NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record[W:199]

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

humbolt said:

Telling. I didn't mention hiding the decline, anyway. I mentioned a corrupt data base.

Click to expand...

No, you didn't mention it.

You didn't read the article.

Click to expand...

Because the opinion piece you posted mentioned it. Are you sure it's me who needs to read it?

The CRU has the largest and most utilized temperature data base in the world, and a portion of that data is simply made up. The only mention of the software involved is to assert that the data base didn't function properly unless data was provided for every site listed. Nice attempt to deflect and change the subject. And no, the CRU isn't the only source of data - just the source for NOAA, the IPCC, and the global temperature measurements supplied to agencies like the US National Weather Service for global temperature records

Click to expand...

No, you have it backwards. The US National Weather Service collects temperature data for the US. Because they own and operate all the machines in this country, and other nations have their own weather stations operated by their own weather services. I mean really, who believes the US NWS would farm that out to some British university?

The CRU collects all that data and compiles an instrumental temperature record.

There are other temperature records, like GISTemp and the satellite records, and they all match fine.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

SouthernDemocrat said:

It is sourced and footnoted to point out the level of consensus on AGW, that basically every major scientific society and organization on earth accepts the theory.

In the end its all neither here nor there as its not like we are going to do anything about it.

Click to expand...

And not one mention of any dissent. Garbage like Naomi Oreski's "study" is presented with no mention of the controversy surrounding it's shoddy methodology.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Deuce said:

No, you didn't mention it.

Because the opinion piece you posted mentioned it. Are you sure it's me who needs to read it?

Click to expand...

Yep. Pretty sure you need to read it - again maybe. You noticed it was an opinion piece, but you somehow failed to notice the substance. That would be the actual words of the technician tasked with updating the CRU database. Since it was the point of the piece, I think you ought to re-read.

No, you have it backwards. The US National Weather Service collects temperature data for the US. Because they own and operate all the machines in this country, and other nations have their own weather stations operated by their own weather services. I mean really, who believes the US NWS would farm that out to some British university?

Click to expand...

True, the NWS does own the equipment in most cases. What you're leaving out, and what is extremely important historically, is that the monitoring has historically been done by volunteers. Some of these volunteers are quite enthusiastic and responsible. Others aren't. There are huge holes in data reported. I think if you had cared to address such serious flaws, you would have noticed that such missing data is exactly what the technician is complaining about.

The CRU collects all that data and compiles an instrumental temperature record.

There are other temperature records, like GISTemp and the satellite records, and they all match fine.

Click to expand...

Oh, I'm sure the data is all in line with each reporting entity. Tell me though, exactly how historic data and trend lines can be established when the data is so ****ed up and incomplete that the technician is forced to just make the temperatures up for innumerable places, just as he readily admits the CRU had done repeatedly in the past? It can't be done with any credibility at all. This is simply a reflection of sloppy work and precisely the kind of inattentiveness that gives the entire effort a bad name, and understandably so. Though opinion, the author's conclusion is right on the mark.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

humbolt said:

Yep. Pretty sure you need to read it - again maybe. You noticed it was an opinion piece, but you somehow failed to notice the substance. That would be the actual words of the technician tasked with updating the CRU database. Since it was the point of the piece, I think you ought to re-read.



True, the NWS does own the equipment in most cases. What you're leaving out, and what is extremely important historically, is that the monitoring has historically been done by volunteers. Some of these volunteers are quite enthusiastic and responsible. Others aren't. There are huge holes in data reported. I think if you had cared to address such serious flaws, you would have noticed that such missing data is exactly what the technician is complaining about.



Oh, I'm sure the data is all in line with each reporting entity. Tell me though, exactly how historic data and trend lines can be established when the data is so ****ed up and incomplete that the technician is forced to just make the temperatures up for innumerable places, just as he readily admits the CRU had done repeatedly in the past? It can't be done with any credibility at all. This is simply a reflection of sloppy work and precisely the kind of inattentiveness that gives the entire effort a bad name, and understandably so. Though opinion, the author's conclusion is right on the mark.

