We're in a cooling phase?? Where do people get this?

Question

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

Looks like the temperature is still going up to me.

Or are these deniers basing this assertion by using 1998 as a reference point? lololol. Does any actual scientist make extrapolations in such a way? Or do you only see this on right wing blogs?

Man, these guys are pros at propaganda, eh?

Answer 1

People come up with this stuff because it is the easy way out.  Its much easier to be skeptical of something and write it off than it is to be in support of something and to take action.  People that don't want to believe GW exists are the ones that don't care if the 2 minutes of research they do is obtained through big oil think tanks that have no scientific backing whatsoever.  I have read (not understood everything) the entire IPCC report and i'll tell you it wasnt that easy.  It takes a lot of thought and intelligence to work through what they are saying and to constantly check the sources if they are respectable.  Its much easier to look at the ridiculous things people that are funded by exxon mobile or James Inhofe put out.  

What as a society do we have to do to prove that it is happening as we speak?  Maybe if 1000+ scientists come out with a huge report....o wait the IPCC came out last year.  Well maybe if they get the Nobel Peace Prize or.....o wait they did that too....

It comes down to the fact that as a society we hate change and we hate having to take action.  We have relied on fossil fuels for so long that no one wants to switch off them....and this is the grave we are digging for our children.......

Answer 2

NOAA for one: Just look at the images for 06/07/2007 and 06/09/008, you will see that: One, more of the Arctic Ocean is still frozen this year than the same period last year. Also look at the heat index for the Caribbean - You'll notice it's cooler this year than last year.

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/ss...

The other thing you need to research is the Sun Spot Cycles - We are now entering a low ebb and the less Sun Spots the less heat the Sun gives off.

I'm not talking about charts I'm talking about looking at the indications for what's to be expected for the next 20 years and what you see on actual heat imaging pictures of the earth.

Edit: One more thing all these indicators help predict how cool/cold or warm/hot a given year will be. They are also used to predict hurricane conditions. A cooler Caribbean will mean less hurricanes this hurricane season.

Edit: The pattern for 1998 - 2007 was flat or slightly down. Now 2007 - 2008 shows a steeper down turn.

Edit: THis looks like it takes longer than 11 years to go through a cycle and some Sun Spot cycles are expected to last longer than others did in the past.

http://science.msfc.nasa.gov/newhome/hea...

"On average, this number varies from a minimum through a maximum to the next minimum in about 11 years. Because the solar magnetic fields reverse at the peak of each 11-year cycle, solar activity cycle actually spans a 22-year "Hale cycle." Cycle 23 is the last half of the current Hale cycle (composed of Cycles 22 and 23) that began in 1986."

http://science.msfc.nasa.gov/newhome/hea...

http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/Sunspo...

Edit: You should also pay attention to the fact that 1998 was the peak of Sun Cycle 22 they have also shown that for some reason Sun Cycle 23 is lasting longer than 11 years, since it still hasn't hit the bottom of it's low ebb.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/...

Answer 3

Yup, 'einstein', you are finally right-the temperature is going up, of course i am only referring to the northern hemisphere, and it is of course almost summer, but wow, your powers of observation are semi-amazing, keep up the great work!

Answer 4

Someone used the argument that AG proponents always pick charts that start around 1860.

How about we go back 400,000 years?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...  (Notice, on this graph, present day is on the left.

Or 1000 years?

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:...

Answer 5

The statistics were falsified- there actually is a cooling trend. The propaganda is used on the other side. Again, I commend you on using wikipedia- pure sophistication. In case you weren't aware, some scientists that are not "deniers" recently said that the earth has stopped warming and will resume after a couple of years. I really must ask you to keep your information up to date.

Answer 6

I assume for you,  the graph is just a box with a squiggly line on it.  Your graph clearly shows that temperature has dropped recently for the last 10 years.  If you take an arbitrary date or a cherry picked date to begin the scale at a time to coincide with a time of cooling then you will get a graph showing an increase.   If you look at a much larger scale recent increases fade to the background.  I  would suggest that you research why they started the graph at 1860.

