Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Your 5 year floating average is better than 2 or 3, but I would submit that maybe a 7 or 10 year average would be even better

...

The fact that the temperature has barely dropped while the solar cycle has gone from high to low speaks rather loudly, don't you think? Or should we now pretend that the solar cycle has no bearing at all on the earth's global temperature?

Gee... citing 6 years is now the same as citing 6-8...


Then citing 6 years that show an increase from the first to the last shows it has leveled off in the last 6-8.

I guess it is now fairly obvious that when you said this okie, you only said it for political reasons and it had nothing to do with science.

okie wrote:

Your 5 year floating average is better than 2 or 3, but I would submit that maybe a 7 or 10 year average would be even better

parados wrote:

Gee... citing 6 years is now the same as citing 6-8...


Then citing 6 years that show an increase from the first to the last shows it has leveled off in the last 6-8.

I guess it is now fairly obvious that when you said this okie, you only said it for political reasons and it had nothing to do with science.

okie wrote:

Your 5 year floating average is better than 2 or 3, but I would submit that maybe a 7 or 10 year average would be even better

Wow, now you are picking on the 8, but accepting 6?

Well, with this year, it would be 7, would you accept that? Do you understand approximations?

I am looking at the numbers, which I hope aren't political, but I admit as I have expressed before, I would like to look at the source of the numbers alot closer.

I would like 5, 7, or 10 year averages for the last 6 to 8 years, but unfortunately there is not enough data to fill in the blanks with those averages yet.

parados wrote:

...

The fact that the temperature has barely dropped while the solar cycle has gone from high to low speaks rather loudly, don't you think? Or should we now pretend that the solar cycle has no bearing at all on the earth's global temperature?

The sun's periodic peak radiation intensities have been increasing, while the earth's temperature has been increasing. We'll see whether that trend continues. If that trend levels off or decreases, and the earth's temperature subsequently levels off or decreases, it would be logical to conclude the sun's radiation intensity trends are a contributing cause of earth's temperature variations, while the increasing CO2 trend is not a contributing cause, but rather a consequence of earth warming.

When the earth warms there is a greater rate of evaporation from its oceans. When there is a greater rate of evaporation, more of the high H2O and CO2 mix dissolved in its oceans enters the atmosphere. It is therefore logical to infer that earth warming is a primary cause of the increasing density of CO2 in the atmosphere, rather than increased CO2 density in the atmosphere is the primary cause of earth warming.

...

ican711nm wrote:

The sun's periodic peak radiation intensities have been increasing, while the earth's temperature has been increasing. We'll see whether that trend continues. If that trend levels off or decreases, and the earth's temperature subsequently levels off or decreases, it would be logical to conclude the sun's radiation intensity trends are a contributing cause of earth's temperature variations, while the increasing CO2 trend is not a contributing cause, but rather a consequence of earth warming.

So what? You are arguing that only the peaks of a solar cycle warm the earth? Either the amount of the sun's radiation affects the temperature or it doesn't. You can't claim it doesn't when the radiation goes down if you claim it is the only cause of warming when it goes up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation
...
Solar activity

[edit] Sunspots

Graph showing proxies of solar activity, including changes in sunspot number and cosmogenic isotope production.Sunspots are relatively dark areas on the surface of the Sun where intense magnetic activity inhibits convection and so cools the surface. The number of sunspots correlates with the intensity of solar radiation. The variation is small (of the order of 1 W/m² or 0.1% of the total) and was only established once satellite measurements of solar variation became available in the 1980s. Based on work by Abbot, Foukal et al. (1977) realised that higher values of radiation are associated with more sunspots. Nimbus 7 (launched October 25, 1978) and the Solar Maximum Mission (launched February 14, 1980) detected that because the areas surrounding sunspots are brighter, the overall effect is that more sunspots means a brighter sun.
...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Short_Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
Description

Expanded record of instrumental temperatures showing recent global warmingThis figure shows the last 25 years of globally averaged instrumental surface temperature measurements according to data collected by the Hadley Centre of the UK Meteorological Office and the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia. Data set HadCRUT3 was used. The most recent documentation for this data set is Brohan et al. (2006).

Also shown is a history of fluctuations in the El Nino Southern Oscillation and the period of volcanic disturbance due to the stratosphere-piercing eruption of Mount Pinatubo. The volcanic period is defined as the period of satellite discernable volcanic ash in the upper atmosphere (Luo et al. 2002). The El Nino / La Nina periods are defined here as times when the five month average of the Nino-3 Index deviated from its mean (over these 25 years) by more than 0.5 °C. Many of the interannual variations in temperature relative to the trend can be explained by the release (during El Nino) or uptake (during La Nina) of thermal energy by the oceans. The eruption of Mount Pinatubo, one of the largest of the century, may have depressed global temperature as a result of expelled ash and sulfates. The eruption of Krakatoa in the 1880's caused global temperatures to drop dramatically. The "Year without a summer" was a direct result of the eruption. Crops failed and frosty mornings in July across much of the northern states were common that year. Proof that a single volcano can effect the earths temperatures.

Since the late 1960s, much of the North Atlantic Ocean has become less salty, in part due to increases in fresh water runoff induced by global warming, scientists say.

This is because saltier waters in the upper levels of the North Atlantic ocean may mean that the global ocean conveyor belt - the vital piece of planetary plumbing which some scientists fear may slow down because of global warming - will remain stable.

This is a pale imitation of what it will be like in Bali in between all the other stuff which won't be mentioned in the "communique".

You must have missed my earlier post mm.

The Sunday Times said that the carbon footprint from Bali was greater than that of Chad which is a country in Africa in case you think it's in Florida.

And they weren't counting the prostitutes, waiters and alcohol densities or any other non-accredited persons who's presence is merely fortuitous and thus unworthy of being mentioned in despatches.

I found a website that really makes it hard to take global warming seriously.
It lists about 600 things that have been blamed on global warming, including several that contradict each other.

Rush read most of them on the air.

You don't enjoy humor, blatham? The global warmers at least provide some.

Are you drinking rats milk yet, blatham? That has been one of the suggestions, I hope you know, to save the planet.