http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/01-annual-comparison.png
@******... I notice that it's only warmed about 0.4C since 1980. I know that I couldn't even notice a 0.4C rise in temperature unless I had a very accurate thermometer. I know if I put a light sweater on it would warm me up way more than 0.4C. I know I doubt the accuracy of global temperatures using today's technology, let alone that from the 1980's, or that from the 1900's. So, I guess if we include room for error I would say I notice that it really hasn't warmed that much since the early 1980's which is way more than 16 years ago.
Is that right?
So, the scientists are right?
I mean, that graph clearly shows warming. If, as some suggested, the scientists wanted to fudge the results, why not make 2013 the warmest year? Why not make sure that, over the past 17 years, every year was warmed than the last?
An explanation for the warming trend that doesn't involve greenhouse emissions has not been forthcoming. And I don't mean 'random ideas that skeptics pull off other skeptics' websites' but an actual theory - something we can model, test, verify with experimental evidence. All you do is speculate about various 'explanations' rather than face the actual data in front of you. The planet *is* warming. We're responsible.
Incidentally, to respond to the facile comments about the rise being small. Well, true, you might not notice it. Fortunately the days of us using human senses to measure things are long gone. And our instruments are telling us the planet is warming. 0.4 C might be small but that's on a planetary scale. See how long it takes to boil water. It takes a surprisingly long time, and a lot of energy. Then imagine how much energy it takes to warm something the size of a planet by 0.4 degrees. That amount of energy is hardly insignificant.
Do you have any substantive comments concerning the climate data?
Your argument here - like most Denier arguments on most things - is nothing more than the rather childish, "Because I don't like it."
Every data correction and computation has been explicitly described and explained. The data bias that neccessitated the Hadcrut adjustments was demonstrated empirically and fully explained.
If you have a criticism of the methods, analyses, or results of the scientific research then why don't you tell us what they are rather than just whine about things that you do not like?
Deniers constantly accuse scientists of falsely manipulating climate data, yet they have never produced any evidence that even a single digit - of any climate record - from anywhere in the world - that has ever used by any climate scientist who has ever lived - is either missing or has been falsely altered.
If continuing to make baseless accusations without any supporting evidence is not lying then nothing is.
Every year as the US Navy operates under the ice at the North Pole they take accurate measurements of the thickness of the ice. Space based measurements using laser technology verifies these readings. The Russians also collect the same data. There's zero doubt that after more than forty years of direct data collection that the artic ice is gradually thinning from the bottom up.... currently in places dozens of feet have vanished. The ice at the edges of the ice pack is also much thinner and it tends to break off and drift south earlier and hard freeze later in the year. ALL of this has been directly observed by our navy, the Russians, the Canadians and ALL of the other navies and ocean shippers who have a direct interest in operating in the northern ocean environments.
The gradual warming of the water above 60 degrees north latitude has slowly eaten away at the ice pack... this has been observed and verified by thousands of scientists from hundreds of national scientific organizations and universities from dozens of countries. While it's true that the 'atmosphere' is not much 'warmer', the transfer of heat energy to seawater and ice accounts for that. The rise in the Earth's retained heat index is closely tied to the massive amounts of CO2 generated by the burning of massive amounts of fossil fuels over the past less than 200 years. The 'greenhouse effect' is real, it's not a ho-ax as suggested by the denier community.
While it may be true that there are people and organizations that use this data to swindle, scam and flim-flam the public for cash, the underlying facts that a man made warming trend has moved this planet toward a rapid climate change. This 'change' is happening in 'historical time', not geological time that has characterized other climate change events. The time for denying the science, the data and the physics is over. Either we admit we don't care, or admit there's nothing we can do, or simply accept what's coming at us, or we do something. if nothing can be done we should also admit that. Not making a decision IS also making a decision with the outcome out of anyone's hands.
The HadCRUT record goes back to 1850, the fact that every one of the warmest years on record has occurred recently shows that the climate has warmed significantly.
Being 8th out of 164 still puts it in the top 5% in terms of the warmest years,
Every year since 2000 has ranked in the top 10%, the statistical probability of this happening purely by change is 1 in 10,000,000,000,000.
There is no relevance to a single datapoint in an extensive dataset. That makes as much sense as claiming that people aren’t in fact living longer than our ancestors because someone died and they hadn’t even reached their 100th birthday. The sceptics logic, applied to this scenario, is that because someone died when they were only 96 then we’re not living longer. When was the last time a sceptic looked at the full picture rather than just singling out odd fragments?
Applying more sceptic logic, looking at the graph shows that every year since 2010 has been warmer, by this token then global warming must be happening.
Can you imagine what would happen if those who accept global warming for what it is, adopted the same level of irrationality and dishonesty as the sceptics, forums like this would be awash with people claiming that because it’s hot where they are then global warming must be real. How many times do we see this sort of statement in comparison to claims that it’s cold today therefore there’s no global warming – probably no more than 5%.
As ghe grsph shows, 2013 was among the 8 warmest years on record
The last 18 years have included the 17 warmest years on record.
What does that mean ?
It is funny (and sad at the same time) that even when you post the full Bob Tisdale graph, you still fail to see the significance of the data provided.
The 7 preceding 'warmest years' in Hadcrut4 all happened within the last 16 years which ironically is the same period of time deniers claim 'it has not warmed at all'.
For real skeptics: taking into account the 'it has not warmed in 16 years claim', look at the graph posted by Kano and see if you can spot any inconsistency, anything which contradicts the claim.
If you spot it, bravo, you've just proven to be a real 24/7 skeptic and not a selectively part-time skeptic like Kano or Sagebrush who are only skeptic of things they dislike/do not understand!
Even if you accept that 2013 was "only" the 8th warmest year since we started keeping records, it's too damned hot and the trend is still upward.
That is not a question. You are just telling us that 2013 was the 8th warmest year (since 1975).
So if the trend continues, there might be a little but of warming in 100 years, but getting large amounts of warming like 5C is very unlikely. The current warming is nothing like the previous regime of steady gains every few years.
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/01-annual-comparison.png?w=640&h=408
Is it time to go to a hadcrut5
hadcrut5 will not show cooling. wishful thing does not change reality.
8th place means cooling when the cooling was forecast to begin in 2003, I would say world temperatures are doing exactly what the speptics have projected. In ten years 2023 will be 25th place or lower and warmists will still talk about how it represents a warming world.
2013 was not a warmest year its bogus .
cooking the graphs well done.
Yes, the greenies are losing the argument so they will have to do something. It is not nice to fool with Al Gore or George Soros.
@******... I notice that it's only warmed about 0.4C since 1980. I know that I couldn't even notice a 0.4C rise in temperature unless I had a very accurate thermometer. I know if I put a light sweater on it would warm me up way more than 0.4C. I know I doubt the accuracy of global temperatures using today's technology, let alone that from the 1980's, or that from the 1900's. So, I guess if we include room for error I would say I notice that it really hasn't warmed that much since the early 1980's which is way more than 16 years ago.
Is that right?
So, the scientists are right?
I mean, that graph clearly shows warming. If, as some suggested, the scientists wanted to fudge the results, why not make 2013 the warmest year? Why not make sure that, over the past 17 years, every year was warmed than the last?
An explanation for the warming trend that doesn't involve greenhouse emissions has not been forthcoming. And I don't mean 'random ideas that skeptics pull off other skeptics' websites' but an actual theory - something we can model, test, verify with experimental evidence. All you do is speculate about various 'explanations' rather than face the actual data in front of you. The planet *is* warming. We're responsible.
Incidentally, to respond to the facile comments about the rise being small. Well, true, you might not notice it. Fortunately the days of us using human senses to measure things are long gone. And our instruments are telling us the planet is warming. 0.4 C might be small but that's on a planetary scale. See how long it takes to boil water. It takes a surprisingly long time, and a lot of energy. Then imagine how much energy it takes to warm something the size of a planet by 0.4 degrees. That amount of energy is hardly insignificant.
Do you have any substantive comments concerning the climate data?
Your argument here - like most Denier arguments on most things - is nothing more than the rather childish, "Because I don't like it."
Every data correction and computation has been explicitly described and explained. The data bias that neccessitated the Hadcrut adjustments was demonstrated empirically and fully explained.
If you have a criticism of the methods, analyses, or results of the scientific research then why don't you tell us what they are rather than just whine about things that you do not like?
Deniers constantly accuse scientists of falsely manipulating climate data, yet they have never produced any evidence that even a single digit - of any climate record - from anywhere in the world - that has ever used by any climate scientist who has ever lived - is either missing or has been falsely altered.
If continuing to make baseless accusations without any supporting evidence is not lying then nothing is.
