+ Reply to Thread
Page 40 of 62 FirstFirst ... 30383940414250 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 400 of 613
  1. #391
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,432
    Thanks
    1,018
    Thanked
    2,082
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Man I've gone away and had a baby and this is still going...

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Clementine Grace For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (26-04-2013)

  3. #392
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,311
    Thanks
    2,387
    Thanked
    4,599
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Clementine Grace View Post
    Man I've gone away and had a baby and this is still going...
    Completely OT - but yay for your baby arriving!'

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to NancyBlackett For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (26-04-2013),Busy-Bee  (26-04-2013),Clementine Grace  (26-04-2013)

  5. #393
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,432
    Thanks
    1,018
    Thanked
    2,082
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by NancyBlackett View Post
    Completely OT - but yay for your baby arriving!'
    Thanks very entertaining reading for late night feeds.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Clementine Grace For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (26-04-2013),DJ Nette  (26-04-2013),NancyBlackett  (26-04-2013)

  7. #394
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by beebs View Post
    But Kirst, It is 16 years for goodness sake, 16 Years!!! How much more evidence does anyone need?
    Well. As my last post indicated, most of the datasets show that it is more than 16 years, with RSS showing no statistically significant warming for 23 years.

    For RSS the warming is not significant for over 23 years.
    For RSS: +0.127 +/-0.134 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1990
    For UAH the warming is not significant for over 19 years.
    For UAH: 0.146 +/- 0.170 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1994
    For Hadcrut3 the warming is not significant for over 19 years.
    For Hadcrut3: 0.095 +/- 0.115 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1994
    For Hadcrut4 the warming is not significant for over 18 years.
    For Hadcrut4: 0.095 +/- 0.110 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1995
    For GISS the warming is not significant for over 17 years.
    For GISS: 0.111 +/- 0.122 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1996
    This cannot be ignored. Kirst's beloved escalator shows periods of less than 10 years of no warming in the last few decades. But none have been so long as the current pause.

    I will remind you what the experts were saying just 5 years ago.

    Near-zero and even negative trends are common for intervals of a decade or less in the simulations, due to the model’s internal climate variability. The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected present-day warming rate
    http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/c...008-lo-rez.pdf
    Page 23.

    So, according to NOAA, there is a discrepancy with the expected warming rate. It just so happens, that the goalposts have now moved again and this previous statement is expected to be ignored. Who is the denier?
    How long with no warming will it take for the 'consensus' to go back to the table for a vote?
    Maybe Kirst can put a year (this thread may well still be going) so the goalposts don't shift any further.

  8. #395
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I'll leave this for you guys (it actually has The Met's comments on the original Daily Mail article and how their data and answer to the author's questions were misrepresented):

    http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/cli...y-stop-in-1997

    Let me know if the link doesn't work as I had to change it from the mobile sight.

    Here's the original Live Science link: http://www.livescience.com/24006-did...stop-1997.html

    The Met Office: 'In the Met's response to the article, they state the answers they provided to Rose's questions before he wrote the article.In them, The Met states that the data show an increase in global temperatures of 0.09 degrees Fahrenheit (0.05 degrees Celsius) between August 1997 and August 2012, adding that calculating the trend beginning in 1999 would show a more substantial warming.

    In other words, the trend you see will vary depending on the start and end dates chosen.'

    "Climate change can only be detected from multi-decadal timescales due to the inherent variability in the climate system," reads The Met's response.'

  9. #396
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Congrats Clementine Grace.

    Professor Judith Curry made a statement to the US House of Reps yesterday.
    It is an interesting read. There are points in the statement that will please those from both sides of the fence.

    I won't quote any paragraphs from the body as this may be regarded by some as 'cherry picking'.

    I did, however, find this quote in the conclusion very relevant to where I stand, especially in regard to how the government reacts to the science.

