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:
Ok, on your terms here is the final word.
Click to expand...


Wrong!

My terms were for you to produce an actual graph that shows the observed data aligning with the predictions.

Your IPCC graph shows that 111 of 114 models got it wrong. The other graphs also show the IPCC got it spectacularly wrong.

Furthermore, every updated graph that I have seen puts the CMIP5 average at about 0.85 degrees C. The 0.68 degrees C temperature (so far) for this El Nino year is nowhere near that, and the NASA and NOAA numbers don't apply because they use an entirely different baseline.

You have failed to produce a graph that shows the IPCC getting it right.
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,261
113
Moviefan-2 said:
Wrong!

My terms were for you to produce an actual graph that shows the observed data aligning with the predictions.
.
Click to expand...
I produced the most recent and most legit chart from the IPCC.
And I gave you the most recent data that showed that the IPCC projections are right on the money.
Deal with it.
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Frankfooter said:
I produced the most recent and most legit chart from the IPCC.
And I gave you the most recent data that showed that the IPCC projections are right on the money.
Deal with it.
Click to expand...
The graph you produced only goes to 2012. I'm not interested in your added analysis.

You were challenged to produce a graph that shows the temperatures aligning with the predictions. You have failed.
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,261
113
Moviefan-2 said:
The graph you produced only goes to 2012. I'm not interested in your added analysis.
Click to expand...
This isn't my analysis, its the most recent data from the sources used in the most recent IPCC chart.
Deal with it.


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
Frankfooter said:
Second, Hadcrut 4's latest readings for 2015 put the global anomaly at 0.809ºC, which makes even your dodgy chart look accurate.
Click to expand...
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...
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...
Frankfooter said:
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
Click to expand...
Check out the string of quotes above. It looks like the self-proclaimed expert on the graphs is a little shaky with the numbers.

You'll notice that after I proved that Groggy's numbers were completely off, he changed his HadCRUT4 number for 2015 from 0.809 degrees C to 0.684 degrees C.

That's an enormous change in an AGW world where every shift of 1/100th of a degree is treated as a major news event. Whatever happened to his claim that I was "lying"? :p
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,261
113
Moviefan-2 said:
Check out the string of quotes above. It looks like the self-proclaimed expert on the graphs is a little shaky with the numbers.

You'll notice that after I proved that Groggy's numbers were completely off, he changed his HadCRUT4 number for 2015 from 0.809 degrees C to 0.684 degrees C.

That's an enormous change in an AGW world where every shift of 1/100th of a degree is treated as a major news event. Whatever happened to his claim that I was "lying"? :p
Click to expand...
Its different versions of HadCRUT.
Version 4.4.0.0 puts 2015 at 0.809ºC
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/...time_series/HadCRUT.4.4.0.0.annual_ns_avg.txt

The second quote we were talking NASA/NOAA numbers.

The third quote was in reply to your claim:
According to you, 2014 was 0.12 degrees C warmer than 2010.
Click to expand...
I challenged you to state where I said that, you failed.

And the fourth quote uses HadCRUT 4 numbers (not the newer, improved numbers).

I accept your point, however, that we should use one set of numbers.
They should be the latest and most up to date, which is HadCRUT 4.4.0.0, unless you can find something newer.

That means the new accepted HadCRUT 4.4.0.0. reading for 2015 is 0.809ºC, which once again puts the IPCC projections right at the top of their projections.
Spectacularly accurate, as you should be want to say.


 
F

FAST

Banned
Mar 12, 2004
10,069
1
0
Frankfooter said:
Old data, as noted above.
Use HadCrut 4.4.0.0.
I know all your claims are based on old data and old posts on dodgy sites, but try to stay with the recent data, models and projections.
Click to expand...
Yep,...THE UNEMPLOYABLES will just keep revising the "data, models & projections " and until they get it "right",...!!!

Called "creative accounting",...nothing new when jobs are at stake.

Keep up with reality,...!!!

FAST
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,261
113
Moviefan-2 said:
Here is the updated HadCRUT4 data from Aug. 27, 2015:

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

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

I'm afraid it doesn't show anything remotely close to 0.8 degrees Celsius in 2015. Nor does it show anything close to the IPCC's predictions.

Oh, well...
Click to expand...
Are you really stupid?
Stay with the picture, use the most recent data from the most recent version of HadCRUT.


Old data, as noted above.
Use HadCrut 4.4.0.0.
I know all your claims are based on old data and old posts on dodgy sites, but try to stay with the recent data, models and projections.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/...time_series/HadCRUT.4.4.0.0.annual_ns_avg.txt

That gives us 0.809ºC for 2015.
Keep up to date.
 
B

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,454
6,703
113
Moviefan-2 said:
Here is the updated HadCRUT4 data from Aug. 27, 2015 (for the benefit of slow learners, I have underlined the date and put it in bold):

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

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

I'm afraid it doesn't show anything remotely close to 0.8 degrees Celsius in 2015. Nor does it show anything close to the IPCC's predictions.

Oh, well...
Click to expand...
Yep, here are the global numbers they give for each month so far.

2015 0.688 0.660 0.681 0.656 0.696 0.728 0.691 avg 0.684

Amazingly those numbers fit pretty well within the projections you keep referring to.




Even more concerning for me are the Northern hemisphere numbers.
2015 0.993 0.958 0.935 0.839 0.903 0.942 0.859 avg 0.918
 
B

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,454
6,703
113
Seriously.

Plot the following data from your source on that same chart and you'll see how 'spectacularly wrong' your claims are.

2013 - 0.499
2014 - 0.567
2015 - 0.684


Seems to me that your no no change claims are pretty wrong. I guess that's what happens when you back the 9%.
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
basketcase said:
Seriously.

Plot the following data from your source on that same chart and you'll see how 'spectacularly wrong' your claims are.

2013 - 0.499
2014 - 0.567
2015 - 0.684


Seems to me that your no no change claims are pretty wrong. I guess that's what happens when you back the 9%.
Click to expand...
Let's put aside the hilarious suggestion that the researchers in 2012 were including the 2015 El Nino in their answers.

Surely, even you (and Frankfooter) can count to five.

The IPCC graph you're using is from 2013 and it used the CMIP3 generation of the models (http://www.ipcc.ch/report/graphics/images/Assessment Reports/AR5 - WG1/Chapter 01/Fig1-04.jpg). It confirmed in 2013 that the IPCC's predictions were spectacularly wrong.

However, the current generation of models is CMIP5, not CMIP3. If you're going to plot current temperatures against the predictions, you have to use the current CMIP5 generation of the models.

For your information, the CMIP5 generation predicted a temperature anomaly of about 0.85 degrees Celsius for this year. Even with El Nino factored in, I'm afraid your current temperature anomaly of 0.684 C is nowhere near 0.85 C.

And the 2014 temperature anomaly of 0.567 degrees C is even further off. In fact, the 2014 anomaly is statistically the same as 2005 (the reported difference is only about 2/100ths of a degree).




http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/

The HadCRUT4 data confirm that temperatures in the 21st century have been stagnant and the predictions were spectacularly wrong -- and that more than 70% of your so-called "experts" gave the wrong answer to the question about the projections.
 
Last edited:
B

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,454
6,703
113
Fact is the HadCRUT4 data you posted shows a clear positive trend, not stagnant like you and a measly 9% of experts believe. Hell, even the graph you just posted shows a clearly positive trend line for this century.


And whatever set of projections you want to go on about, the HadCRUT4 data for the past few years clearly fit withing the projections. Your excuses get weaker and weaker.
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
basketcase said:
Fact is the HadCRUT4 data you posted shows a clear positive trend, not stagnant like you and a measly 9% of experts believe. Hell, even the graph you just posted shows a clearly positive trend line for this century.
Click to expand...
If you think a trend line showing increases of a few 1/100ths of a degree is significant, you're delusional.

The temperatures have been stagnant in the 21st century. The HadCRUT4 data that you cited prove it.

As for the Netherlands survey, 46 per cent of your so-called "experts" said the trend was the same or greater than the preceding decades. Your own data confirm that your "experts" were wrong.

basketcase said:
And whatever set of projections you want to go on about, the HadCRUT4 data for the past few years clearly fit withing the projections.
Click to expand...
Prove it.

Produce a graph that shows how the HadCRUT4 temperature anomalies compare with the average of the CMIP5 models. Let's see how well they compare.
 
M

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
171
63
Stepping back from Basketcase's nutty attempts to defend his "experts," here's the bigger issue:

Let's say we all agree that the Earth's temperature currently appears to be increasing by a few 1/100ths of a degree per decade (for the sake of this discussion, we'll ignore the satellite data and the margin of error for the surface data).

So what? How could anyone possibly be worried about that?

And why would anyone think such minuscule changes are the result of anthropogenic global warming?

In 2001, the IPCC warned the Earth's temperature could increase by as much as 5.8 degrees Celsius from 1990 to 2100. You're sure not going to get anywhere near that number -- or near any number that anyone would care about -- with microscopic increases of a few 1/100ths of a degree.
 
B

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,454
6,703
113
Moviefan-2 said:
If you think a trend line showing increases of a few 1/100ths of a degree is significant, you're delusional.....
Click to expand...
Yep. a trend line showing an increase.

Stepping back from Basketcase's nutty attempts to defend his "experts," here's the bigger issue:
Click to expand...
Now who was it who posted that survey again? Amazing how quickly you can run away from your own posts though it seems to have become a habit of yours.

Fact is only 9% of YOUR experts support your claims.


Let's say we all agree that the Earth's temperature currently appears to be increasing by a few 1/100ths of a degree per decade
Click to expand...
Trend-line I plotted based on that data had 0.011 degrees per year, not per decade. But don't let facts get in the way of your desperate denials.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ashley Madison
Previous Thread Next Thread
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom