Damn that Global warming; er....Climate change

[Cypress]

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

Since I am not a scientist, perhaps one of you fear mongers can explain this to me....

According to this data... 2009 is NOT the warmest year on record as the article Dung posted states.

Also, why are they using 1951-1980 as the 'base' period?

Also, why did NASA admit 1934 was the warmest year on record (this was stated before 2009), when the data on here does not seem to show that?

Also, why does Hansen continue to block FOIA requests for the raw data?

I think you're confused. It's probably because you read rightwing blogs for science information.

1934 was a record hot year....in the United States. But that's not pertinent to global warming, is it?

This is what the rightwing blogs are referring to, when they mislead about 1934. Notice, this is the NCDC for united states temperatures.

And that's got nothing to do with global temperatures. Furthermore, land temperatures are not at all the most salient metric. Ocean temperatures are. Oceans actually control the climate, not land. And ocean temperatures have been rapidly accelerating, far more than land temperatures.

Regarding 2009.....2009 was the second hottest year globally, after 2005. Maybe dung or whoever it was, should apologize for being off by one year.


As for the baseline, that's probably something that is explained if you read the actual studies methodology section. I'm sure it's published on the internet, and easily accessible. I doubt anyone has time here to research it for you. I don't know anything about Hansen and FOIA, except that Tinfoil never posts anything about this crap unless it comes from a partisan rightwing blog. Which aren't reliable sources of scientific information. I suggest you check factcheck.org, who totally debunked "climategate", and maybe Hansen himself has put out a statement.

Regardless, these amount to nothing more than distractions, and the smart people who write the rightwing blogs you and tinfoil read, are deliberately misleading you. Every reputable scientific body and organization on the planet with expertise in climate science agrees that there is a high probability than humans are impacting the climate. I've been asking for years for denialists to present on single major reputable scientific organization having expertise in climate science, who concurs that humans aren't affecting the climate. And for like four years, the rightwing denialists haven't been able to give me one.



EDIT:
I went ahead and looked at the methodology for using the 1951-1980 baseline.

Really, it took like 5 minutes to find it. There's no grand conspiracy of evil liberal scientists to hide information. If ya'll would get of the rightwing blogs, this information is easily accessible to the public.

Here's the reason for using a 1951-1980 baseline. And it makes total sense to me, as it would to anyone with a rudimentary science background.

Anomalies and Absolute Temperatures

Our analysis concerns only temperature anomalies, not absolute temperature. Temperature anomalies are computed relative to the base period 1951-1980. The reason to work with anomalies, rather than absolute temperature is that absolute temperature varies markedly in short distances, while monthly or annual temperature anomalies are representative of a much larger region. Indeed, we have shown (Hansen and Lebedeff, 1987) that temperature anomalies are strongly correlated out to distances of the order of 1000 km. For a more detailed discussion, see The Elusive Absolute Surface Air Temperature.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

 

[maineman]

well said cy!

 

[RockX]

View attachment 362

 

[Cypress]

Back in the 60's this same crowd was predicting global cooling. They even developed a scheme to color parts of the polar regions black to try and absorb more sunlight.

Teabagger myths and misinformation are more fun than a barrel of monkeys!

From: The American Meterological Society:

The Myth of the 1970s “Global Cooling” “Scientific Consensus”

There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then.

[recently]…..the following pervasive myth arose: there was a consensus among climate scientists of the 1970s that either global cooling or a full-fledged ice age was imminent (see the “Perpetuating the myth” sidebar).

A review of the climate science literature from 1965 to 1979 shows this myth to be false. The myth’s basis lies in a selective misreading of the texts both by some members of the media at the time and by some
observers today. In fact, emphasis on greenhouse warming dominated the scientific literature even then.

http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/1520-0477/89/9/pdf/i1520-0477-89-9-1325.pdf

The Teabagger Myth of “Sea Ice Isn’t Shriking”

Tinfoil, Meme, Dixie, George Will, and rightwing climate denialists claim that University of Illinois data show “sea ice has recovered” since the 1970s, proving the Libtards wrong! HaHaHa!!!!

Here’s what the University of Illinois Actually Says……as per usual, teabaggers were lied to by their rightwing blogs again, sadly:

In an opinion piece by George Will published on February 15, 2009 in the Washington Post, George Will states “According to the University of Illinois’ Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979.”

Response from the University of Illinois Arctic Climate Research Center:

“We do not know where George Will is getting his information, but our data shows that on February 15, 1979, global sea ice area was 16.79 million sq. km and on February 15, 2009, global sea ice area was 15.45 million sq. km. Therefore, global sea ice levels are 1.34 million sq. km less in February 2009 than in February 1979. This decrease in sea ice area is roughly equal to the area of Texas, California, and Oklahoma combined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Will#2009_Global_Sea_Ice_Level

The Teabagger Myth of “Climate Gate!”

Teabaggers claim “climate gate” proves a global conspiracy of fraud by climate scientists, and completely debunks the human-induced climate change:

Note what non-partisan factcheck.org reports”

Skeptics claim this trove of e-mails shows the scientists at the U.K. research center were engaging in evidence-tampering, and they are portraying the affair as a major scandal: "Climategate."

We find such claims to be far wide of the mark.

Claims that the e-mails are evidence of fraud or deceit, however, misrepresent what they actually say.

• The messages, which span 13 years, show a few scientists in a bad light, being rude or dismissive. An investigation is underway, but there’s still plenty of evidence that the earth is getting warmer and that humans are largely responsible.
• Some critics say the e-mails negate the conclusions of a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but the IPCC report relied on data from a large number of sources, of which CRU was only one.
• E-mails being cited as "smoking guns" have been misrepresented. For instance, one e-mail that refers to "hiding the decline" isn’t talking about a decline in actual temperatures as measured at weather stations. These have continued to rise, and 2009 may turn out to be the fifth warmest year ever recorded. The "decline" actually refers to a problem with recent data from tree rings.


http://factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/

Every major, reputable, internationally scientific organization with expertise in climate science agrees that there is a high probability that humans are significantly influencing the climate.

Wingnuts, teabaggers, birthers, and GED drop outs are unable to come up with one single solitary internationally-recognized scientific organization with expertise in climate that supports the wingnut position.
t

 

[NOVA]

Teabagger myths and misinformation are more fun than a barrel of monkeys!








Every major, reputable, internationally scientific organization with expertise in climate science agrees that there is a high probability that humans are significantly influencing the climate.

Wingnuts, teabaggers, birthers, and GED drop outs are unable to come up with one single solitary internationally-recognized scientific organization with expertise in climate that supports the wingnut position.
t

Seems like only yesterday you would lace your rants with words like..."peer reviewed".....guess since the scandal exposed that as bullshit, that don't quite cut it anymore...

 

[DamnYankee]

Teabagger myths and misinformation are more fun than a barrel of monkeys!








Every major, reputable, internationally scientific organization with expertise in climate science agrees that there is a high probability that humans are significantly influencing the climate.

Wingnuts, teabaggers, birthers, and GED drop outs are unable to come up with one single solitary internationally-recognized scientific organization with expertise in climate that supports the wingnut position.
t

:lol: Now you want scientific consensus for shit in the 60's and 70"s? There's no consensus now, shitferbrains.

 

[DamnYankee]

Urbanization around the weather stations explains that. Try again.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I think you're confused. It's probably because you read rightwing blogs for science information.

1934 was a record hot year....in the United States. But that's not pertinent to global warming, is it?

This is what the rightwing blogs are referring to, when they mislead about 1934. Notice, this is the NCDC for united states temperatures.

And that's got nothing to do with global temperatures. Furthermore, land temperatures are not at all the most salient metric. Ocean temperatures are. Oceans actually control the climate, not land. And ocean temperatures have been rapidly accelerating, far more than land temperatures.

Regarding 2009.....2009 was the second hottest year globally, after 2005. Maybe dung or whoever it was, should apologize for being off by one year.


As for the baseline, that's probably something that is explained if you read the actual studies methodology section. I'm sure it's published on the internet, and easily accessible. I doubt anyone has time here to research it for you. I don't know anything about Hansen and FOIA, except that Tinfoil never posts anything about this crap unless it comes from a partisan rightwing blog. Which aren't reliable sources of scientific information. I suggest you check factcheck.org, who totally debunked "climategate", and maybe Hansen himself has put out a statement.

Regardless, these amount to nothing more than distractions, and the smart people who write the rightwing blogs you and tinfoil read, are deliberately misleading you. Every reputable scientific body and organization on the planet with expertise in climate science agrees that there is a high probability than humans are impacting the climate. I've been asking for years for denialists to present on single major reputable scientific organization having expertise in climate science, who concurs that humans aren't affecting the climate. And for like four years, the rightwing denialists haven't been able to give me one.



EDIT:
I went ahead and looked at the methodology for using the 1951-1980 baseline.

Really, it took like 5 minutes to find it. There's no grand conspiracy of evil liberal scientists to hide information. If ya'll would get of the rightwing blogs, this information is easily accessible to the public.

Here's the reason for using a 1951-1980 baseline. And it makes total sense to me, as it would to anyone with a rudimentary science background.

Oh look.... The little leg humper goes to his standard .... 'use musta be readin from a right wing blog' bullshit. Everything I wrote came from Goddard you unbelievable hack.

That said, you are correct on the 1934... I misread that.

But do go ahead and address the fraudulent behavior of the so called 'scientists' you flat earthers worship.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Every major, reputable, internationally scientific organization with expertise in climate science agrees that there is a high probability that humans are significantly influencing the climate.

Wingnuts, teabaggers, birthers, and GED drop outs are unable to come up with one single solitary internationally-recognized scientific organization with expertise in climate that supports the wingnut position.
t

ROFLMAO....

yeah... you mean those international scientific organizations that have...

1) Been destroying data because it was too hard to store

2) Been refusing to release their raw data because they didn't want people scrutinizing it

3) Published the IPCC report with pure nonsense in it. (see Himalayan glaciers.... etc...)

4) been actively trying to suppress opposing views

You mean THOSE international government funded fear mongers? Hey, if the public is a scared, well then we can exert yet more control over them via cap and trade schemes that will make our friends rich.

No matter how you flat earthers try and force feed the rest of the world your bullshit... we are not having any more. Your lies are being brought to light.

But I know... little leg humping stalker hacks such as yourself have your head buried so far up your masters ass that you really have no choice but to choke on the shit they provide you.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Every major, reputable, internationally scientific organization with expertise in climate science agrees that there is a high probability that humans are significantly influencing the climate.

Every half-assed liberal pinhead government funded grant seeking crackpot group of pinheads have universally concluded that it is within the realm of possibility that man-made CO2 might possibly effect the climate to some unknown degree. That's essentially what you have offered! No evidence, no proof, as that was all found to be manipulated and fraudulent. But because you've all banded together and are holding each others hands, you can definitively say that man might possibly be effecting the climate...maybe! But we can take your word for this because you are smart educated pinheads who wouldn't lie about such a thing, even though it would mean the end of all the government money if this goes away. Excuse me, let me open my ass a little wider so you can get your smoke nozzle in there!