Click to expand...

He probably read it, or skimmed through it, but it flew right over his head because it tells a story he doesn't want to hear. In the AGW world, the world temperature data for the past 100+ years is pristine with no mistakes or flaws. If it did have flaws that don't match the theory, the temperature record is simply "adjusted". Sometimes it's done by the climate scientists to ensure the data meets their theories and sometimes, as shown in this article, numbers are simply thrown into the database to fill up spaces by someone that does not have a clue.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Gill said:

And not one mention of any dissent. Garbage like Naomi Oreski's "study" is presented with no mention of the controversy surrounding it's shoddy methodology.

Click to expand...

Funny. Oreskes study has been reconfirmed by about three or four hat have been done afterward. One was even published in PNAS, a top journal of top journals.

Thats probably because the 'controversy' about 'shoddy methodology' is only a controversy on blogs and the methodology is only trashed by people who have never published a study in their lives. But I guess thats good enough 'controversy' for some people if they dont have any critical thinking skills and an ideology to support...

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Gill said:

He probably read it, or skimmed through it, but it flew right over his head because it tells a story he doesn't want to hear. In the AGW world, the world temperature data for the past 100+ years is pristine with no mistakes or flaws. If it did have flaws that don't match the theory, the temperature record is simply "adjusted". Sometimes it's done by the climate scientists to ensure the data meets their theories and sometimes, as shown in this article, numbers are simply thrown into the database to fill up spaces by someone that does not have a clue.

Click to expand...

Yeah, what's missing is the dedication to recreate the data using everything at their disposal rather than simply throwing some numbers into the mix, or worse, throwing in numbers to help support a pre-determined outcome. This speaks of really poor science and professional discipline. If this is the level of effort they are delivering to the project, I want no part of it and will disregard their pronouncements. I have yet to hear the CRU admit their fraudulent figures and I haven't heard of any effort to clean the mess up. Seems like they're happy as clams with the crap they've accumulated.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

KLATTU said:

Sure. mr . science denier.
Here's triplesuper warmist Gavin Schmidt devoting a whole paper to the pause in global warming. ( or as he euphemistically calls it - a slown-lol)
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n3/full/ngeo2105.html

agin for the umptennth tiime- why are all these warmists writing articles and papers about the ein global warming if there isn't one?

Click to expand...

Perhaps it is because warming hasn't stopped and they want you to know it. I've been busy reading the latest about 2014. It is about to become the hottest year on record. Does that mean that warming has "paused" to you? We have passed 1 degree above the 1990 average and every year is getting worse. That is what happens when the Earth absorbs more heat than it loses. You keep setting record highs. How long can you keep denying what is right in front of your face?

"What we saw in 2014 is consistent with what we expect from a changing climate. Record-breaking heat combined with torrential rainfall and floods destroyed livelihoods and ruined lives.
"What is particularly unusual and alarming this year are the high temperatures of vast areas of the ocean surface, including in the Northern Hemisphere," said World Meteorological Organization Secretary-General Michel Jarraud.

NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

According to the organization, estimates for this year show the average air temperature over land and sea for January-October was about 1.03 degrees Fahrenheit (0.57 degrees Centigrade) above the average of 57.2 degrees F (14.00 degrees C) for the 1961-1990 reference period, and 0.16 degree F (0.09 degree C) above the average for the past 10 years.

Click to expand...

2014 may be the hottest year on record - CNN.com

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Gill said:

Interesting. I just read a paper that claims the fluctuating population of polar bears is due to heavy spring ice, not depleted summer ice. It seems that heavy spring ice greatly affects ringed seal populations. Polar bears obtain about 80% of their weight gain following winter by gorging on ring seal pups in March through early May. If the ringed seal pups can't survive due to heavy sea ice, then the polar bear populations are affected.

Click to expand...

That would intuitively seem to make some sense, kind of like a rabbit-eating coyote population number following the rabbit population number cycle, and occasionally throw in a wild card deep snow year starving down the rabbits....

I think that polar bears are pretty hard to count accurately , but I wouldn't quibble with the 20 to 25,000 popular number, since there seem to be so much political and media attention paid to the critter. There'a a lot of hype put to fragments of their studies, and decison based evidence gathering.

You can ride the train up to see the open water polar bears.
Train routes in the Prairies and Northern Manitoba | VIA Rail
( dress warm, expect delays

The Manitoba innuit only shoot about a hundred polar bears a year, the Nunavit aboriginals pop around 400 a year. Add in Quebec and the North West Territories- total polar bears shot annually in Canada is about 600.

I'd guess the Russians would take out a similar number ( no idea..)

They survived the ice recess of the mediaval warm period, I think it unlikey the current ice variation will be a problem .

The truth about polar bears - Canadian Geographic

I think a more interesting perspective on natural climate variation affecting population would be looking at how a previous larger climate change , and the movement of the more warlike Thule ( whose descendants are the current polar bear -shooting innuit ) wiped out the more peaceable arctic Dorset ( referenced in current aboriginal verbal legend as the " large ones " ) .

And why there are european steel knives so far north, under ice....

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

iguanaman said:

Perhaps it is because warming hasn't stopped and they want you to know it. I've been busy reading the latest about 2014.It is about to become the hottest year on record
[/url]

Click to expand...

Nah.Ya been drinking too much kool aid.
The two main research groups tracking global lower-tropospheric temperatures (our UAH group, and the Remote Sensing Systems [RSS] group) show 2014 lagging significantly behind 2010 and especially 1998:

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

KLATTU said:

Nah.Ya been drinking too much kool aid.
The two main research groups tracking global lower-tropospheric temperatures (our UAH group, and the Remote Sensing Systems [RSS] group) show 2014 lagging significantly behind 2010 and especially 1998:

Click to expand...

Of course, when you look at SURFACE temperatures (ie where people actually live), 2014 is set to be a record.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

KLATTU said:

Nah.Ya been drinking too much kool aid.
The two main research groups tracking global lower-tropospheric temperatures (our UAH group, and the Remote Sensing Systems [RSS] group) show 2014 lagging significantly behind 2010 and especially 1998:

Click to expand...

Isn't it funny to see people making claims about the most accurate temperature measurement systems, NOAA satellites, that know absolutely nothing about it?

It's almost sad to see some people claiming to be "experts" that don't even know the basics.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Real science: " Hmm, the temperature measures are different, I wonder why that is?"

Warmism:" One temperature measure shows what I want it to show, so that's the best one"

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

KLATTU said:

Real science: " Hmm, the temperature measures are different, I wonder why that is?"

Warmism:" One temperature measure shows what I want it to show, so that's the best one"

Click to expand...

...says the guy who ignores surface temperature readings from multiple places (HADCRUT, GISS) and only shows the tropospheric data that show what he wants it to show....

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

C'mon warming. I'm rootin' for you. I'll get those palm trees planted one day.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Just came across a chart of all the major indices graphed together, both surface and tropospheric. RSS seems to be the only recent outlier over the last few years, but it also covers the least amount of the earth, so there is that.

You can see all the datasets correlate well.



And as far as the UAH satellite data set goes, October 2014 was the warmest ever reported, and today you can see November 2014 was the second warmest ever reported, making 2014 tracking as the 3rd hottest year ever.

HotWhopper: UAH on track for 3rd hottest year

But its not warming according to denier logic, because apparently we are always living through the warmest month ever.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Threegoofs said:

Just came across a chart of all the major indices graphed together, both surface and tropospheric. RSS seems to be the only recent outlier over the last few years, but it also covers the least amount of the earth, so there is that.

You can see all the datasets correlate well.

Click to expand...

So, in the last 160 years, the earth has warmed by almost a full degree Celsius.

Gee, I wonder if the earth does this every thousand years or so. What made it so warm during the Medieval period?