Every year as the US Navy operates under the ice at the North Pole they take accurate measurements of the thickness of the ice. Space based measurements using laser technology verifies these readings. The Russians also collect the same data. There's zero doubt that after more than forty years of direct data collection that the artic ice is gradually thinning from the bottom up.... currently in places dozens of feet have vanished. The ice at the edges of the ice pack is also much thinner and it tends to break off and drift south earlier and hard freeze later in the year. ALL of this has been directly observed by our navy, the Russians, the Canadians and ALL of the other navies and ocean shippers who have a direct interest in operating in the northern ocean environments.
The gradual warming of the water above 60 degrees north latitude has slowly eaten away at the ice pack... this has been observed and verified by thousands of scientists from hundreds of national scientific organizations and universities from dozens of countries. While it's true that the 'atmosphere' is not much 'warmer', the transfer of heat energy to seawater and ice accounts for that. The rise in the Earth's retained heat index is closely tied to the massive amounts of CO2 generated by the burning of massive amounts of fossil fuels over the past less than 200 years. The 'greenhouse effect' is real, it's not a ho-ax as suggested by the denier community.
While it may be true that there are people and organizations that use this data to swindle, scam and flim-flam the public for cash, the underlying facts that a man made warming trend has moved this planet toward a rapid climate change. This 'change' is happening in 'historical time', not geological time that has characterized other climate change events. The time for denying the science, the data and the physics is over. Either we admit we don't care, or admit there's nothing we can do, or simply accept what's coming at us, or we do something. if nothing can be done we should also admit that. Not making a decision IS also making a decision with the outcome out of anyone's hands.
The HadCRUT record goes back to 1850, the fact that every one of the warmest years on record has occurred recently shows that the climate has warmed significantly.
Being 8th out of 164 still puts it in the top 5% in terms of the warmest years,
Every year since 2000 has ranked in the top 10%, the statistical probability of this happening purely by change is 1 in 10,000,000,000,000.
There is no relevance to a single datapoint in an extensive dataset. That makes as much sense as claiming that people aren’t in fact living longer than our ancestors because someone died and they hadn’t even reached their 100th birthday. The sceptics logic, applied to this scenario, is that because someone died when they were only 96 then we’re not living longer. When was the last time a sceptic looked at the full picture rather than just singling out odd fragments?
Applying more sceptic logic, looking at the graph shows that every year since 2010 has been warmer, by this token then global warming must be happening.
Can you imagine what would happen if those who accept global warming for what it is, adopted the same level of irrationality and dishonesty as the sceptics, forums like this would be awash with people claiming that because it’s hot where they are then global warming must be real. How many times do we see this sort of statement in comparison to claims that it’s cold today therefore there’s no global warming – probably no more than 5%.
As ghe grsph shows, 2013 was among the 8 warmest years on record
The last 18 years have included the 17 warmest years on record.
What does that mean ?
It is funny (and sad at the same time) that even when you post the full Bob Tisdale graph, you still fail to see the significance of the data provided.
The 7 preceding 'warmest years' in Hadcrut4 all happened within the last 16 years which ironically is the same period of time deniers claim 'it has not warmed at all'.
For real skeptics: taking into account the 'it has not warmed in 16 years claim', look at the graph posted by Kano and see if you can spot any inconsistency, anything which contradicts the claim.
If you spot it, bravo, you've just proven to be a real 24/7 skeptic and not a selectively part-time skeptic like Kano or Sagebrush who are only skeptic of things they dislike/do not understand!
Even if you accept that 2013 was "only" the 8th warmest year since we started keeping records, it's too damned hot and the trend is still upward.
That is not a question. You are just telling us that 2013 was the 8th warmest year (since 1975).
So if the trend continues, there might be a little but of warming in 100 years, but getting large amounts of warming like 5C is very unlikely. The current warming is nothing like the previous regime of steady gains every few years.
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/01-annual-comparison.png?w=640&h=408
Is it time to go to a hadcrut5
hadcrut5 will not show cooling. wishful thing does not change reality.
8th place means cooling when the cooling was forecast to begin in 2003, I would say world temperatures are doing exactly what the speptics have projected. In ten years 2023 will be 25th place or lower and warmists will still talk about how it represents a warming world.
2013 was not a warmest year its bogus .
cooking the graphs well done.
Yes, the greenies are losing the argument so they will have to do something. It is not nice to fool with Al Gore or George Soros.
