Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 18-01-2016, 19:47   #1921
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,961
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackdale View Post
I thought UAH had corrected for those necessary adjustments.

OK surface data





And recognizing that HADcrut4 underestimates Arctic temperatures. (Cowtan and Way)
UAH has corrected for those necessary adjustments occasioned by atmospheric friction, along with several others that have come to light. That was what the propaganda article you linked to obfuscated, but was clarified in the article that fryewe just linked to. Are you not also reading the underlying sources for the counter-arguments??

I don't understand what the second (HADcrut4) graph represents. But if you want to look at a single graph that compares the UAH to the surface data, it's been linked to repeatedly but most recently appears in fryewe's link as well. (For some reason my tablet wouldn't let me cut & paste it). As for Mears' RSS data, here's a link to the website which also includes the same sort of temp graphs. Upper Air Temperature | Remote Sensing Systems. I'm not sure I'm reading them right, but they look like they show more of a cooling trend than UAH.
__________________

__________________
Exile is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 20:10   #1922
Senior Cruiser
 
jackdale's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 5,048
Images: 1
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

RSS



UAH



Also UAH



UAH Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.11 C per
decade

http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2015/de...berGTR2015.pdf

That is lower than RSS.

The only cooling in RSS occurs in the stratosphere. Lower Tropospheric Stratosphere (TLS)



As predicted by the models.

Troposphere warms, stratosphere cools
Manabe and Wetherald 1967
Manabe and Stouffer 1980
Ramaswamy et al. 1996, 2006
De F. Forster et al. 1999
Langematz et al. 2003
Vinnikov and Grody 2003
Fu et al. 2004
Thompson and Solomon 2005
__________________

__________________
ISPA Yachtmaster Ocean Instructor Evaluator
Sail Canada Advanced Cruising Instructor
IYT Yachtmaster Coastal Instructor
ASA 201, 203,204, 205, 206, 214
As I sail, I praise God, and care not. (Luke Foxe)
jackdale is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 20:14   #1923
Registered User

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Toronto
Boat: Sandpiper 565
Posts: 2,943
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by fryewe View Post
Whether I agree with his statement [that AGW is real and likely to be a problem], or not, is immaterial.
No, it's central. Why would you cite someone you don't agree with?

Quote:
If climate science is real science, why is there a legal defense fund for climate scientists to fund their efforts to block FOIA requests for their work using public monies?

Climate Science Legal Defense Fund

If public viewing of publicly funded science work is such a big problem, why is there not a physical science defense fund, or a natural science defense fund, or a medical science defense fund, or an aeronautical science defense fund, or a nuclear science defense fund, or a...
We've done this one. Many if not most of the FOIA data requests that climate scientists currently have to field are from "skeptic" (denier) fronts and the volume and demands in these requests are intended to be disabling. And these requesters only intend to mine for any shred of anything they can whip into an attack;there's no undertaking to do anything constructive with them as McIntyre stated when asked.

As I also mentioned before... I'm in favour of FOIA. I do think that the requesters have to demonstrate that they have a bona fide interest in the data, and the competence to use it. I also think that if it's a government or institution that's on the receiving end of these FOIA requests, then additional funding must be provided to handle the burden of compliance if it's significant.

I guess the answer to your last question would depend on whether those institutions also faced a similar barrage of vexatious FOIA requests or the wrath of a powerful industry.
__________________
Lake-Effect is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 20:21   #1924
Senior Cruiser
 
jackdale's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 5,048
Images: 1
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exile View Post
As for Mears' RSS data, here's a link to the website which also includes the same sort of temp graphs. Upper Air Temperature | Remote Sensing Systems. I'm not sure I'm reading them right, but they look like they show more of a cooling trend than UAH.
Read the whole page.
__________________
ISPA Yachtmaster Ocean Instructor Evaluator
Sail Canada Advanced Cruising Instructor
IYT Yachtmaster Coastal Instructor
ASA 201, 203,204, 205, 206, 214
As I sail, I praise God, and care not. (Luke Foxe)
jackdale is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 20:22   #1925
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,961
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake-Effect View Post
Do you agree with the author that:
I repeat, once again, that I believe that the balance of the evidence suggests that man-made global warming could become a significant problem for humanity as this century unfolds.
Yes? No?
I included Stu's highlights but added a couple in orange that together reveal the author's more honest appraisal of the current level of scientific uncertainty. He substitutes the oft-repeated but dubious "97% consensus" for "the balance of the evidence," and states that the evidence "suggests" (vs. "compels") that MMGW "could" (vs. "will") become a "significant" (vs. "overwhelming/disastrous") problem. Compare this, for e.g., to James Hansen's 2008 warning to Obama about the scientific certainty of catastrophic rising sea levels in 4 years.

