BIODIESEL & SVO DISCUSSION FORUMS





Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Environment  Hop To Forums  General Environmental Discussion    Anthropogenic Global Warming- Your thoughts please
Page 1 ... 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 ... 184

Moderators: Shaun, The Trouts
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Anthropogenic Global Warming- Your thoughts please
 Login/Join
 
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
There is no way to be certain, but it is probable that the entire Earth–almost certainly the Northern Hemisphere– was warmer in the 11th Century than today. There is more data but it has not been made available to the general scientific community. The latest solar activity predictions indicate that the next few solar cycles will be quieter. We do not have records for more than 170 years, but the last time we had a prolonged period of minimal solar activity included the so-called Maunder Minimum, and fell in the middle of what is now called The Little Ice Age.

We know the Earth was warmer during the Viking Period, possibly – I think probably – than it is now. In 1325 there was a noticeable change in weather patterns in Northern Europe, and by the 1700’s the Thames froze over. In 1776 the Hudson froze hard enough for Col. Alexander Hamilton to bring the guns captured by Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys from the British fortress at Ticonderoga across the Hudson ice to General George Washington in Harlem Heights, thus covering Washington’s retreat from the encircling British General Howe. It was a decisive event of the Revolutionary War. During the 18th and 19th Centuries there was a period of unified warming (interrupted by The Year Without a Summer q.v.). Note that the interruption of solar radiation caused by Tambora had a decided and recorded effect on annual temperature; it was neither predicted nor predictable, and climate models do not accommodate it – although periodic variations in solar output can have effects on the solar radiation Earth receives.


http://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Digging coal out of the ground and exporting it around the globe where it's burned is a significant addition to the worlds GHGs and toxic air pollution. It's far more toxic than oilsands.

Worlds biggest polluters are the countries producing coal: China, USSA, Australia, Indonesia, India

It matters not to the world if it's burned at home or exported to be burned elsewhere. Global pollution is global, there is no 'peeing end' in the atmosphere pool.


While Australia’s domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions represent some 1.5% of the global total, its global carbon footprint – the total amount of carbon it pushes out into the global economy - is much bigger.

Australia is the world’s largest coal exporter. By adding emissions from exported coal to domestic emissions, Australia’s carbon footprint trebles. Its coal exports alone currently contribute at least another 3.3% of global emissions.

In aggregate, therefore, Australia is at present the source of at least 4.8% of total global emissions. That’s without considering natural gas exports. The greenhouse gas emissions in other countries from ... coal export ... will greatly outweigh the proposed reductions in Australia's emissions from the introduction of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

While Australia imposes safeguards on the export of uranium, it does not impose any requirements for carbon capture and storage of greenhouse gas emissions of exported coal. Australia thus contributes substantially more to the global warming which, according to the Garnaut Climate Change Review will lead to the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef, Kakadu and the Murray Darling Basin as they have existed during recorded history to date. Australia is also a major exporter of liquefied natural gas, another fossil fuel.


About 0.15 per cent of global GHG emissions comes from Canada's oil sands development. All of Canada's crude oil exports are 0.91% of global GHGs. The total GHGs produced by the extraction and consumption of Canadain oil including the oil sands is 1% of the global total. Australia's contribution to global GHGs is 3.3 to 4.8 times that amount.



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
The Earth Is Getting Hotter Faster Than It Ever Has Since Dawn Of civilisation!

A new analysis of Earth’s climate over the last 11,300 years indicates our global temperature is now higher than it has been for most of that period. The temperature is also rising faster than we’ve ever seen. By 2100, the Earth will be warmer than any time during this period no matter what we do, they project.

“We already knew that on a global scale, Earth is warmer today than it was over much of the past 2,000 years,” study researcher Shaun Marcott of Oregon State said in a statement. “Now we know that it is warmer than most of the past 11,300 years. This is of particular interest because the Holocene spans the entire period of human civilisation.”

During the last 5,000 years, the Earth as a whole cooled about 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit – until the past 100 years, when it warmed about 1.3 degrees. The largest changes were in the northern hemisphere, where there are more land masses and greater human populations.

“The last century stands out as the anomaly in this record of global temperatures since the end of the last ice age,” said Candace Major, program director in the National Science Foundation’s Division of Ocean Sciences.

