists using satellite data to measure atmospheric temperature do not know how to do it. So you are either very special, or just another lying climate skeptic.

Which is it?

I have seen a lot of stupid things posted here, but I think this is a new low.

Also, why do the only two groups using satellite data to measure atmospheric temperature disagree with themselves and each other on what temperature they are measuring?

So they get different "measurements" from the same set of satellite data?

The only reason we have any confidence at all in the attempts to measure atmospheric temperature with satellites is that after correcting countless errors and drastically changing their "measurements," they are finally getting close to what the climate models predict.

That's how anomaly plots work Lee. Are you really that clueless?

The offset is entirely arbitrary. They could also make it narrowing.

That's how anomaly plots work Lee.

Can you give an example of anyone other than fools on the internet taking your dodgy temperature plots from a decade ago seriously?

The warming is not the offset Lee.

The people who use satellites to measure atmospheric temperature have not claimed to be measuring a cooling trend for a long time.

Do you know how to measure atmospheric temperature with a satellite?

Can you give an example of anyone other than fools on the internet taking your dodgy temperature plots from a decade ago seriously?

Let me say this real slowly. The offset is arbitrary.

Even the people who use satellites to measure atmospheric temperature say the "measurements" you posted are bunk.

That's why you post primary school looking plots from a decade ago, like an idiot.

Quote:
So who is claiming a cooling trend for "a long time"?


Not any more. They fixed a lot of mistakes.

Lee are you able to explain how to measure atmospheric temperature with a satellite or not? Right now the only possible conclusion is that you are way out of your depth and have no clue what you are talking about.

It is not maths Lee. It is plain English. Read what I actually posted.

What do you think zero offset means?

You cannot offer a rational explanation for why you posted ten year old plots that look like they were done by a primary school students. The reason is that even the people who came up with those "measurements" think they are bunk.

But in any case, see the examples from wikipedia below where they admit a long series of errors.

It is a mistake (one of many) if they do not correct for it.

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

Pre-1998 results published by UAH showed no warming of the atmosphere. In a 1998 paper, Wentz and Schabel showed this (along with other discrepancies) was due to the orbital decay of the NOAA satellites.[10] With these errors corrected, the UAH data showed a 0.07 °C/decade increase in lower troposphere temperature.

Some discrepancies between the UAH temperature measurements and temperatures measured by other groups remain, with (as of 2019) the lower troposphere temperature trend from 1979-2019 calculated as +0.13 °C/decade by UAH,[6][7] and calculated at +0.208 °C/decade by RSS.

Much of the difference, at least in the Lower troposphere global average decadal trend between UAH and RSS, had been removed with the release of RSS version 3.3 in January 2011, at which time the RSS and UAH TLT were now within 0.003 K/decade of one another.

You are confused. The article has a very long list of errors that have been corrected. Only an idiot or a compulsive liar (who cannot even explain how to measure atmospheric temperature with a satellite) would use this as proof that the current "measurements" contain no errors.

It is a mistake (one of many) if they do not correct for it.

So which is correct?

So you think they are both correct, even though they give different "measurements"?

What uncertainty bars? You are full of crap Lee.

I was not asking you to google uncertainty bar and copy the first result you could find.

Also, you lied when you said you were capable of explaining how to measure atmospheric temperature with a satellite.

They use MSU/AMSU's.

"MSU / AMSU

Satellite measurements of the Earth’s microwave emissions are a crucial element in the development of an accurate system for long-term monitoring of atmospheric temperature. Satellites provide global coverage at much higher densities than attainable with in situ observations. In situ observations also suffer from non-uniform temporal coverage and undocumented changes in the instrumentation used that can lead to local biases and increased uncertainty.
Microwave Temperature Sounding

Satellites can measure the temperature of the atmosphere by evaluating thermal emission from gases in the atmosphere.  Molecular Oxygen has a complex of relatively strong absorption lines near 60 GHz.  By choosing the different measurement frequencies, and thus different values of absorptivity, the emission from different layers of the atmosphere can be measured.  RSS studies the measurements made by 3 series of satellite-borne microwave sounders in order to construct long-term, climate-quality atmospheric temperature datasets for use by the scientific community. "

http://www.remss.com/missions/amsu/