Blondie Massage Spa

415000 years of temperature change.....true or false?

Previous Thread Next Thread
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Frankfooter said:
I think its bullshit, as everything from Watts is.
Prove it by providing a link to the original document or admit its bullshit.
You lied about everything else.
Click to expand...
The same graph appeared in the Wall Street Journal in a column written by Richard McNider and John Christy:

http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303945704579391611041331266?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/02/20/wsj-to-kerry-flat-earthers-were-the-consensus-position/
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Frankfooter said:
Like I said, you can't provide an original source.
The chart is bullshit.
Click to expand...
The source stands. The fact that you can't handle reality is your problem.

As a reminder, you've come up with nothing that shows temperatures being anywhere close to the predictions.
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Frankfooter said:
HadCRUT uses a different baseline, 1961-1990, if memory serves me correct.
Comparing it to CMIP-5 projections is comparing apples to oranges.
Try again.
Click to expand...
Moviefan-2 said:
More bullshit.

Try reading pages 768 and 769 of Chapter 9 of the IPCC's AR5 report:

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf

The IPCC compares the CMIP5 projections to the HadCRUT4 data. You don't know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...
I notice that Groggy has gone somewhat quiet on his claim that you can't compare the CMIP5 projections with the HadCRUT4 data, as the IPCC did in its AR5 report.

That's because he's just making shit up. The IPCC's predictions were spectacularly wrong -- the IPCC itself has confirmed that is the case.
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Moviefan-2 said:
In fact, your own NASA graph shows you're full of crap.

According to you, 2014 was 0.12 degrees C warmer than 2010. However, your NASA graph shows 2014 was only 0.03 degrees warmer than 2010.
Click to expand...
Frankfooter said:
You are making things up.
I never said such a thing.
That is just yet another lie.

Do you ever stop lying?
Click to expand...
While we're waiting for Groggy/Frankfooter to concede that he was wrong about comparing the CMIP5 projections with the HadCRUT4 data, let me follow up on the alleged 0.12 degrees Celsius increase over just four years.

The IPCC graph that I posted uses HadCRUT data. The graph shows the temperature in 2010 was 0.56 degrees Celsius.

http://skepticalscience.com//pics/DvDFmodel-data.png

Here's what Groggy/Franky said about the temperature in 2014:

Frankfooter said:
And note that it even proves that the IPCC's predictions are right on the money in the chart on the right, since the 2015 temp of 0.83ºC is at the top of the red bar, and last year's 0.68ºC is smack dab in the middle. Fucking accurate predictions, thanks for confirming that the IPCC is really quite good.
Click to expand...
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...rue-or-false&p=5334954&viewfull=1#post5334954

So, the temperature that should be plotted on the graph for 2014 was 0.68 degrees C -- an increase of 0.12 degrees C over 2010.

Really?

NASA's numbers -- the ones that Groggy loves to cite -- show the temperature in 2014 was only 0.03 degrees warmer than 2010:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

The NOAA -- another Groggy favourite -- says the temperature in 2014 was 0.03 degrees Celsius less than 2010:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global

The alleged 0.12 degrees Celsius increase is pure fairy tale.
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,263
113
Moviefan-2 said:
That's because he's just making shit up. The IPCC's predictions were spectacularly wrong -- the IPCC itself has confirmed that is the case.
Click to expand...
Here is the correct chart from AR5, but its 2 years old.
If you plot in 2014 and 2015's data in this chart you'd see that the last two years are at the upper end of the IPCC predictions.

 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,263
113
Moviefan-2 said:
Here's what Franky said about the temperature in 2014:



https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...rue-or-false&p=5334954&viewfull=1#post5334954

So, the temperature that should be plotted on the graph for 2014 was 0.68 degrees C -- an increase of 0.12 degrees C over 2010.

Really?