For the layman at least, I don't think it's possible to give a "yes or no" answer, nor is one appropriate. Given the seriousness of the proposed changes to our socio-economic system in "fixing" the possibility of the more alarmist events occurring, it's more a question of which side has the burden of proof, or at least credible persuasion. And this can only appropriately fall on the MMGW proponents, some of whom are advocating that the science mandates such significant change. Given the current level of scientific uncertainty, and even taking into account Jack's "Precautionary Principle," I can't see how they have yet to meet that burden.
__________________
Exile is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 20:41   #1926
Registered User

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Toronto
Boat: Sandpiper 565
Posts: 2,943
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exile View Post
... Given the seriousness of the proposed changes to our socio-economic system...
...what serious proposed changes to our socio-economic system, specifically, are we to take as given?
__________________
Lake-Effect is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 21:06   #1927
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 570
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake-Effect View Post
...what serious proposed changes to our socio-economic system, specifically, are we to take as given?
YGTBKM. You're not that dense.

How about the proposals for the elimination of fossil fuels for energy generation and transportation, or curtailed "consumption" by developed nations, and transfer payments to developing nations? Does "energy prices are going to necessarily skyrocket" sound familiar?
__________________
fryewe is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 21:16   #1928
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 570
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackdale View Post
RSS


Why do these curves frequently drop a "trend" line along the data line for the period of the presentation, rather than a best fit curve? Wouldn't such a curve provide a better terms of reference for discussion of the past twenty years (18 some say) during which warming rate seems to have tapered off?
__________________
fryewe is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 21:33   #1929
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,961
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect:
...what serious proposed changes to our socio-economic system, specifically, are we to take as given?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fryewe View Post
YGTBKM. You're not that dense.

How about the proposals for the elimination of fossil fuels for energy generation and transportation, or curtailed "consumption" by developed nations, and transfer payments to developing nations? Does "energy prices are going to necessarily skyrocket" sound familiar?
You can't be serious, L-E. Weren't you just bemoaning the fact that low oil prices were not creating enough of a deterrent to reduce fossil fuel demand? That a sufficiently high carbon tax should be imposed? That society needs systemic solutions in moving to more renewables? And the best of all -- your praise for China's system of (tyrannical) centralized control that would more efficiently expedite emissions reductions and clean up their horrendous pollution. If you're still confused, then go back & read Mike's last post about what sorts of changes he thinks are needed. Maybe you agree with him and that's fine, but don't suggest that the sorts of solutions being proposed by the alarmist crowd wouldn't be seriously disruptive to our current system and way of life.

And you think putting a solar panel up on your roof is too expensive???
__________________
Exile is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 21:42   #1930
Senior Cruiser
 
StuM's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Port Moresby,Papua New Guinea
Boat: FP Belize Maestro 43
Posts: 6,713
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by fryewe View Post
Why do these curves frequently drop a "trend" line along the data line for the period of the presentation, rather than a best fit curve? Wouldn't such a curve provide a better terms of reference for discussion of the past twenty years (18 some say) during which warming rate seems to have tapered off?
Because alarmists love extrapolating short linear trends out to absurd conclusions.

That's assuming they can even manage that. Remember the classic from one of the world's "best" climate scientists?
Phil Jones:
" I’m not adept enough (totally inept) with excel to do this now as no-one who knows how to is here. What you have to do is to take the numbers in column C (the years) and then those in D (the anomalies for each year), plot them and then work out the linear trend. The slope is upwards. I had someone do this in early 2006, and the trend was upwards then. It will be now. Trend won’t be statistically significant, but the trend is up."


Anything more complex that a simple linear trend line is clearly beyond their capabilities
__________________
StuM is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 21:50   #1931
Senior Cruiser
 
jackdale's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 5,048
Images: 1
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by fryewe View Post
Why do these curves frequently drop a "trend" line along the data line for the period of the presentation, rather than a best fit curve? Wouldn't such a curve provide a better terms of reference for discussion of the past twenty years (18 some say) during which warming rate seems to have tapered off?
That is a trend for the totality of the data. If you want a specific time frame use the World Meteorological Organization time span of 30 years.

Quote:
Climate “normals” are reference points used by climatologists to compare current climatological trends to that of the past or what is considered “normal”. A Normal is defined as the arithmetic average of a climate element (e.g. temperature) over a 30-year period. A 30 year period is used, as it is long enough to filter out any interannual variation or anomalies, but also short enough to be able to show longer climatic trends.
As Carl Mears stated, using 1997 is a start is classic cherry picking that gives inordinate emphasis to the largest El Nino event of the previous 50 years.

UAH does smooth the data over 13 months.
__________________
ISPA Yachtmaster Ocean Instructor Evaluator
Sail Canada Advanced Cruising Instructor
IYT Yachtmaster Coastal Instructor
ASA 201, 203,204, 205, 206, 214
As I sail, I praise God, and care not. (Luke Foxe)
jackdale is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 22:00   #1932
Senior Cruiser
 
jackdale's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 5,048
Images: 1
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by StuM View Post
Because alarmists love extrapolating short linear trends out to absurd conclusions.


Anything more complex that a simple linear trend line is clearly beyond their capabilities
Look who uses cherry picked straight line trends.

These are ones about whom Mears complains.

No global warming at all for 18 years 9 months – a new record – The Pause lengthens again – just in time for UN Summit in Paris | Climate Depot

Lord Monckton posts this crap every month.

Notice his trend line is 0.25C above the mean. Above average temperatures are warmer.
__________________
ISPA Yachtmaster Ocean Instructor Evaluator
Sail Canada Advanced Cruising Instructor
IYT Yachtmaster Coastal Instructor
ASA 201, 203,204, 205, 206, 214
As I sail, I praise God, and care not. (Luke Foxe)
jackdale is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 22:01   #1933
Senior Cruiser
 
StuM's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Port Moresby,Papua New Guinea
Boat: FP Belize Maestro 43
Posts: 6,713
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

> That is a trend for the totality of the data

The point being that it is a linear trend applied to what is, if you look at longer recordsets, clearly cyclic data.
__________________
StuM is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 22:05   #1934
Senior Cruiser
 
jackdale's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 5,048
Images: 1
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by fryewe View Post
Why do these curves frequently drop a "trend" line along the data line for the period of the presentation, rather than a best fit curve? Wouldn't such a curve provide a better terms of reference for discussion of the past twenty years (18 some say) during which warming rate seems to have tapered off?
That is called smoothing. What time period would you recommend? UAH uses 13 months.

30 years is the WMO standard for climate trends.
__________________
ISPA Yachtmaster Ocean Instructor Evaluator
Sail Canada Advanced Cruising Instructor
IYT Yachtmaster Coastal Instructor
ASA 201, 203,204, 205, 206, 214
As I sail, I praise God, and care not. (Luke Foxe)
jackdale is offline  
Old 18-01-2016, 22:08   #1935
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,961
Re: Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackdale View Post
RSS



UAH



Also UAH



UAH Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.11 C per
decade

http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2015/de...berGTR2015.pdf

That is lower than RSS.

The only cooling in RSS occurs in the stratosphere. Lower Tropospheric Stratosphere (TLS)



As predicted by the models.

Troposphere warms, stratosphere cools
Manabe and Wetherald 1967
Manabe and Stouffer 1980
Ramaswamy et al. 1996, 2006
De F. Forster et al. 1999
Langematz et al. 2003
Vinnikov and Grody 2003
Fu et al. 2004
Thompson and Solomon 2005
OK, I stand corrected, and completely screwed up the RSS graph comparing the troposhere to the stratosphere. But if I'm reading the graphs you just posted correctly, the difference in the avg. trend (over a decade) b'twn. the two different sets of sat data is minimal, namely 0.123° (RSS) vs. 0.11° (UAH). Yes, they both show slight warming, but the far more meaningful point is that they also both show a far cooler avg. trend than the surface modeling. And according to the science, temps in the troposhere should show a higher rate of warming than they do on the surface, but they obviously don't.

So yes, warmer in the troposhere & cooler in the stratosphere is also predicted by models, but that seems off point. It's the much cooler rate of warming in the troposhere compared to the much warmer modeling on the surface that is relevant and also askew. That's what the Christy graph that compares sat data with surface modeling plainly shows.
__________________

__________________
Exile is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cruising and the Coming Storm ~ Recession, Depression, Climate Change, Peak Oil jtbsail Off Topic Forum 162 13-10-2015 13:17
Weather Patterns / Climate Change anjou Off Topic Forum 185 19-01-2010 15:08
Climate Change GordMay Off Topic Forum 445 02-09-2008 08:48
Healthiest coral reefs hardest hit by climate change GordMay Off Topic Forum 33 11-05-2007 03:07



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 19:35.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.