Sorry but your excuses are boring. The numbers clearly show warming.The numbers Groggy and I are debating are in what proved to be a super El Nino year. Until we get through the El Nino (and possible La Nina) period, they tell us nothing.
The Earth's temperature in the 21st century has been stagnant, despite huge increases in man-made emissions. The predictions remain spectacularly wrong, even with the El Nino period included.
Bullshit, start the graph a few years before 1994. There's a lot of variability year over year. Picking an unusually high year from the 90s and pretending that is a baseline is dishonest.
Its important to note that graph does show an upward trend.
Another fool whose confirmation bias pushes him to only used cherry picked data.
That chart is not legit.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/paleolast.htmlThe recent record warm temperatures in the last 15 years are indeed the warmest temperatures the Earth has seen in at least the last 1000 years, and possibly in the last 2000 years.
It's cherry picking years. It starts with an unusually high spike and uses that as a baseline to compare to subsequent years. By that dishonest trick you can claim there were many periods of 20 or more years where there was no warming, because it took awhile for the gradual rising average to exceed the highest variable spike.Its important to note that graph does show an upward trend.
How accurate their data is however, is another question
The climate is in constant flux , measurable even over a one hundred year period. The statistics have inherent error in them and can be used incorrectly to support many different arguments. Observations such as polar ice caps shrinking do not need statistics to back them up. Ice ages and heat waves come and go on this planet. The effect to which climate change is effected by man will be always debatable but not refutable. Harper like suppression of climate change research is regrettable but understandable from an economic point of view since Alberta oil is a key driver of the Canadian economy. Watch what Trudeau will do if the world price for a barrel of crude goes way up again, probably nothing to hurt the Tar Sands Operation, likely lip service to the environmentalists.Fact: You said that you "needed" a record "year over year" temperature increase in 2015 in order to win the bet: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=5499392#post5499392
Fact: You said that record "year over year" temperature increase that you were talking about was an increase of 0.15ºC over the 2014 anomaly on NASA's graph: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=5445145#post5445145
Fact: You have insisted that the graph we should be using is the one that says the temperature anomaly in 2014 was 0.74ºC: http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
Fact: You keep saying that to win the bet, you needed the temperature anomaly in 2015 on the graph you insist we are using to hit 0.83ºC: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...distribution&p=5516415&viewfull=1#post5516415
Thus, you have repeatedly argued that 0.74ºC + 0.15ºC = 0.83ºC.
That's what happens when you mix and match numbers from different data sets. You create fairy tales that are blatantly wrong.
"Excuses"?Sorry but your excuses are boring. The numbers clearly show warming.
The issue is that it would appear you never completed Grade 3 and it remains unresolved whether you are capable of putting the numbers together correctly.Nowhere in any of the posts you quoted did I ever put those numbers together.
You have failed to state that I ever made that calculation....
Yes, excuses. The data clearly does show a rising temperature. Cherry picking years and mooing is just silly."Excuses"?
You might want to rethink that. I'm seeing in the news that La Nina is on its way. :thumb:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-weather-lanina-braun-idUSKCN0X215F
Indeed. In the 21st century, the Earth's temperature has been stagnant -- confirming that the predictions have been consistently and spectacularly wrong.Temperatures vary significantly each year but the long term trend is well established.
Nope, you are lying again.Whether you're able to do the math or not, the reality is that you have calculated that 0.74 + 0.15 = 0.83.
.
The Fyfe paper where you got that chart says the total opposite of what you claim, as has been pointed out to you over and over again.Indeed. In the 21st century, the Earth's temperature has been stagnant -- confirming that the predictions have been consistently and spectacularly wrong.
http://www.nature.com/news/global-warming-hiatus-debate-flares-up-again-1.19414
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncli...KCaDcruk2QI=&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com
https://www.facebook.com/MichaelMannScientist/posts/1040204106035791Our study does NOT support the notion of a "pause" in global warming, only a *temporary slowdown*, which was due to natural factors, and has now ended.
Our recent work (http://www.nature.com/articles/srep19831), which you fail to cite, indicates that the record warmth we are now experiencing can only be explained by human-caused global warming.
So in order to win the bet, all the temperature has to do is hit 0.83ºC anomaly for the year of 2015, correct?
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.
NASA reported:
- 2015 anomaly: 0.87ºC
I didn't say that calculation came from a direct quote. I said it was your calculation, using your numbers. And I have produced attributions for every one of your numbers.You have failed repeatedly to find any quote where I made such a statement, you have been caught out lying.
Bullshit, this is what you said:I didn't say that calculation came from a direct quote. I said it was your calculation, using your numbers. And I have produced attributions for every one of your numbers.
Nowhere have I made a calculation using those numbers, that is an out and out lie.No, I am stating categorically that your calculation that 0.74 + 0.15 = 0.83 is wrong.
You promised to honour the bet using the 0.83ºC we bet on, and here you are still trying to break your word and claim the bet should be changed.In any event, it's settled. The bet that you and I made on May 10, 2015, stands.