    The politicization of climate change presents daunting challenges to climate science and scientists. In my assessment, the single most important actions that are needed with regards to climate science – particularly in context of assessments for policymakers – is explicit reflection on uncertainties, ambiguities and areas of ignorance (both known and unknown unknowns) and more openness for dissent. Natural internal variability is a topic of particular importance over which there is considerable disagreement. Disagreement and debate is the soul of the scientific frontier, which is where much of climate science lies. Greater openness about scientific uncertainties and ignorance, and more transparency about dissent and disagreement, would provide policymakers with a more complete picture of climate science and its limitations.


    http://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2...ny-2013-il.pdf

  10. #397
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,532
    Thanks
    1,313
    Thanked
    1,390
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    subbing

  11. #398
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    From your link:

    The Met Office has issued a response to the article. It does not dispute the trend Rose identifies, but says Rose's article contains "some misleading information."
    So they don't dispute Rose's trend.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    I'll leave this for you guys (it actually has The Met's comments on the original Daily Mail article and how their data and answer to the author's questions were misrepresented):
    And the Met's comments were factually wrong on several counts as I mentioned earlier in the thread. The Met claims that Rose was misleading. The Met, on the other hand, were not just misleading, but were also wrong.
    I will list the errors again:

    1. "What is absolutely clear is that we have continued to see a trend of warming..."
    The justification for this is using the "each decade has been warmer than the previous". This is misleading. An analogy = I got taller the first 2 decades of my life, but stopped growing in the third. I have been taller on average each decade when compared to the previous. But I have not grown for over 10 years. It is wrong to say that I am still growing.

    2. "The linear trend from August 1997 (in the middle of an exceptionally strong El Nino) to August 2012 (coming at the tail end of a double-dip La Nina)" is false. In August 1997, the temperatures were in transition - around half way between La Nina and El Nino. They were also in transition in August 2012.

    3. "....such a period [15 years of no warming] is not unexpected. It is not uncommon in the simulations for these periods to last up to 15 years, but longer periods are unlikely".
    So they are admitting that we haven't warmed for 15 years.... in a round about way. It shows that their models are not very good. They did not 'expect' that there was going to be a pause for 15 years, yet they said that it was "not unexpected"???? NOAA's State of the Climate report in 2008 stated -
    "Near-zero and even negative trends are common for intervals of a decade or less in the simulations, due to the model's internal climate variability. The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 years or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected present-day warming rate."
    Well, 15 years has been and gone. But yet, the goalposts shift.

  12. #399
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Didn't you quote HadCrut earlier (the Met) but are now saying they're wrong? Are they wrong or right???

    Here's NOAA's report from 2010:

    2010: http://blog.ametsoc.org/news/noaa-un...ing-continues/

    http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories...heclimate.html

    “When we look at air temperature and other indicators of climate, we see highs and lows in the data from year to year because of natural variability. Understanding climate change requires looking at the longer-term record. When we follow decade-to-decade trends using multiple data sets and independent analyses from around the world, we see clear and unmistakable signs of a warming world.”

  13. #400
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Do you not think the goal post shifts because they are constantly learning new things about our environment and the consequences of our lifestyles? Like I quoted a couple days ago, the Earth is not a test tube.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Vanuatu - Great or not so great?
    By Clarabelle in forum Destination Suggestions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 29-10-2012, 10:56
  2. Green poop
    By Alphabetsoup in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 24-05-2012, 20:02

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Fridge-To-Go Australasia
Xmas with a NEW Fridge-to-go Lunch Bag! Fridge-To-Go Australasia
Fridge-to-go 8 hour cooler bags are ideal under the Christmas tree! Now in modern lunch bag designs - fill them with toys and chocolate to make parents and kids happy! Stay super cool and eat healthy and fresh food all summer long!
sales & new stuffsee all
CarmelsBeautySecrets
Growing your own natural nails is easy. Years ago, I devised a simple and very effective technique which really helps boosts the nails' growth in as little as three days! And most importantly keeps them that way.
featured supporter
Little Kickers NSW
Little Kickers was launched in 2002 in the UK and arrived Down Under in 2009. Our motto is “Play not Push” and we provide a positive fun-filled soccer program for children aged 18 months -7 years in a vibrant, group play environment.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!