Predictions indicate this trend will continue, with the Earth warming between two and up to 11.5 degrees by 2100. We will really be seeing the effects of global climate change by then: In 2100, spring will come to New York in mid-February.






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Canada is the "most admired" country with the "best reputation" in the world, according to an annual survey ranking the reputations of developed nations across the globe.
...
Norway placed second on the list, followed by Sweden, Switzerland, and Australia. The United States slotted into 22nd spot.

The Reputation Institute also produced a separate list ranking countries based on what their citizens said about their homelands. Australia ranked first on this "self-image" list, followed by Canada, Russia, India and Germany, with the U.S. in sixth place.

Russia had the largest gap between their self-image and how they are perceived by other nations. Russian citizens scored their country as the third-most reputable country in the world, but other nations ranked them 52nd out of 55 countries, ahead of only Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq.

The gap between internal reputation and external reputation was also large for China, India and the United States.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/c...rld-report-1.2470040



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Tar sands are the dirtiest source of oil on Earth.

This extreme source of oil is currently being mined mainly in Alberta Canada, however, oil companies are now pursuing tar sands mines in the U.S. West.

Tar sands are composed of clay, sand, water, and bitumen (a heavy black hydrocarbon). Extracted
bitumen can be refined into synthetic oil and other petroleum products.
Bitumen cannot be pumped from the ground in its natural state, so deposits must be mined using energy-intensive extraction techniques and then separated from the sand, clay, and water.

Shallow tar sands deposits can be recovered using open-pitmining techniques. In this process, massive 20-storytall shovels strip the tar sands from the earth and load it onto the world’s largest dump trucks for transport to upgraders, where hot water is used to separate the bitumen from the sand. The in situ method, used to extract deeper tar sand deposits, entails injecting compressed steam into a network of underground pipes to melt the bitumen out of the earth.






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Science Confirms 2014 Was Hottest Yet Recorded, On Land And Sea
July 17, 2015
Christopher Joyce

Floodwaters from rising sea levels have submerged and killed trees in Bedono village in Demak, Central Java, Indonesia. As oceans warm, they expand and erode the shore. Residents of Java's coastal villages have been hit hard by rising sea levels in recent years.

For the past quarter-century, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has been gathering data from more than 400 scientists around the world on climate trends.

The report on 2014 from these international researchers? On average, it was the hottest year ever — in the ocean, as well as on land. Icebergs float in Iceland's Jökulsárlón glacial lake, where the Vatnajökull glacier is retreating quickly due to global warming.

Deke Arndt is a climate scientist with the agency and an author of the State of the Climate in 2014 report, released Thursday. It's the lower atmosphere that's warming, not the upper atmosphere, he points out — just as the total of greenhouse gases in the lower atmosphere continues to increase. That's not a coincidence.

"The changes that we see in the lower part of the atmosphere are driven by a change in the composition of the atmosphere," Arndt says. "If an external forcing — such as the sun or some orbital phenomenon — would be driving the warming, we would see a warming across the board in most of the atmosphere. And we don't."

This year's hottest-ever record is the third time that's happened in the past 15 years.

The annual spike in ocean temperature — specifically, in the upper 2,000 feet of water in most of the world's oceans — was especially big last year, the scientists say. Melbourne visitors and residents took to the waters of Australia's St. Kilda Beach in January 2013 to escape a fierce heat wave.

"You can sort of think of ocean warming as being global warming, since that's where most of the global warming goes," says Greg Johnson, an ocean scientist at NOAA.

A lot of extra heat has been trapped in the lower atmosphere over the past several decades, Johnson says. And the ocean is going to continue to suck up that heat and get warmer.

Moreover, the oceans expand when they get warmer. That raises sea levels, which — again, no coincidence — reached their highest point last year, as well. The naval base at Norfolk has had to build two levels to its docks to accommodate rising sea levels. The water level has risen about 1 1/2 feet since 1920.

Glaciers continued to melt. And the extent of Arctic sea ice kept shrinking as well.

On the temperature front, Europe was hotter than ever. But it wasn't hotter than blazes everywhere. The eastern U.S. got a break. The winter there was especially cold, which led some climate skeptics to question the whole idea of climate change.

