Global Cooling trend?

Great link. An editorial blog from investors.com. It does not even show an author. I also don't see a link to the article. I see this as pointless to read.
 
hornpharmd, the study was led by Robert Kaufmann of Boston University. The abstract can be found here. The goal of the study was to reconcile the lack of warming from 1998 to 2008 (which by the way has continued through 2011) with the models and predictions. In other words, once again real world data has failed to confirm models and catastrophic predictions. They feel they have "solved" this dilemma by blaming the Chinese for a greater release of Sulfur Dioxide and by the phase shift from El Nino to La Nina (which doesn't work after 2008 since 2010 was a large El Nino but we still haven't seen warming increase from the 10 year period in question.).



abstract for Boston University study
 
The lack of warming between 1998 and 2008?

Any particular reason 2010 was left out, or why 1998 was the starting point?

Try doing a graph of 1997 to 2010 and tell me if there's a lack of warming.
 
Texoz, it may help inform your line of questioning to realize that these authors are fellow AGW enthusiasts like yourself. these are not skeptics. they were specifically trying to deal with the fact that there wasn't cooling for that decade. Honestly, in spite of 2010, if you add, 2009 and 2011, it doesn't help the case….you just end up with 13 years of no warming. in fact, if you go to wood for trees and put in 1997 to 2011 and use the HadCrut adjusted (just to make the AGW argument for you) you will see that in the past 14 years, according to adjusted data, we have warmed about 0.05 degrees Centigrade. Which is to say, not very much at all. But that's the "adjusted" data. In this case, i can't actually see that using the unadjusted HadCrut data changes that trend however.

Wood for Trees
 
Texoz, if you turn an oven on and set it for 350 degrees and once it reaches 350 you turn it off. it takes a while to cool. for a while you would have the "hottest" temperatures the oven had experienced in the last 20 minutes. we have seen a fairly clear and pronounced plateau for about 10 years (maybe more) and all the while CO2 has been increasing at a higher rate. if you don't see any problem there, that's fine, but some of us are curious as to how this fits the predictions.
 
Question- how much has the Earth warmed since 1950, when the Industrial revolution truly went global? Oh, about .6 degrees Celsius, or just a little over 1 degree fahrenheit.

NASA Chart

So...

What did the first IPCC forecasts from the early 1990s predict for 2010?

What did the revised 2001 forecasts predict?

Any conclusions?
 
Hornpharmd, I have only read "about" the study from commentators here and there around the web. I, like you, didn't want to spend $10. If you don't like what I linked to, then don't read it. That is well within your rights.

It is fairly clear from how much this study is being discussed by both those who are convinced of AGW and those who are skeptics of AGW that the study does indeed show that there was a 10 year period of flat temperatures (actually other studies have shown the same thing and famous climate scientists have confirmed this fact in interviews as you well know). The new "spin" is that sulfates released in China have temporarily kept the earth cool, but dangit, that warming is coming so you better get ready! I am sure that this argument is quite convincing to some, but it is not convincing to me.
 
EarthsSurfaceTemp.png


Stephen Schneider's website links the 2001 IPCC forecast. As you can see, every scenario predicted a higher temperature than we see now.

When a forecasting expert noted in testimony to congress several years ago that the IPCC was using poor forecasting methods, he was pilloried for not being a climate scientist (he ran the forecasting department at Wharton). Now, the IPCC will freely tell you that they aren't forecasting; they're just discussing possible scenarios.

I like to say that AGW is good science, poor forecasting, and wretched policy.
 
I've looked at these charts. So far I've seen that we have global warming during an El Nino and global cooling during a La Nina.

If you look at the chart that shows the top 10 warmest years, you will see that they were all dominated by El Nino.

The years that aren't on this chart are La Nina years.

Different models say different things.

Side notes:

If you look at the SPC's yearly tornado line graph from 2004 to 2008, you notice that each year after 2004, the tornado count sank lower and lower.

How are you people in South Texas liking your La Nina induced super drought?
 
but you are wrong Texoz, the hottest year on record is 1998. 2010 tied it in one of the 4 and possibly even barely (way below the significant digits) passed 1998 in one more, but the "consensus" hottest year on records is still 1998. you might be less tempted to bang your head against walls if you would try to keep up with the actual data instead of sound bytes from those who stand to gain tons from AGW theory.
 
but it is interesting how you conveniently ignored the part about Phil Jones and Robert Kaufmann who actually agree with what I am presenting in this thread about a flatlining of the previous warming trend.

unfortunately, the more we learn about the oceans, we find that the "hidden warmth" isn't there either. in fact, the oceans have been cooling too, which is quite bizarre don't you think? At least it is "bizarre" if you are convinced that CO2 is causing the warming we have seen in the past. If you believe it is largely natural in origin then you might not be surprised at all. This is exactly where I find myself.
 
I don’t pretend to know as much as the folks like mop and others who are truly passionate about this subject, but I would like to offer a possible explanation.

If I recall, the 70s saw the end of a global cooling trend that started earlier (in the 40s I think). It actually got some folks alarmed and worried, but the earth started warming again. I think we all agree the Earth goes through these periods of cooling and warming cycles naturally.

The AGW believer is inclined to see the warming we experienced in the 90s as more excessive than it would have been naturally. They would expect a cooling trend, but perhaps the current cooling trend is very weak. They would tell you the cooling trend is not as pronounced as it should be. I suppose it will take 30 years to see if this cooling trend matches up with that of the 70s.

Regardless, the models and hysteria promoted by the scientific community have done little to service their cause. It’s like that Christian doomsday guy in California. He made Christians look like a joke and only turned people away who may have considered the religion.
 
Gadfly, I think you have given a very good explanation and I mostly agree with you. I would only add however that even looking back at the last 150 years, we have seen warming before CO2 was ever a real factor. The times of cooling have also been there, but not too pronounced. I think CO2 has yet to show its "radical" ability to warm.
 
Texoz, actually, the NOAA said 2010 was tied for the hottest year on record with 2005. NASA no doubt says that 2010 is the hottest year on record. But that leaves the UAH, RSS and HadCru as 3 data sets that you have not touched. furthermore, of those 3, 2 of them are satellite based. Those 2 (RSS and UAH) have 2010 well below 1998 for a distant 2nd, while HadCru has it in 3rd place. Regardless, 1998 is still the benchmark. Why? Because 3 out of 5 of the most respected sources agree and the 2 that don't basically have it in a virtual tie. 1998 is still the standard to beat for global temperature index.

As for the rest of what you say, CO2 is not questioned in terms of being a greenhouse gas. The question is about issues like the sun (both its direct influence on the warming we have seen and the secondary if it indeed does have a role in cloud formation as Svensmark and others have suggested), the clouds, global ocean currents etc respond to the added CO2 we have seen.

For instance, did you know this?

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
McBrett, you sure are selective in what you respond to! What do you think about the global carbon markets these days? Think they are a good investment for us to throw cash into?
wink.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top