Welcome to PatsFans.com

Global Cooling - interesting stat with solid sample size

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by BelichickFan, Aug 13, 2008.

  1. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,624
    Likes Received:
    213
    Ratings:
    +504 / 13 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-tom-skilling-explainer-13aug13,0,918946.story

    "There have been only 162 days 90 degrees or warmer at Midway Airport over the period from 2000 to 2008. That's by far the fewest 90-degree temperatures in the opening nine years of any decade on record here since 1930."

    It's only one city but it's almost a decade of data. I wish it gave the average number of 90 degree days instead of saying "by far the fewest" but the point is interesting.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2008
  2. godef

    godef Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,118
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    "It's only one city" you say. Well, one city won't prove squat. Anyone who understands anything about global climate changes knows that it will never be uniform around the world. It will cause temperatures to go up in one region, and down in another. Whereas Chicago might have a record low number of 90-degree days, there may be another region of the world hit with record high heat waves. The global climate model is simply too complex and has too many variables to simply expect a uniform temperature rise all around.

    The key is the average cumulative global temperature. Is this up or down? I believe this has been well documented to be up. Citing this single instance as apparent evidence that global warming is not occurring is nothing but spin.
  3. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,824
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +225 / 8 / -13


    Over the last 10 years the satillate temp record show the temp cooling globally.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2008
  4. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,624
    Likes Received:
    213
    Ratings:
    +504 / 13 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    At the very least it is interesting given that all the other stuff is largely theory and little substance. One data point over a decade may not prove much but it is not insignificant.

    One thing that is abundantly clear is that no-one understands the global climate much. If we did we could explain ice ages and mini ice ages. We could explain why the rise in temperatures in the past 50 years is about the same as the previous 50 years. We could explain why there were spikes in the 1300s just as significant as there was in the 1900s. People who claim they understand it are wrong - at least this is a legitimate data point with a decent sample size.

    That's already been answered for you.
  5. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,048
    Likes Received:
    185
    Ratings:
    +259 / 10 / -11

  6. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,824
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +225 / 8 / -13


    That data is obsolete, there was a Y2k error your graph appears to be the uncorrected data. BTW the 30's is the warmest decade in the last 100 years. I also specified the satallite data which of course only goes back to the 80's. How bout a graph covering the last 1000 yrs Patters, that would show the midevil warming period being much warmer than current temps.
  7. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27


    Do you ever back up what you say, or just throw shyt against the wall and expect us to believe it.. you know better than this.
  8. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,048
    Likes Received:
    185
    Ratings:
    +259 / 10 / -11

    You know, I've already responded to those things in the past. But, here's a good article from NASA to enlighten you.

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/updates/200708.html

    "Contrary to some statements flying around the internet, there is no effect on the rankings of global temperature. Also our prior analysis had 1934 as the warmest year in the U.S. (see the 2001 paper above), and it continues to be the warmest year, both before and after the correction to post 2000 temperatures. However, as we note in that paper, the 1934 and 1998 temperature are practically the same, the difference being much smaller than the uncertainty."

    [​IMG]

    As far the 1000 year graph, I think I see your problem. You don't understand that the major issue with global warming is the rapid increase in temperature over a relatively short period of time. When temperature changes happen over centuries, plant, animal, and human life automatically deal with it. But, when those changes happen rather quickly (and 130 years is a fairly short time period), then nature and humanity are less able to adapt. I'm surprised you didn't know that basic premise to the issue of mmgw. Perhaps knowing that you'll rethink your positions.
  9. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,824
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +225 / 8 / -13


    Do a search I have posted links onnumerous occasions about this data.
  10. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,824
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +225 / 8 / -13


    So looking at the corrected graph the 1930's was the warmest decade not the last 10 years...
  11. Patsfanin Philly

    Patsfanin Philly Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    6,756
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +68 / 0 / -0

    #95 Jersey

    Last edited: Aug 13, 2008
  12. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,824
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +225 / 8 / -13




    There is no problem there at all. The data is the data. There is no evidence that the rate of change currently observed is abnormal comapred to the historical record.

    What the longer timeframes show is that the current temps are below avg for the latest interglacial period and if you look at a longer timeframe (say 1,000,000 yrs the current interglacial period is cooler than other interglacial. The reason I find this interesting is that there were no disasterous consequences for the enviroment when we have had warmer temps, indeed the climate was quite hospitiable for life.

    The problem for the modelers is that the latest peer reviewed research show that the climate has a low CO2 sensitivity. This data is based on actual measurement rather than just computer models where the sensitivity is assumed by the modeler (which is why the IPCC projections have been changed (down) in each report. A quote from the abstract:



    http://www.weatherquestions.com/Climate-Sensitivity-Holy-Grail.htm
  13. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27


    Because you are too lazy to do it.. back up what you say.
  14. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    Do you think that Spencer is a credible source? He obviously has a bias.. so a lot of what he says has to be taken with a grain of salt.
  15. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,824
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +225 / 8 / -13

    Why is it 'obivious' that Spencer has a bias?

    Spenser has won numerous scientific awards the abstract is from a peer review paper he had publidshed, since the paper is peere reviewed it is either right or wrong.

    You might try reading the overview so you can make up your own mind.
  16. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,075
    Likes Received:
    468
    Ratings:
    +1,026 / 8 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    Global warming is such an inaccurate term .. if there's warming at the poles it really does not matter if there is warming or cooling anywhere else ... if the ice is melting the world as we know it is screwed.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2008
  17. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27


    Duh, he does not believe in global warming.. thus difficult to apply the scientific method if he wants a particular outcome.. you can manipulate the data to meet your needs..

    You do not write a book entitled,
    and then claim to be an objective scientist..
  18. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,824
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +225 / 8 / -13


    So not accepting an unproven computer model makes one biased???? Was Einstein biased because he didn't believe in the ether?


    IF your book presents a legitimate POV why not? The title helps to sell the book. This of course has no bearing on whether the data presented in his peer reviewed paper is accurate or not. Which part of his paper do you disagree with and why?

    Do you have other example of positive feedback systems in anture that are stable over a million years?
  19. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    Do you ever read what you say or just keep going on and on and on and on.. what I contend is that he has a definite bias and wants a definite outcome, so he manipulates the data to meet his needs.. he is not reliable except in the world of Rush..
  20. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,824
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +225 / 8 / -13


    HE looked at the data and reached a different conclusion based on his analysis. his isn't desiring an outcome or having a bias.

    You OTOHnever respond to data you merely attack the motivations of those with views different than yours. You are biased.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>