Jessica Blunden, a climate scientist and report author who consults for NOAA, says the weather in the East was an outlier.

"For example, the lower latitudes of eastern North America and parts of Russia were well below average during this period — up to 10 degrees Fahrenheit below average," Blunden says. "But then in the higher latitudes, Alaska, for example, was super warm for this time of year — 18 degrees above average in late January.

So the eastern U.S. got lucky — if you consider record-breaking snow, and cold weather lucky. Keith Seitter, head of the American Meteorological Society, which published the report, found that ironic.

"I'm here in Boston," he says. "We had an incredibly tough winter, but that doesn't change the fact that the globe is getting warmer. And 2014 really represents some kind of landmark year in that respect."

As the climate report shows, weather is local. Climate is global.
http://www.npr.org/2015/07/17/...rded-on-land-and-sea

Hottest ever? Well... maybe for those who consider a couple of decades as 'ever'. Irrefutable evidence shows that it was warmer at the peak of the Medieval Warming a few hundred years ago, just before rapidly plunging into the coldest period since the end of the most recent ice age 10,000 years ago.




 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post
Italy sizzles again as new heatwave hits
Published: 13 Jul 2015 16:05 GMT+02:00

The new heatwave, nicknamed 'Caronte', has already got the mercury rising and will cause intense heat and stuffiness right across the country.

Temperatures will rise steadily throughout the week before peaking at the weekend, according to Il Meteo.

No rain is forecast except for a few isolated thunderstorms.

Saturday will see highs of 37 degrees Celsius in Bolzano, Florence and Milan. Rome, Naples and Florence will be hotter still at 38 degrees, while a sweltering 39 degrees is predicted in northeastern Trieste.

The Italian Met office, Meteo Aeronautica, has put out extreme temperature warnings for the next five days in six regions, and so far more than 1300 people have called the Ministry of Health's 'safe summer 2015' hotline (1500) because of the heat.

The new heatwave comes just days after the end of a previous bout of hot weather, which sent the mercury rising up to 40 degrees Celsius across many Italian cities.

The previous heatwave, dubbed 'Flegetonte' was lethal, killing more than 10 people and contributing in no small part to a tornado that ripped through Venice, leaving one dead and causing millions of euros worth of damage.






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
The models of solar activity predict a new minimum in solar activity. The models have been validated against observation back to as long as we have observation. They are pretty accurate. Whether decreased solar activity has much relationship to solar output – and thus to irradiation received by Earth – is not so clear. We do know that the variance in solar radiation is tiny compared to the output of the sun – but that tiny variance exceeds all the other sources of thermal addition to the Earth’s eco-system, including warming from the interior (due to radioactive element decay in the core). Tiny – relative to solar output – variations in solar output have a large effect on climate. Whether sunspots indicate increased total solar input to the Earth is not so well understood, since we do not have sunspot records for more than a few hundred years, and we do not have accurate records of Earth temperature for more than a century (defining accurate to a degree C or less).
quote:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.g...s/SORCE/sorce_03.php



Daily variation in solar output is due to the passage of sunspots across the face of the Sun as the Sun rotates on its axis about once a month. These daily changes can be even larger than the variation during the 11-year solar cycle. However, such short-term variation has little effect on climate. The graph above shows total solar irradiance on a daily basis. The plot is based on data collected by the ACRIM III instrument, which is currently in orbit. (Graph by Robert Simmon, based on data from ACRIM III)

Variations in TSI are due to a balance between decreases caused by sunspots and increases caused by bright areas called faculae which surround sunspots. Sunspots are dark blotches on the Sun in which magnetic forces are very strong, and these forces block the hot solar plasma, and as a result sunspots are cooler and darker than their surroundings. Faculae, which appear as bright blotches on the surface of the Sun, put out more radiation than normal and increase the solar irradiance. They too are the result of magnetic storms, and their numbers increase and decrease in concert with sunspots. On the whole, the effects of the faculae tend to beat out those of the sunspots. So that, although solar energy reaching the Earth decreases when the portion of the Sun’s surface that faces the Earth happens to be rife with spots and faculae, the total energy averaged over a full 30-day solar rotation actually increases. Therefore the TSI is larger during the portion of the 11 year cycle when there are more sunspots, even though the individual spots themselves cause a decrease in TSI when facing Earth.

<snip>

Another trend scientists have picked up on appears to span several centuries. Late 17th century astronomers observed that no sunspots existed on the Sun’s surface during the time period from 1650 to 1715 AD. This lack of solar activity, which some scientists attribute to a low point in a multiple-century-long cycle, may have been partly responsible for the Little Ice Age in Europe. During this period, winters in Europe were much longer and colder than they are today. Modern scientists believe that since this minimum in solar energy output, there has been a slow increase in the overall sunspots and solar energy throughout each subsequent 11-year cycle.



The number of sunspots on the Sun’s surface is roughly proportional to total solar irradiance. Historical sunspot records give scientists an idea of the amount of energy emitted by the Sun in the past. The above graph shows sunspot data from 1650 to the present. The Maunder Minimum occured from 1650–1700 and may have influenced Europe’s little ice age. (The data from this period are not as reliable as the data beginning in 1700, but it is clear that sunspot numbers were higher both before and after the Maunder Minimum.) Since then, sunspot number have risen and fallen in a regular 11-year cycle. An 11-year running average shows only the long-term variation, which shows a rise in total sunspot numbers from 1700 until today. [Graph by Robert Simmon, based on data compiled by John Eddy (1650-1700) and the Solar Influences Data analysis Cent

Lastly, on the time scale of the lifetime of the solar system, measured in billions of years, the Sun is going through the same life and death cycle as any average star. As it uses up its hydrogen fuel, the Sun grows hotter and hotter throughout its lifetime. In a couple of billion years, this gradual heating will melt all the ice on Earth and turn the planet and into a hothouse much like Venus. Since the increase occurs over such an extended period of time, today’s instruments cannot even detect year-to-year changes along this cycle. By the time the effects of this warming trend are felt, it’s possible humans may have become extinct, or found a way to populate distant planets, and in either case may not still be left on Earth worrying about Earth’s demise.



None of this is easy reading, but my conclusion is that there is considerable uncertainty, but it is a reasonable conclusion that models of solar activity are useful in predicting solar output and therefore total solar heat input to Earth. Whether these variations in solar output are are more responsible than CO2 (1825 to present) for global warming is worth study, but need to find more data. It does seem reasonable to to be skeptical about the certainty of human caused global warming, since we know that Earth in Viking times was at least as warm as it is today and very likely was warmer in Roman times.

As Freeman Dyson continues to point out, CO2 is going to have its greatest effect in cold, dry areas, because the “greenhouse” effects of CO2 are small compared to those of water vapor. As soon as there is appreciable water vapor, heat reflected from earth and radiated to space but intercepted by greenhouse gasses has been got: there isn’t more for the CO2 to intercept.

We can possibly predict a coming period of minimal solar surface activity – sunspots, etc. Whether this will cause cooling is not known, but it appears to be possible. There is definitely a correlation between sunspots and solar irradiance. Whether this predictable decrease in irradiance is greater that the effects of CO2 is apparently in dispute among those more expert than me. I can only work with the data available, but include in that data records of growing seasons and other rough climate indications from Britain to China, and I’m quite certain it was warmer in Viking times than now, despite Mann’s hockey stick that purported to erase the Viking Warm period.

One thing is certain: USA efforts to decrease the use of coal will have very little effect of world production of CO2, as undeveloped countries continue to become developing nations, and China continues to build coal plants . As witness:

https://twitter.com/settostun/...447248568320/photo/1

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/...iews-is-coming-back/



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Holy crap you guys still at it? The only way tilly will ever believe that global warming is a scam and money maker is when the frost bite reaches up and freezes their ass.
Quit wasting your time im sure there is more constructive things to do, its not worth it.
 
Location: bc canada | Registered: September 16, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Geologically speaking, we live in a time period of intense climatic change. Since the last 1 million years, our species and our human forebears experienced a dozen or so major glaciations of the northern hemisphere, with the greatest ever occurring around 650,000 years ago. During this period of extreme ice buildup, the ice advanced deep into the Midwest, from its center around Hudson Bay in Canada, and deep into Germany, from its center on the Scandinavian Shield. So much ice collected in these two major regions and several lesser ones that the sea level dropped by some 400 feet and the overall global temperature was lowered by around 5°C (about 9°F).

