LakeEffectKing Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 1. That is a small area of the Earth. 2. Even so it turns out irrelevant anyways. 3. Why? 4. Because.... 5. The 82N thing and 70S thing only count on RSS, not the raw daily channel 5 ascending and descending passes averages. 6. So that covers nearly the entire Earth except 2-3 degrees around each pole 7. That makes the pole area warmth even more irrelevent 8. Chill Out, I wasn't singling you out, I was asking a general question. I was quite chilled before....and I was just "asking a general question" myself.....and stop bringing irrelevant things into a conversation that I started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 It was bound to happen eventually.....Ch. 5 ended it's downward run.....up .02C.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I was quite chilled before....and I was just "asking a general question" myself.....and stop bringing irrelevant things into a conversation that I started. Ok man. Will get right on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Ok man. Will get right on that. Thanks! It just helps the flow of discussion when people stop counterdicting themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Thanks! It just helps the flow of discussion when people stop counterdicting themselves. wow, look in the mirror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 wow, look in the mirror. Re-read your first response to this recent topic in this thread (most of your post was based on the 82-90N area and how "to ignore this would be to ignore reality")....then I point out how small the area is. You then ask "should we ignore it?". And I interpretated that as a strawman, thus my response to you, and more detail was provided as to how small the area really was. You then admitted/agreed the area is small and irrelevant, but for some reason (defensive??) told me to "Chill out". I'm confused as to your reactions to our discussions....?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Re-read your first response to this recent topic in this thread (most of your post was based on the 82-90N area and how "to ignore this would be to ignore reality")....then I point out how small the area is. You then ask "should we ignore it?". And I interpretated that as a strawman, thus my response to you, and more detail was provided as to how small the area really was. You then admitted/agreed the area is small and irrelevant, but for some reason (defensive??) told me to "Chill out". I'm confused as to your reactions to our discussions....?? I didn't know you thought I was trying to present a strawman arguement. I didnt know the difference between 80-90N was that much from 50-60N. your right those flat maps make.the arctic appear much larger. I just looked at it like the poles could be torching and we should take that into consideration because it's the logical thing to do. If we super impose them of say some of the cold anomalies in Canada it may have an affect. Probably very small affect. Then I said after looking into it those amsu channels cover most of the globe so the cold is legit. I would assume that would show in itself that there was no strawman there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I didn't know you thought I was trying to present a strawman arguement. I didnt know the difference between 80-90N was that much from 50-60N. your right those flat maps make.the arctic appear much larger. I just looked at it like the poles could be torching and we should take that into consideration because it's the logical thing to do. If we super impose them of say some of the cold anomalies in Canada it may have an affect. Probably very small affect. Then I said after looking into it those amsu channels cover most of the globe so the cold is legit. I would assume that would show in itself that there was no strawman there. Great, then we are in agreement.....no chilling needed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Jan UAH now below average: 2012 01 -0.093 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Jan UAH now below average: 2012 01 -0.093 * The 1981-2010 average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Jan '12 GISS....smallest departure from normal in almost 3.5 years: 2008 16 26 65 43 41 34 54 36 53 55 58 49 44 44 27 50 41 55 2008 2009 55 46 48 48 55 61 65 56 65 59 66 60 57 56 50 50 61 63 2009 2010 68 74 85 76 65 55 49 54 53 63 71 43 63 64 67 75 53 62 2010 2011 44 43 57 55 42 49 65 65 49 55 48 45 51 51 43 51 60 51 2011 2012 36 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 ENSO: -1.046 AMO: -0.030 PDO: -1.38 I don't know how long this cool period will last. But it has been a great learning experience for climate science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 ENSO: -1.046 AMO: -0.030 PDO: -1.38 I don't know how long this cool period will last. But it has been a great learning experience for climate science. How about this graph.....I like it better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryM Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 How about this graph.....I like it better What happened to the 0-2000 data? And why 3 different time graphs - it's pretty, but why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 What happened to the 0-2000 data? And why 3 different time graphs - it's pretty, but why? Oh my bad.....I thought I added it here; Raw values are better than observing a trend or an average line. I rather see what occurs this decade into perhaps 2022 before coming to any conclusions. Weather and Climate are very complex in there own nature and we can not argue against one single entity. When it comes to climate we have to examine every single variable were given. Lets see how February stacks up overall globally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryM Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Oh my bad.....I thought I added it here; Raw values are better than observing a trend or an average line. I rather see what occurs this decade into perhaps 2022 