|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 25, 2012 2:07:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Mar 25, 2012 3:11:30 GMT
notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/adjustmentgateaustralia/The team that brought you “Hide The Decline” have gone one better, with their latest offering “Invent The Incline”. Across much of the Arctic, GHCN have been caught making controversial temperature adjustments, which have had the effect of reducing past temperatures, thereby creating a false warming trend. (Full story here).
It now appears that it is not just the Arctic. The same sort of adjustments have been discovered in Australia.
Before:  After: 
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Mar 25, 2012 4:03:12 GMT
Poor old socold, waiting for an el nino to bump temps up. Unfortunately, neutral ENSO is going to be as good as you can hope for before we go back to double dip La Nina. BTW socold how is Scenario C looking? As i understand it, Co2 over rides all other forcings. So keep moving the goal posts, until its all over. We should get an El Nino in the next two years. El Ninos are not rare during cold ocean cycles. The question is how rare do they get when you have a once in a hundred years solar sleep. In fact, I would bet on one that brings us close to a record year with even a possibility of a record warm year. If one stands on the shore in front of the waves, the biggest wave and highest point reached on the sand can be a couple of hours past high tide. Thats the nature of a natural cycle with long periods on top before a rapid change. Astromet has been predicting as I recall 2017 for the rapid decline. I tend to think he is far better in tune with what is happening in the real world on a big picture longterm scale than probably any climate scientist. What I would bet against would be a .2degC record shattering year, which is direly needed (actually 2 steps of .2C are needed to get AGW back into form) They need one to take care of the last decade and another one for the decade we are currently in. To get back on track they need a .7 anomaly year and .6 anomaly decade. Anything less and they will be scrambling for explanations. A milktoast El Nino that doesn't produce a .7 anomaly year during this maximum pretty much slams the door on AGW alarmism because they need to average .68 for the remainder of the decade to get back on track. |
|
ant42
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 65
|
Post by ant42 on Mar 25, 2012 8:12:32 GMT
I dont think its going to happen icefisher. I think neutral this year, then back to La nina, and if we get a nino, might be in 2014/15.
And we wont even go to the AMO....the climate in 10 years time will be severely on the ropes with anomalies unrocgnizable IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by socold on Mar 25, 2012 12:11:56 GMT
Poor old socold, waiting for an el nino to bump temps up. Unfortunately, neutral ENSO is going to be as good as you can hope for before we go back to double dip La Nina. We've already just had a double dip La Nina. You mean triple dip? The odds are for an El Nino now, but even a period of ENSO neutral would be telling though so see how high global temperatures reach. |
|
|
|
Post by socold on Mar 25, 2012 12:14:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 25, 2012 13:32:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by socold on Mar 25, 2012 13:46:10 GMT
You can't see it by eye, the ENSO noise in the record is too large compared to a 0.2C cycle.
|
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Mar 25, 2012 14:27:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 25, 2012 14:38:35 GMT
socold:
The reason the arguement doesn't hold up that the increase is being masked is that the elements that you indicate are masking the increase have not masked anything in the past 100 years.
Several items actually point to a confirmation of the cool trend of the past 15 years.
OHC, taking into account the step change when changing measurement instruments, has been flat.
Sea level rise has slowed, even while Greenland mass loss has accelerated.
Just these two items show that heat accumulation on the planet has not continued.
The surface temperature record also confirms the cooling bias now.
There are major metrics that don't add up when thinking there is a mask, and it does appear that nothing is hiding the increase. In fact, it appears the increase just isn't there.
|
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Mar 25, 2012 14:52:57 GMT
Breathlessly from magellan's link. After reading the narrative I quickly reached into my medicine chest for my heart medications. Then I thought beer before breakfast?
""Seth Borenstein in Washington
Associated Press
December 12, 2007
An already relentless melting of the Arctic greatly accelerated this summer—a sign that some scientists worry could mean global warming has passed an ominous tipping point. "
"This week, after reviewing his own new data, NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally said: "At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions."
So scientists in recent days have been asking themselves these questions: Was the record melt seen all over the Arctic in 2007 a blip amid relentless and steady warming? Or has everything sped up to a new climate cycle that goes beyond the worst case scenarios presented by computer models?
"The Arctic is often cited as the canary in the coal mine for climate warming," said Zwally, who as a teenager hauled coal. "Now as a sign of climate warming, the canary has died. It is time to start getting out of the coal mines." "
|
|
|
|
Post by socold on Mar 25, 2012 18:28:29 GMT
socold: The reason the arguement doesn't hold up that the increase is being masked is that the elements that you indicate are masking the increase have not masked anything in the past 100 years. I disagree I think they have. Any period which starts with El Ninos and ends with La Ninas for example will contain a degree of masking. What cooling? www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/plot/wti/from:1997/trendOHC, taking into account the step change when changing measurement instruments, has been flat.[/QUOTE] It's positive:  Down to 2000m:  Sea level rise slows during La Ninas. That's another masking effect. A mask can make it look like the increase wasn't there. If the Sun and ENSO completely mask the surface warming over a 10 year period then you won't see any surface warming over that period. The trend will be flat. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 25, 2012 18:40:42 GMT
Socold: Ok........let's do OHC first. Forget the splice of data instruments and use 2004 to present. Statistiscally, OHC is flat. The time period is much to short to say there is a warming or cooling trend. One can only look at the record when the buoys were calibrated and within a reasonable error. As far as surface temps: www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998/trend/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1915/trendLook at the trend change since 1998. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I find fault with the study that tried to show a mask as when you look at historical data the mask doesn't work. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 25, 2012 18:53:21 GMT
Another item that I find quit interesting is that we have not approached Sargasso Sea proxy temps from the near past. MWP as an example.
The main thing is that we stay within the max's of the Holocene in general. IF we exceed these maxes, that is an early indicator of re-glaciation.
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 25, 2012 19:00:36 GMT
|
|
