Am I still allowed to question climate change?

[El Cid]

google is a biassed source

 

It is strange, when I search for 'Antarctic sea ice', most of the results that come back are 'Arctic'.

[Cyclone]

Yes I suppose I'm guilty of assuming a global average temperature increase means the average temperature as gone up globally.

 

Over what time period? It hasn't gone up in the last decade+.

 

And if it is going up over a longer time period, does that automatically make it anthropogenic? We've no way to know. But what we do know is that it fluctuates naturally and that it's been much higher in the past, before man even existed...

 

---------- Post added 03-08-2013 at 12:05 ----------

 

There's also a bigger temperature differential around the antarctic so wind speeds have increased, this creates more spray which freezes and builds more sea ice.

 

And more sea ice increases the albedo of the planet. Oh no, snowball earth is starting, soon we'll plunge into another ice age (the one that is overdue actually, we've been in a 10k period of unusually stable temperatures).

[angos]

Over what time period? It hasn't gone up in the last decade+.

 

And if it is going up over a longer time period, does that automatically make it anthropogenic? We've no way to know. But what we do know is that it fluctuates naturally and that it's been much higher in the past, before man even existed...

Coincidentally since the start of the industrial revaluation.

 

 

And more sea ice increases the albedo of the planet. Oh no, snowball earth is starting, soon we'll plunge into another ice age (the one that is overdue actually, we've been in a 10k period of unusually stable temperatures).

 

Yes it does but it is sadly not going to be enough to counter global temperature rises caused by human activity.

[Cyclone]

The hocky stick graph is manipulated to look like that. There is no sudden increase in the rate of temperature change at the start of the industrial revolution.

 

Maybe AGW is the only thing that has stopped us entering a new ice age. The fact is that we have no way to know because our understanding and models are not complete.

[angos]

The hocky stick graph is manipulated to look like that. There is no sudden increase in the rate of temperature change at the start of the industrial revolution.

 

Maybe AGW is the only thing that has stopped us entering a new ice age. The fact is that we have no way to know because our understanding and models are not complete.

 

You could be right, human activity may well have stopped and reversed global cooling, which would mean the temperature would be lower if it wasn't for human activity.

[Cyclone]

Maybe. But it's all speculation, we don't know, we don't understand the climate well enough, our models are demonstrably not functional and therefore useless for making predictions.

[El Cid]

 

Coincidentally since the start of the industrial revaluation.

 

The Industrial Revolution was the transition to new manufacturing processes in the period from about 1760 to some time between 1820 and 1840.

 

Quite a broad statement then?

 

Global temperatures started going up sometime after 1900

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record

[woolyhead]

The Earth's mean temperature is actually falling. This Global Warming/Climate Change nonsense is entirely political. for whatever hidden agenda the politicians have

 

Along with Political Correctness it goes to show how easily the population's mindsets can be manipulated with a constant barrage of dis-information. I wonder Climate Change Denial hasn't been added to their list of taboo subjects

 

What does this "mean temperature" actually mean? Is it the mean taken from measurements made at one location over a number of years? What about the equivalent "mean temperatures" taken from measurements at other locations? What's done with these different "mean" figures so as to calculate a "mean of all the means," if that's what all the fuss is about? And what does "mean of all the means" mean mathematically? What does it mean physically?

[El Cid]

 

What about the equivalent "mean temperatures" taken from measurements at other locations?

 

I will let Nodens answer your question; but I would say that the reason why global temperatures havnt changed much in the past 15 years is because we do not measure global temperature accurately enough.

 

Climate scientists talk about the warming oceans, are the scientists including temperature measurements of the oceans in their "mean" average global temperature?

 

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20130613.html#.Uf47cKzUb3E

 

The science/evidence of climate change is not 100%, but the earth is warming.

[woolyhead]

I will let Nodens answer your question; but I would say that the reason why global temperatures havnt changed much in the past 15 years is because we do not measure global temperature accurately enough.

 

Climate scientists talk about the warming oceans, are the scientists including temperature measurements of the oceans in their "mean" average global temperature?

 

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20130613.html#.Uf47cKzUb3E

 

The science/evidence of climate change is not 100%, but the earth is warming.

 

I think that the term "global temperatures" is the clue. They vary all through the year. They also vary from place to place at any one time. To blithely refer to "average global temperature" means very little. If you calculate the average in one place over a whole year you'd get corrisponding but different figures for everywhere in the world. Then what do you do with them? Take the average, I suppose. The trouble is that since the so called "average" global temperature rise is so small, by doing the maths the other way, ie averaging the global daily figure and averaging all the results anually, will give a conflicting answer. So what do we mean when we say "average global temperature? What's Nodens, by the way?

 

---------- Post added 04-08-2013 at 20:45 ----------

 

The UK's Climate Centre at Hadley has been hacked. These are just some extract from the e-mails not publicly available on the net !

 

 

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/hadley_hacked#63657

 

Michael Mann is the world foremost proponent of global warming !

 

From: Kevin Trenberth

To: Michael Mann

Subject: Re: BBC U-turn on climate

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:57:37 -0600

Cc: Stephen H Schneider , Myles Allen , peter stott , “Philip D. Jones” , Benjamin Santer , Tom Wigley , Thomas R Karl , Gavin Schmidt , James Hansen , Michael Oppenheimer

 

Hi all

 

Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming ? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low.

 

This is January weather (see the Rockies baseball playoff game was canceled on saturday and then played last night in below freezing weather).

 

Trenberth, K. E., 2009: An imperative for climate change planning: tracking Earth’s global energy. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 1, 19-27, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.06.001. [1][PDF] (A PDF of the published version can be obtained from the author.)

***

 

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.***

 

Hi. I don't know how average global temperatures are defined but I do know that if you average the daily maximum figures from every point on the globe and then average these averages at the end of the year you get a different answer from what you get if you do the maths the other way. Since the global temperature rise is supposed to be very small, why isn't the exact method used published for wide review? Try it with some simple numbers and see what I'm talking about. Average of averages is a very dodgey concept!

Edited August 4, 2013 by woolyhead