before coming to any conclusions. Weather and Climate are very complex in there own nature and we can not argue against one single entity. When it comes to climate we have to examine every single variable were given. Lets see how February stacks up overall globally. Surely the climate observed thus far enables you to reach some conclusions. BTW Did you get some nice snow today - The grass is finally hidden here in Cambridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Surely the climate observed thus far enables you to reach some conclusions. BTW Did you get some nice snow today - The grass is finally hidden here in Cambridge Yeah but it was wet snow. Didnt stick lol. How much did u get? So far man only 51cm, pathetic. Some conclusions yes but there are many variables. I hate those scientists that blame every single climatic event on human emissions or C02. It bothers me alot. There's still alot we have to learn so I'll give it another couple of years. I've also noticed Winters and summers have gotten wetter since the PDO shift. 2008, 2009, 2010 were very wet summers in E. Canada and on a yearly basis every year since 2008 has been wetter than normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeatherRusty Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 ENSO: -1.046 AMO: -0.030 PDO: -1.38 I don't know how long this cool period will last. But it has been a great learning experience for climate science. From that chart we see that as oceans absorb energy (warming), the deeper waters are currently accumulating energy at a greater rate than the near surface. That deep heat is presently unavailable to warm the atmosphere, but it's just a matter of time before it does. This is evidence as to where the TOA energy imbalance (due to an enhancement to the greenhouse effect) is attempting to be restored to equilibrium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Oh my bad.....I thought I added it here; Raw values are better than observing a trend or an average line. I rather see what occurs this decade into perhaps 2022 before coming to any conclusions. Weather and Climate are very complex in there own nature and we can not argue against one single entity. When it comes to climate we have to examine every single variable were given. Lets see how February stacks up overall globally. I agree with you. But the obvious conclusion so far is that even with all of the major cooling players coming together. The warming indices have shown very good correlations to them with the relative slow period in Earths growing energy imbalance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Any update on global temps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Any update on global temps? We're currently colder than any year of the past decade at the 25,000ft level (400mb). At 14,000ft (600mb) we're also starting to drop off once again, with temps about equal to 2011 right now, although we'll likely fall well below that in the coming weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Any update on global temps? GISS: January 2011: +0.44°C January 2012: +0.36°C (coldest monthly anomaly since August 2008: +0.35°C) NCDC: January 2011: +0.3963°C January 2012: +0.3512°C (coldest monthly anomaly since February 2008: +0.3371°C) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 2012 is now the coldest year in the AMSU record at 25,000 and 14,000 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 2012 is now the coldest year in the AMSU record at 25,000 and 14,000 feet. Is this like those political projections on tv when 12% of the precincts are reporting? If you mean on this date, then you might be correct. But I doubt that we can conclude that 2012 is the coldest year on some record with 300+ days to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabize Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 http://www.climatecentral.org/videos/web_features/nasa-finds-2011-ninth-warmest-year-on-record/ Here's one for LEK...... I found it to be one of the most effective summaries of warming since 1881 I'v ever seen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Is this like those political projections on tv when 12% of the precincts are reporting? If you mean on this date, then you might be correct. But I doubt that we can conclude that 2012 is the coldest year on some record with 300+ days to go. Yep, I'm refering to this current day. I think we will come on the colder side overall in the AMSU record. We'll see how far that prediction goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Yep, I'm refering to this current day. I think we will come on the colder side overall in the AMSU record. We'll see how far that prediction goes. it is definitely a good start for not being warmest year on record. Probably not close. But it may end up the largest disparity in UAH/RSS vs NASA/NCDC globally. We are most definitely in a cooler period with so many climate indicies pointing that way. It will be interesting to see the arctic vs the globe this year. And if the cooler global start can help the arctic summer min with a -PDO and -AMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 http://www.climatece...year-on-record/ Here's one for LEK...... I found it to be one of the most effective summaries of warming since 1881 I'v ever seen Yes, and as further historical temperature revisions take place (which I'll predict will continue to cool historical temps) the dramatic visual effect will only become even more hyserically alarming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryM Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 http://www.climatece...year-on-record/ Here's one for LEK...... I found it to be one of the most effective summaries of warming since 1881 I'v ever seen That is amazing!!! All the data is from NASA so it should be well vetted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue sky Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Glopal temp anomalies are plunging once again. http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.