Answer 7

First you notion of sun spots and temperatures is illogical.  There have been many studies that link solar activity to temperatures over the past 1500  years.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/su...

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v43...

As for the cooling phase, it depends on what temperature record you choose to support.  Three of the four major ones say we are in a cooling phase.  Only Jim Hansen with NASA says otherwise, and he has done that by rewriting history.

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PA...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/05/...

Answer 8

The trend is flat or down over the last 10 years and remain so for several more decades.

Actually I TAKE the less than 1/2 degree warming trend over the last 80 years as propaganda.

Edit-- Jim z's point is well taken--- if the GW ers can start at an arbitrary date then why is the last 10 years data not applicable? or at least taken for what it shows --- which is a downward trend.

Answer 9

yes u can edit a graph although it does takes some effort

but yeah definitely not in a cooling phase freakin 80 degrees and 100% humidity where i am so s***w them jackasses idk maybe its the heat gettin to me

Answer 10

Most people base it on the fact that according to most temperature records, we haven't had a year warmer than 1998 - a.k.a. cherrypicking.

Some people base it on an eyeballing of the satellite data, but again they ignore the long-term trend and just look at the data since 1998, and also fail to do any sort of basic statistical analysis (like a best fit line).

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Ima...

Others use the brilliant 'January was cold' argument.  No need to point out what's wrong with that one.

In short, it's based on cherrypicking short-term data and ignoring long-term trends and statistical analyses like these:

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

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/0...

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/0...

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/0...

Answer 11

you oviously didn't look at the 2 links i gave you on your last question

Answer 12

When a person has no numerical analysis experience, they are likely to fall into such errors because they don't understand even the basics of analyzing data.  I simply can't comprehend why someone without any formal numerical analysis and statistics training thinks they can spend a few hours making charts on Excel and suddenly they are experts.

There's a reason why Universities teach advanced courses on numerical analysis and statistics.  And as someone who's taken such courses, they aren't the kind of stuff you simply pick up working as a TV weatherman (as Mr. Anthony Watts has shown) or going through an Excel tutorial.

Edit:

Boatman - Climate scientists do not choose an arbitrary year to start from.  30 years is (and has long been) a standard duration to use for evaluating climate.  So go ahead and choose any 30 (even 15 or 20) year period of time you like and you'll see the same thing: the warming continues.  Anyone who claims otherwise, is simply ignorant of numerical analysis and the statistics of trending data.

Jim Z - you have to be kidding?  Go ahead and start in 1870 if you like, or 1880, 1890, 1900, etc.  No matter when you start (so long as your duration is adequate to filter out annual and decadinal weather noise), there's clearly a warming trend.

Answer 13

"As for sun spots and solar activity: the sun goes through 11 year cycles. Therefore it's not possible to go through a 30 year warming cycle, according to basic logic."

This makes no sense. 1) there are longer cycles than 11 years, and 2) TSI and other solar outputs can still increase overtime outside of the 11 year cycles. If your "logic" is so "basic", try sending it into peer review, preferably the PNAS, and you will get laughed all the way out of the building. Your "basic logic" may be basic, but it is no where near logic.

And good job using a 5 year running mean to conclude that temperatures continue to go up. Sorry buddy, that doesn't work.

You seem to hate "deniers" so badly, but you are just as bad as the worst of them with your pseudo-logic, arrogant attitude, and overall ignorance on the subject.

Answer 14

Dana now concedes that all but one of the agencies that attempts to estimate global mean temperature for the year still rank 1998 as the warmest since measurements began about 110 years ago.....

Will wonders never cease?

Answer 15

Using wikipedia is just fine!  You are OK, unfortunately you are simply suffering from scientific myopia, leftist mental disorders, and are too "intellectually lazy" to understand long term trends.

If you can, try to understand this chart.  Please.  

http://www.socialtext.net/data/workspace...