Mammoth, mastodon, wooly rhinoceros, giant bison, camels, horses, and many large predators (cats, wolves, bears) roamed the grasslands well south of the rim of the miles-high ice, both in North America and in Europe. Small bands of humans made a living by hunting and gathering in Africa, and perhaps elsewhere. The glaciation that occurred 650,000 years ago lasted some 50,000 years. It had a profound effect on the landscape, carving great glacial valleys and fjords and lakes, and making moraines and glacial outwash plains around the perimeter of its extent. The greatly lowered sea level allowed rivers to cut deeply into the shelves of the continents and into the edges of the shelves, where the sea floor drops off into the deep ocean. Here canyons could form which would later serve to funnel sediments from the shelf into the deep sea.

After this great glaciation, a succession of smaller glaciations has followed, each separated by about 100,000 years from its predecessor, according to changes in the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit (a fact first discovered by the astronomer Johannes Kepler, 1571-1630). These periods of time when large areas of the Earth are covered by ice sheets are called “ice ages.” The last of the ice ages in human experience (often referred to as the Ice Age) reached its maximum roughly 20,000 years ago, and then gave way to warming. Sea level rose in two major steps, one centered near 14,000 years and the other near 11,500 years. However, between these two periods of rapid melting there was a pause in melting and sea level rise, known as the “Younger Dryas” period. During the Younger Dryas the climate system went back into almost fully glacial conditions, after having offered balmy conditions for more than 1000 years.

The reasons for these large swings in climate change are not yet well understood.



http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/vir...techange2/01_1.shtml



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post


21 years off the grid and counting

 
Location: Muskoka, Ont, Can | Registered: March 23, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:

Originally posted by johnny
We can possibly predict a coming period of minimal solar surface activity – sunspots, etc. Whether this will cause cooling is not known, but it appears to be possible. There is definitely a correlation between sunspots and solar irradiance. Whether this predictable decrease in irradiance is greater that the effects of CO2 is apparently in dispute among those more expert than me. I can only work with the data available, but include in that data records of growing seasons and other rough climate indications from Britain to China, and I’m quite certain it was warmer in Viking times than now, despite Mann’s hockey stick that purported to erase the Viking Warm period.


No, the sun isn't going to save us from global warming

quote:
Some zombie myths just won’t die. In fact, I debunked this one two years ago right here at The Guardian.

To sum up, a number of scientific studies have asked the question, ‘if the sun were to enter another extended quiet phase (a grand solar minimum), how would that impact global surface temperatures?’. Every study agrees, it would cause no more than 0.3°C cooling, which would only be enough to temporarily offset about a decade’s worth of human-caused global warming.


Don't see any dispute there if every study agrees


21 years off the grid and counting

 
Location: Muskoka, Ont, Can | Registered: March 23, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post
A mass of Antarctic air has turned the usually mild Australian winter into a snowy winter wonderland. Regions known for their sunny weather, from central New South Wales to Queensland, experienced an uncomfortable snow fall last week, paired with record low temperatures for the month of July. The usual 50 degree F winter weather has dipped down as far as 24 degrees F in some areas, making for the coldest winter in over twenty years.




Read more: Australia's Sunshine State hit with rare snowfall | Inhabitat - Sustainable Design Innovation, Eco Architecture, Green Building

Global warming YEAH RIGHT. Australia has snow Tilly better have long johns on.

http://inhabitat.com/sunshine-...with-heavy-snowfall/
 
Location: bc canada | Registered: September 16, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
North-east US cools down after heatwave but the south sees no relief!!

Temperatures were expected to reach 90F (32C) with soaring humidity in Central Park for a third day, while temperatures in south set to reach 110F!!


At New York’s Central Park observatory, temperatures were expected to top 90F (32C) for the third day in a row, with humidity levels making it feel much hotter. If they do, NBC New York reported, it would be the first sustained heat wave in two years.

In New York City and surrounding areas, more than 20,000 homes and businesses lost power overnight on Monday, cutting off air conditioners that had already been working overtime. Air quality alerts were issued across New York and surrounding states, and residents were urged to spend as little time outside as possible.

No relief is in sight for the American south, though, where the National Weather Service has issued heat advisories across parts of nine states, including South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi. Heat indexes – the combined effect of real temperature and humidity – on Tuesday afternoon were expected to be as high as 110F (43C), the service said.

Hi 96 canola
quote:
Global warming YEAH RIGHT. Australia has snow Tilly better have long johns on.
News Flash
Australia has snow every year.
There is a thriving winter skiing industry in New South Wales and Victoria.
My kids go skiing every winter

It even nearly snowed here once about 35 years ago, but then it didn't.

Perisher, located in the Australian Snowy Mountains is the largest ski resort in the southern hemisphere



Welcome to the real world Wink






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I know Australia gets snow, I just couldn't resist putting that article on.lol
 
Location: bc canada | Registered: September 16, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Arctic ice 'grew by a third' after cool summer in 2013
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33594654
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent, BBC News

21 July 2015


Average thickness of Arctic sea ice in spring as measured by Cryosat between 2010 and 2015.



The volume of Arctic sea ice increased by around a third after an unusually cool summer in 2013.

Researchers say the growth continued in 2014 and more than compensated for losses recorded in the three previous years.



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Heat wave in B.C. breaks 64 temperature records
Osoyoos and Warfield both had highs of 40 C

By Tamara Baluja, CBC News Posted: Jun 29, 2015 4:46 PM PT

This past weekend's heat wave in B.C. is one for the history books.

Environment Canada says 64 temperature records for communities across the province have been broken.

The highest temperature was 40.6 C, recorded in Warfield, a village outside Trail in West Kootenay, on Saturday.

Osoyoos, near the U.S. border about 400 kilometres east of Vancouver, came close — hitting 40.4 C.






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post


21 years off the grid and counting

 
Location: Muskoka, Ont, Can | Registered: March 23, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
NOAA Tampering Exposed

July 20, 2015
tags: Temperature Adjustments

By Paul Homewood



Last month, NOAA caused a lot of controversy by adjusting historic global temperature data to show that the pause had never happened. This has been well covered by WUWT and others, but what is less well known is that NOAA have been making similar but subtle adjustments year by year for a while now.

When they do this, the old versions are never archived, and they do not publically announce what they have done. Instead, the new figures simply replace the old version.

Fortunately, however, Walter Dnes has been archiving the old data each month since January 2010. His results were published at WUWT last week.

I have used his data to show in a simple fashion what the total effect of these changes since 2009 has been.


First, we can look at the changes that have been made to annual data back to 1880. Figure 1 shows, for instance, that the temperature anomaly for 1938 published currently is 0.13C lower than was published in January 2010. In contrast the anomaly for recent years has been increased, for instance 2009 has increased from 0.56C to 0.64C.





Figure 1



The overall effect of these changes has been to cool the 1930’s and 40’s, and increase warming in recent years.

Note as well though the way that the changes have steadily added to temperature anomalies since 1999, thus conveniently removing the pause.



The effect of these recent changes can be seen in more detail in Figure 2. Temperatures have been progressively increased as each year has gone by.




Figure 2

For instance, in their State of the Climate Report for 2010, NOAA showed 2010 and 2005 tying as the warmest years, 0.02C higher than 1998.





http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201013

Figure 3





However, the latest version shows that 2010 as being 0.04C warmer than 2005, and 0.06C warmer than 1998.




http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global

Figure 4



But the tampering is even worse than this, as changes were being made prior to Walter Dnes beginning his archiving in 2010. It is difficult to get a handle on the full extent, since NOAA do not archive these things.

We can though see how things changed between 2004 and 2010.

Take another look at the 2010 version in Figure 3. The anomaly for 1998 was 0.60C, 0.06C higher than the figure for 2004.

But when we look at the State of the Climate Report for 2004, we find that 1998 was 0.09C warmer than 2004. In other words, between 2004 and 2010, the temperature for 1998 has been reduced relative to 2004 by 0.03C.

Add that to the 0.06C already identified, and by magic 1998 is now demoted to only the fifth warmest year!




http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/200413





It is little wonder that, with tampering on this scale, the NOAA dataset has been diverging so drastically from the satellite numbers since 1998.



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 ... 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 ... 184 
 

Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Environment  Hop To Forums  General Environmental Discussion    Anthropogenic Global Warming- Your thoughts please

© Maui Green Energy 2000 - 2014