NASA's numbers -- the ones that Groggy loves to cite -- show the temperature in 2014 was only 0.03 degrees warmer than 2010:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

The NOAA -- another Groggy favourite -- says the temperature in 2014 was 0.03 degrees Celsius less than 2010:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global

The alleged 0.12 degrees Celsius increase is pure fairy tale.
Click to expand...
Talk to your other persona, bishop, he'll try to give you a lesson on moving averages.
Your math really, really sucks, you can't tell the difference between mean and addition, can you?
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Frankfooter said:
Here is the correct chart from AR5, but its 2 years old.
If you plot in 2014 and 2015's data in this chart you'd see that the last two years are at the upper end of the IPCC predictions.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. The figure for 2014 is 0.57 degrees Celsius -- still at the bottom of the graph, and far below the IPCC's predictions.
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,263
113
Moviefan-2 said:
Nonsense. The figure for 2014 is 0.57 degrees Celsius -- still at the bottom of the graph, and far below the IPCC's predictions.
Click to expand...
Nonsense, the figure for 2015 is 0.83ºC, right at the top third of their chart.
2014 was 0.68ºC, right in the middle.
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,263
113
Moviefan-2 said:
My math sucks?

The HadCRUT4 temperature for 2014 was 0.57 degrees C.

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4.pdf

You were off by 0.11 degrees.
Click to expand...
We are talking NASA and NOAA numbers in this debate, remember?
Moviefan-2 said:
We might get a bet, once you agree to use one chart for recording the results.

For example, your NASA chart that shows 1995 at 0.43 degrees Celsius put 2014 at 0.68 degrees in 2014: http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

If that's the chart you're saying will hit 0.83 at the end of 2015, we definitely have a bet.
Click to expand...
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Frankfooter said:
Nonsense, the figure for 2015 is 0.83ºC, right at the top third of their chart.
2014 was 0.68ºC, right in the middle.
Click to expand...
Frankfooter said:
We are talking NASA and NOAA numbers in this debate, remember?
Click to expand...
Nonsense. You're using completely different data sets again that have an entirely different baseline.

The HadCRUT4 anomaly for 2014 -- which has the same baseline as the IPCC graphs -- is 0.57 degrees Celsius. At the bottom of the graph and confirming that the IPCC's predictions are spectacularly wrong.

Furthermore, I challenged you to produce an actual graph that shows the predictions and the observed data. I didn't ask you to post a graph and then insert your own numbers from a completely different data set.

So far, the graphs -- including your IPCC graph -- show the IPCC got it spectacularly wrong. You have found nothing to the contrary.
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,263
113
Moviefan-2 said:
Nonsense. You're using completely different data sets again that have an entirely different baseline.

The HadCRUT4 anomaly for 2014 -- which has the same baseline as the IPCC graphs -- is 0.57 degrees Celsius. At the bottom of the graph and confirming that the IPCC's predictions are spectacularly wrong.
Click to expand...
If you enter the 2014 and 2015 HadCRUT numbers that are most recent:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4-gl.dat
0.684ºC for 2015

Then you have a dot at the end of the line that is smack dab in the middle of the chart, using your terms.
End of debate.
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,263
113
Moviefan-2 said:
It's still well below the IPCC's predictions.

The challenge was for you to produce an actual graph that shows the observed data being aligned with the IPCC's predictions.

So far, you have failed.
Click to expand...
Here is an actual chart (2013) with the actual recent data (2015). This is the most recent chart available from the IPCC and the most recent data available from HadCRUT4.

Ok, on your terms here is the final word.
HadCRUT 4 for 2015 = 0.684ºC

Data available here:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4-gl.dat

Enter that dot on this chart from AR5, direct link to the IPCC chart.



That gives you a dot that is smack dab in the middle of the projections.
End of debate.
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Wrong again.

The 2015 temperature is still well below the IPCC predictions.

If you say this is the "end of debate," that means you're conceding that you couldn't find a graph that shows the observed data aligning with the IPCC's predictions.
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,263
113
Moviefan-2 said:
Wrong again.

The 2015 temperature is still well below the IPCC predictions.
Click to expand...
No it isn't.
Plot it into the chart and you'll see its smack dab in the middle.
Spectacularly accurate.


Ok, on your terms here is the final word.
HadCRUT 4 for 2015 = 0.684ºC

Data available here:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4-gl.dat

Enter that dot on this chart from AR5, direct link to the IPCC chart.



That gives you a dot that is smack dab in the middle of the projections.
End of debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ashley Madison
Previous Thread Next Thread
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom