Is there any data showing cooling global temperatures over the past 10 years?

Question

The 'top answerer' in global warming continually makes this claim:

"global temperatures have been declining at a rate of 0.06 degrees a year for the last 10 years."

Hadley directly contradicts this claim:

"A simple mathematical calculation of the temperature change over the latest decade (1998-2007) alone shows a continued warming of 0.1 °C per decade."

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/myths/2.html

Is there any data which supports this, or is it just another to be added to the list of unsubstantiated and false denier claims?

Answer 1

Actually, I don't know how anyone can determine whether or not the Earth is warming.... or cooling.  Until the stations that provide scientists their data are repaired/re-located, we will not have the ability to practice climate science.

Garbage in.............. Garbage out.

Answer 2

Excuse me plzz! But as I was drawned by your debates I will change this kiss for more "researchers":.)

I have a question for you: The "magma" would be changing also over so many years inside. Any relation posible with Earth's orbits?

Good Luck!

It will be posted on br/pt/ and in esp.

Thanks for improving the quality in My Yahoo

At this question....

Danna pergunta pela questão mais comentada relativamente ao aquecimento na Terra. Cita que: as temperaturas do globo terrestre têm declinado em uma margem de 0.06 graus por ano nos últimos 10 anos. Hadley contradiz esta questão com outra cita: Certo cálculo matemático a cerca da mudança da temperatura há mais de uma década (1998-2007) demonstra um contínuo aquecimento de 0.1 graus Celsius.

Answer 3

I will repost my previous answer since this is essentially the same question you recently asked. I wonder why AGW proponents use the last 25 years as any significant data. Why not start the trend analysis around 1000 AD. Oh, that's right. That would not work as it was several degrees warmer then. Again, back to my original post.

You and I both know it all depends on the starting and end point. AGW proponents like to use the 1970's as their starting point, or the late 1870's. Why? Because these were periods where the temp was bottoming out. So any line starting at this point would naturally go up. So why do you cry foul when the AGW skeptics use data to prove their side? Sort of like the Chinese gymnast calling other gymnast cheaters.

The really funny thing is that everyone knows there was a little ice age that ended in the 1860's (all except Micheal "The Scam" Mann). So the question is, coming out of an ice age, how much should we warm? So far about 1 degree. Seems about right to me.

As for NASA data, it is no longer reliable. Hansen has destroyed any credibility that agency had when is comes to AGW. Seriously, why would you need to "Adjust" temps? How about decommisioning those that need "adjustments".

Answer 4

While it is amusing to see who jumps to Jellos defense his comments recently have become more and more silly, take the 0.06 figure I have also seen him use it in several questions and to date it is just a statement he gives no source. If there had been a 0.06 drop per year then it is simple math that the total drop over ten years would be 0.6 which would have us back at the mean 0 temp.

Is there anything to support this "no" this is the official GISS temps

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

Apart from a brief drop in 1999-2000 to ~0.4 above the mean the temp has stated at or above 0.6, there is no drop.

Which side of this is acting like a religion that would be the side that takes things on faith without supporting evidence.

And for good measure this is the same period using Hadley centre data.

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

Yes 2007 was a slightly cooler year, but I find it funny that deniers keeps stating that the 150 year temp record isn't enough (ignoring, as they do, the ice core data) and yet a small temp drop in 2007 is enough to state we are entering a cooling period.

And for those new to this I should point out that Tomcats "icecap" site isn't a real science site it just made to look like one and is on the same level as wattsupwiththat & Newsbusters none of which have any other agenda than disinformation for oil companies.

And anyone who talks of "IPCC articles of faith" and then quotes a political blog as a reference has zero credibility.

Answer 5

Here is 8.5 years of data, which shows roughly -0.15 degree/decade trend.

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/MSUCRUvs...

Edit:

Antarcticle

Oh boy, a real science site, clap... clap....clap. That is some funny stuff, I suppose you would like to provide us with a real science, site. The UAH satellite data is real science boy!

The RSS with a diurnal correction applied VIA a climate model calibrated by the surface record, I guess that's your idea of real science.

Answer 6

i can't answer that.

what i can answer is that over 2000 scientists from many countries and continents all agree that the earth is in a state of warming ( temp. cooling from melting ice flowing into the worlds oceans). hope you get to the bottom of this.

Answer 7

The salient facts are these. First, the accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998. Oddly, this  temperature stasis has occurred despite an increase over the same period of 15 parts per million (or 4 per cent) in atmospheric CO2.

Second, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements, if corrected for non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, show little if any global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 per cent).

Third, there are strong indications from solar studies that Earth's current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroo...

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story...

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/clisc...

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images...

http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/img/pdo_...

http://i29.tinypic.com/302oxli.jpg

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/hadat2...

The anomaly last year was a 0.6 drop . The trend since 2001 is very clear on this NASA graph even though no trend line is present . You asked if there is "any" data and clearly , there is.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

Answer 8

OK --- I will bite --- read this from Australia---

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/sto...

and these charts-- and article

http://hallofrecord.blogspot.com/2007/02...

and even the GW scientists say we are "on hold" ----

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...

Answer 9

You won't find anything published in the scientific literature.  If we are in the very beginning of a cooling trend, it is too early to tell.  Therefore, there is not enough evidence for scientists to make claims (in published literature) that would reverse decades worth of trends, models, and predictions.  If we are in a cooling trend, we will start to see publications coming out after there is substantial evidence for a cooling trend (probably 5-10+ years worth of data).  Science is all about being able to make predictions, and you can't predict anything based on a couple months, or even years, of abnormal cooling trends.

Answer 10

This one is not to bad and has lots of data with it, but I am sorry it has not been adjusted to the IPCC articles of faith.

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/...