2018 fourth warmest year in continued warming trend, according to NASA, NOAA

So climatologists who base their conclusions on "active" datasets are not scientists. Right?

 

I really do hate this talking point. It makes absolutely no sense.

You didnt live in such a climate. No modern human did either. And the currently existing plants and animals that DID live in those climates evolved to the current one overs tens of thousands to millions of years. We are changing the current one to a climate that last existed over 65 million years ago in a timespan closer to ~250 years.

 

I feel pressure to warn you that such an absolutely batshit standard as he is proposing does not warrant a response beyond a report to the mods.

 

This is another troll post.

Make a third to me and I will gladly place you on ignore.

 

He was joking.

 

Who would have thunk that we'd have such a gathering of preeminently keen, climatological minds all in one place, lol.

 

What do you mean by "active"?

And just to clarify something before someone misunderstands what I'm saying. I'm not saying that there aren't bad apples and that there has never been an occurrence of fraud. I'm just saying that there is no conspiracy or widespread fraud going on. And in the particular instance in the post there was no fraud or fudging of data. This was yet another case of the accuser not understanding the science. Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean that it must automatically be fake.

 

So flat and falling since 2015.

The planet is no longer warming



The HadCRUT 4 rate of temperature change (°C/year) is no longer increasing. In fact, it stopped increasing ~1994 and has been decreasing since. Global warming has been decelerating for over 20 years despite CO2 levels increasing at the same rapid rate.



Figure 3. HadCRUT 4 rate of temperature change (°C/year). Thin line, 12-month rate of change. Thick line, gaussian smoothing. Red line, 2nd order polynomial least-squares fit to the yearly increase.

Since 2017, the rate of temperature change has become negative.



Figure 4. Zoom of the HadCRUT 4 rate of temperature change (°C/year). The best fit polynomial (black line) shows the long-term evolution in the rate of temperature change.

The global warming deceleration since 1994, and cooling since 2017 are incompatible with the hypothesis that the increase in CO2 is driving global warming. Other factors must be more important than CO2.

The Mauna Loa CO2 data can be downloaded here and the HadCRUT 4 global temperature data can be downloaded here.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/06/the-planet-is-no-longer-warming/

 

guess I'm going to be hungry tonight, lol. (seems to me that the 'troller' must exist chronologically subsequent to the 'trollee'). So since I was posting here first, how would TLegal's assertions make sense, lol. (not my forte'... obviously)

 

He can be a bit "sensitive". Don't let him run you off, deep down he's a marshmallow.

 

I gotta say it is amusing when people expound with dead certainty—— and are wrong

In this case you assert that

all the doomsday mass extinction events happen during ice ages..
​

Ice ages do not cover the entire earth. Otoh an Asteroid impact is pretty effective in creating an intantaneous world wide catastrophe

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous–Paleogene_extinction_event

But i do have a sincere question for you. Did you make your claim based on research you did?

Or maybe it seemed to you as a matter of simple common sense that ice ages would be responsible for calamitous mass extinctions. Sometimes “common sense”. Is not the most reliable guide

​

 

Sahba looks to be a troll based on her comments on other threads [ie typhus fever in Los Angeles].

 

This is not correct. The troposphere is still warming. This is plainly obvious.

This is actually a true statement; at least for the lower troposphere. Just like it was a true statement in 25 of the last 60 years. Yet the troposphere is still warming. How do you think this happened?

And keep in mind that total heat uptake (which includes hydrosphere, atmosphere, cryosphere, and land) has broken a record high again in 2018.

This is not correct. The cooling of the lower troposphere is NOT incompatible with the hypothesis that an increase in CO2 causes warming. In fact, 25 of the last 60 years have been cooler than the previous year yet the Earth is significantly warmer. This also ignores the fact that ~95% of the excess heat goes into the ocean. The entire geosphere is warming at 10e21 joules/yr. The rate of heat accumulation has actually accelerated in recent decades. And this is all happening with declining solar radiation.

Of course you got this from the WUWT blog written by Andy May who is not a climate scientist, but is (or at least was) employeed by Kinder-Morgan.

 

I mean what you mean:

I understand, of course, that you'd rather not call that fudging, but that's obviously what it is.

 

The 1978–1997 warming trend is an artifact of instrumentation

The data give the lie to warmist claims about late–20th century warming.

 

Give me one good reason why you believe the 3 year " trend" from 2015-2018 is a reasonable prediction of future trends?

 

Billions of dollars in economic decision are made based on the accuracy and reliability of those "fudges."

I trust that rationale and the integrity of these scientists over you.

 

The body of the article lends very little confidence to the validity of the title because it routinely admits they do not know the amount of impact created by those alterations to the instrument and data collection methodology.

 

It backs up the obvious fact that it's no longer warming and that temperatures are currently falling. While we use the past to model the future, the futures is always uncertain.

Our current interglacial warming will almost certainly end in glacial advance. No one is predicting an end to our current ice-age and a return to the balmy wonder of Warm Earth Conditions when great rich forests, teeming with life stretched to the Arctic circle.

 

His source, American Thinker, is a conservative news and opinion blog, founded by Thomas Lifson (He writes frequently for the conspiracy site The Liberty Beacon) .

 

Isn't fudging and fraudulent manipulation the same thing?

I've never heard someone describe the process of quality control, bias correction, post processing, etc. as fudging the data. But that's just me. Are you saying that you use a different definition?

Anyway, there is no conspiracy to fraudulently or unjustly manipulate climate data. That's what I mean.

 

You are not giving me a single reason to think the "trend" of the last 3 years (which is ****ing idiocy to start your line at the warmest year on record) will continue into the future.

 

Two bad you aren't bright enough not to express yourself with vulgarity so profane that the auto censor renders your thoughts gibberish.

I already told you that trends aren't guaranteed to continue, Silly!

 

Then do not use a three year trend, starting with the warmest year on record.

Use at least 10 years. Better yet, use 25 years. Better yet, use 100 years.

P.s. If you think the autocensor renders the sentence incomprehensible, then I would be happy to provide you an education in the most common vulgarities and their definitions in the relevant context.

 

Seriously? Fred Singer?

How do you find these illegitimate sources anyway?