Latest Headlines on OCRegister.com
[x] Close
- NEWS
- Auld Dubliner tries to break world record 1 hour & 56 minutes ago
- Corporate O.C. practices purposeful giving 3 hours & 47 minutes ago
- Fear, distrust surround Capo teacher negotiations 2 hours & 48 minutes ago
- Poll: Brown, Whitman deadlocked in race for governor
- SPORTS
- Bruins tailgate: 11-21-09 25 minutes ago
- UCLA stops Arizona State, 23-13 3 hours & 32 minutes ago
- Live updates from 'UFC 106: Ortiz vs. Griffin 2' 2 hours & 14 minutes ago
- Skater loses deal in fight over hockey stick
- BUSINESS
- ENTERTAINMENT
- LIFE
- TRAVEL
- OPINION
So, you wanna talk global warming trends?
October 30th, 2009, 3:56 pm · 14 Comments · posted by Mark Landsbaum
Have any of the true believers explained this global warming anomoly yet?
From 1940 to 1975, globally-averaged temperature declined while manmade CO2 emissions increased substantially.
Since 1998 global average temperatures have fallen, but CO2 emissions have soared.
That means for 46 of the last 69 years (66% of the time) temperatures declined while CO2 emissions increased substantially.
Did someone say trends are important? Maybe it depends on where you draw the lines for the beginning and the end, hm? Let’s draw the beginning 100 years ago and the end today. Temperatures haven’t increased even 1 whole degree. But CO2 emissions have skyrocketed. Hm.
Then there’s this:
Not exactly an upward trend, hm?
And this…
This one either, huh? In fact, the plots show 20th century warming is dwarfed by past warming.
The folks at World Climate Report offer a little insight:
“We suspect you have been living your life unaware of the articles by Loehle and McCulloch. The reason is obvious – they found evidence that temperature variations over the past 2,000 years indicate that the earth’s average temperature bounces around naturally to a larger degree than other paleo-reconstructions indicate, and further, that temperatures about 1,000 years ago were not that dissimilar to today’s temperatures. This suggests that the earth’s ecosystems are more resilient (and adaptive) than some pessimists give them credit for—not a favorite topic in the mainstream press.”
RELATED POSTS:
ADVERTISEMENT
14 Comments
Leave a Reply
-
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Meet the bloggers
-
Subscribe to Orange Punch
-
ADVERTISEMENT
Mr. Landsbaum seems to have been stung a wee bit by the AP article already noted here, about a group of statisticians debunking his favorite (well one of them, anyway) constant deliberately misinformed screeds about the earth cooling instead of warming.
(I’d use the term “lies” instead of “misinformed screeds,” but we passed that threshhold a long time ago, didn’t we? “Lies” doesn’t even do justice to this crud anymore.)
I’ll just invite you folks to read that article - it’s on Yahoo news - and the underlying research too.
Even Mr. Landsbaum’s echo chamber is starting to spring leaks. Expect a post within a week asserting that people are deserting the theory of climate change in droves and that the entire “hoax” is collapsing under its own weight. The noise you will hear in that post is Mr. Landsbaum whistling past the graveyard.
Landsbaum is wrong about warming trends. What part of “an analysis of global temperatures by independent statisticians shows the Earth is still warming and not cooling as some global warming skeptics are claiming ” was unclear to him?
From NOAA:
The 2005 global temperature was statistically indistinguishable from the standing record set in 1998. One data set, in use at NCDC since the late 1990s, produced a global annual temperature for 2005 that was slightly below 1998 . An improved data set, which incorporates innovative algorithms that better account for factors such as changes in spatial coverage and evolving observing methods, results in 2005 being slightly warmer than 1998.
Professor W, the problem with your cut and paste is the issue of innovative algorithms. This is simply a way to manufacture data to benefit the Al Gore’s of the world. These kinds of comments cannot go unchallenged.
Luckily I thing the masses are waking up and seeing what a hoax this is and how it is just one more way for the one worlders to gain more control of us and our TAX DOLLARS.
Only in an environment governed by the precepts of George Orwell — and by Far Left intellectualoids — would eggheads feel comfortable arguing that steadily declining temperatures are proof that the planet is heating up.
Yet, paradoxically, though Landsbaum is right about the non-prevalence of global warming,he’s wrong about libertarianism.
Human stupidity — particularly the stupidity of the intellectual class — is the reason why freedom doesn’t work.
Liberals control the the news media, the academy, and popular culture, so they are able to use their freedoms to spread a number of lies. Gresham’s Law prevails and bad information drives out good information.
Freedom is antithetical to the truth when liberals control the opinion-making institutions, and like any other scarce commodity, freedom should be limited and restricted only to those who won’t abuse it.
Sorry GA. It has not been “steadily declining temperatures”. 1998 and 2005 were nearly identical. It has been a warm decade. Period.
About that AP study: the statisticians showed that the claimed decadal cooling trend depends on starting with a particular year, and show that by starting with a different year the trend appears stable, or even - with yet another year to start from - slightly warming. This is well-known in statistical analysis, nothing new. Note that the trend for ten decades shows about one-tenth degree of warming per decade: again, neither new nor alarming. Nor is it noted that the coolest year of the 1997-2007 decade dropped slightly below the entire previous century’s warming - an anomoly, yes, but CO2 certainly does not explain it.
Now, I happen to believe that the Globe has been [mostly] warming. But it has been doing so since before the Industrial Revolution: it has been a couple of centuries since the English government could plan a year in advance to have massive displays on the fully-frozen Thames in London. OTOH, neither is it yet warm enough for Greenland to export grain again.
Then challenge them ,Loufca - don’t just make a huffy comment about Al Gore (the universal epithet, it seems) and walk away. Algorithms and other software are constantly being refined and upgraded (see Windows 7).
This is so silly.
The new response to scientific data refuting their position is to claim “conspiracy”.
“Conspiracy” claims such as???
Mark, can you take this on another angle. I am curious about sea levels rising. I have not seen any increase in sea levels in my 45 years of life. So I am not buying that they will suddenly start rising 1.3 feet every ten years.
The NOAA says there is no evidence that CO2 causes warming.
“It has been thought that an increase in carbon dioxide will lead to global warming. While carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been increasing over the past 100 years, there is no evidence that it is causing an increase in global temperatures.”
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/jetstream/atmos/ll_gas.htm
That quote appears to have been up at least since September 01, 2009. The webpage is actually part of the website of the Southern Region Headquarters of the NOAA, so I wonder if there isn’t a bit of dissension in the agency. I’m sure Jane Lubchenko will address this soon and the quote will change to better fit official Obamavision.