Nope, it has to be evil Republicans and their damn Escalades.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Erod said:

So, in the last 160 years, the earth has warmed by almost a full degree Celsius.

Gee, I wonder if the earth does this every thousand years or so. What made it so warm during the Medieval period?

Nope, it has to be evil Republicans and their damn Escalades.

Click to expand...

Given the MWP seems like it was an isolated event to Western Europe, its not really that important in global temperature research.

A degree centigrade is a lot. We are clearly on a path to have at least one or two degrees even warmer - far exceeding any temperature rise in the past in terms of a short period (hundreds of years vs thousands of years).

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Threegoofs said:

Given the MWP seems like it was an isolated event to Western Europe, its not really that important in global temperature research.

A degree centigrade is a lot. We are clearly on a path to have at least one or two degrees even warmer - far exceeding any temperature rise in the past in terms of a short period (hundreds of years vs thousands of years).

Click to expand...

Yeah, it was isolated. I'm sure we have incontrovertible evidence from Chile, Thailand, and Tupelo, Mississippi that says just that.

You guys are going to build and fabricate "evidence" to say whatever it is you need it to say. Many billions to be had.

Re: NOAA: 2014 is shaping up as hottest year on record

Erod said:

Yeah, it was isolated. I'm sure we have incontrovertible evidence from Chile, Thailand, and Tupelo, Mississippi that says just that.

You guys are going to build and fabricate "evidence" to say whatever it is you need it to say. Many billions to be had.

Click to expand...

Don't forget to add Patagonia, Chili.

The temperature reconstruction from Laguna Escondida shows cold conditions in the 5th century (relative to the 20th century mean), warmer temperatures from AD 600 to AD 1150 and colder temperatures from AD 1200 to AD 1450. From AD 1450 to AD 1700 our reconstruction shows a period with stronger variability and on average higher values than the 20th century mean. Until AD 1900 the temperature values decrease but stay slightly above the 20th century mean.

Click to expand...

Late Holocene air temperature variability reconstructed from the sediments of Laguna Escondida, Patagonia, Chili, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology.

Glad you guys are aware of local temperature variations from centuries ago.

But world temps are a different story.

Threegoofs said:

View attachment 67176841

Glad you guys are aware of local temperature variations from centuries ago.

But world temps are a different story.

Click to expand...

Yeah, 73 LOCAL sites in the entire world proves the whole world's temperature rose and fell together. :lamo

By the way, the uptick in the Marcott 19th century data has been refuted by the authors themselves.

Gill said:

Yeah, 73 LOCAL sites in the entire world proves the whole world's temperature rose and fell together. :lamo

By the way, the uptick in the Marcott 19th century data has been refuted by the authors themselves.

Click to expand...

Yeah. Thats your story and youre sticking to it. Of course, Mann, PAGES 2K and a bunch of other reconstructions replicate that graph I showed pretty closely, but dont let that stop you from 'destroying' me on this point. :lamo

Threegoofs said:

Yeah. Thats your story and youre sticking to it. Of course, Mann, PAGES 2K and a bunch of other reconstructions replicate that graph I showed pretty closely, but dont let that stop you from 'destroying' me on this point. :lamo

Click to expand...

Your doing a pretty good job of destroying yourself by posting this discredited garbage. That's funny because Marcott claims his paper and reconstruction is unique. How can that be if hockeysctick Mann has replicated it??

But please continue, you're a great source of amusement.

We've reached that point warmers are so all-in that it is impossible to turn back now .

Gill said:

Your doing a pretty good job of destroying yourself by posting this discredited garbage. That's funny because Marcott claims his paper and reconstruction is unique. How can that be if hockeysctick Mann has replicated it??

But please continue, you're a great source of amusement.

Click to expand...

Well, actually it's the other way around- Marcotts work came a decade after Mann.

And the whole concept is that this data has been replicated using completely different proxies- thus strengthening the original thesis.

It's science... You wouldn't understand. Obviously.