Open thread for “One or Two Warm Years is not Global Warming”

A commenter just asked on the original “One or two warm years is not Global Warming” thread if the article is still true five years later.

Certainly the logic of it, that the temperature trend is unequivocally warming and we are not claimig global warming because of a record or two, still holds, but I thought it might be interesting to revisit the specific data points I raised in it and ask if they are still true.

The temperature data points are from the GISS analysis and can be found here (as you see, I have discovered where they hide their data!).

The statements I made are as follows:

every year since 1992 has been warmer than 1992

Still true.

the ten hottest years on record occurred in the last 15

Still true, in fact we can now up that to the ten hottest years have occurred in the last 12.

every year since 1976 has been warmer than 1976

Yes, absolutely.

the 20 hottest years on record occurred in the last 25

1981 and 1983 with anomalies of .26oC have slipped out of that window so we can now only claim 18 of the hottest years in the last 25.

every year since 1964 has been warmer than 1956

I think this was a typo, because then, and now, every year since 1964 has been warmer than 1964!

every year since 1917 has been warmer than 1917

This is a very safe datapoint.

The five year mean global temperature in 1910 was .8oC lower than the five year mean in 2002

The five year mean in 2006 (the last year for which this can be calculated) is .05oC higher than it was in 2002.

I would venture to predict that global average temperatures will not be below 1974 levels for some number of centuries, notwithstanding some catastrophic volcanism or miraculous technological development.

80 thoughts on “Open thread for “One or Two Warm Years is not Global Warming”

  1. Freddy, Wow frames it exactly as I would.

    You wanted a single sentence – tricksie of you, but I went one better… I gave you a single word. And with that word I linked to a wealth of information, for your education and edification and hopefully your eventual understanding.

    If you don’t comprehend why that single word points to a whole field of research, learning and simple, empirical fact that provide all the evidence you’d need, that is your problem and not mine.

    Have you ever considered other mechanisms than primitive evolution speculation as cause of the origin of differing species or is your imagination or knowledge too limited for that?

    Knock yourself out. Amaze me with detail to follow on from your question.

    We’re all ears – and eyes.

    Like

  2. Bernard, always the same with you guys! You consider youself intelligent when you just don’t answer a specific question addressed to you and redirect it to the person who originally raised the question and asking this person, he should anwser it youself. Do you think the readers here are stupid enough not to be able to recognize how primitive your argueing behavior is?

    Again my question to you, Bernard:

    Have you ever considered other mechanisms than primitive evolution speculation as cause of the origin of differing species or is your imagination or knowledge too limited for that?

    What is the problem with you that you object to answer such a simple question? Does the question offend you somehow? If so, why?

    Like

  3. You’re just an idiot, aren’t you, freedy.

    Scared of reality and spiteful of everyone who has a brain that actually works, so go all anti-intellectual and anti-science and run to God who you are told loves you even if you are a nasty piece of shit.

    Like

  4. How does who answered change the fact it’s been answered?

    Does

    E=mc^2

    only become correct if it’s from Albert Einstein himself?

    Like

  5. Is your brain actually allowed out on the street in public, or are you safely locked away in an insane asylum? Because only a seriously damaged and non-functional brain could come up with THAT interpretation.

    Like

  6. Bernard

    you did not elaborate yet on answering my question:

    Have you ever considered other mechanisms than primitive evolution speculation as cause of the origin of differing species or is your imagination or knowledge too limited for that?

    Like

  7. MarcoWowMandasTroll, who has asked you?

    “other mechanisms” is not “such mechanisms”: how illiterate are you really? Your remark is of utter stupidity and ignorance!

    Like

  8. “you did not elaborate yet on answering my question:”

    That’s because you’ve shown that you don’t want an answer to it, fredski.

    Like

  9. Freddykaitroll can’t handle a small challenge, the challenge of proposing such other mechanisms. Freddykaitroll just wants to bother others with demands. I guess that’s one way of freddykaitroll admitting he has no idea and is just huffing and puffing to hide his incompetence.

    Like

  10. Wow, between civilized persons it is normal that the addressee (i.e. Bernard, who in turn has asked me before) politely answers questions posed to him. Your and Marco’s brat-like behavior are not tolerable and you therefore disqualify yourself as poorly educated brats from further discussion.

    PS: Have you learned in the meantime the lesson I have given you on your idiotic views on not-increasing global temperatures? Show me that you can read and learn, before I teach you the next lesson.

    I am in no way used to interactions with such terribly uninformed and misbehaving non-scientists like you, Marco and Mandas.

    Like

  11. freddy can’t handle an answer he demanded.

    he’s scared of answers. They aren’t comforting to him.

    Because he’s a fucking moron.

    Like

  12. @Wow,

    “Because he’s a *** moron.

    Yes, I agree. freddykaitroll is a moron of the worst kind. Nevertheless I would still refrain form using foul language.

    Like

  13. Uh, Jan, two things.

    1) Nobody is fooled by using an asterisk. It still MEANS fucking. Therefore, since the entire point of words are their meaning, it is STILL THE SAME THING.

    2) Who said you had to go swearing?

    Like

  14. Freddykaitroll is doing the tone trolling again…and can’t help insulting us in doing so!

    Hypocritical much, freddykaitroll?

    Like

  15. WowJanMarcoMandasTroll, instead of giving you nasty brats back what you deserve as uneducated misinformed AGW church pupils with a terribly low degree of knowledge, I try to introduce you to facts which you have to learn and accept:

    Please have a look at the cooling trend in Isla De Pascua in the last decades of the 20th century:

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=304854690007&dt=1&ds=14

    The data are from GISS, so you don’t need to be nasty again with me, but just take the lesson for your enlightenment that there was an impressive cooling in Isla De Pascua despite increasing CO2 levels. Conclusion: no correlation between temperature and CO2 in Isla De Pascua. You have to digest this. Please do decently and try to abstain from brat-like behavior again.

    Like

  16. Greenhouse gas theory total wrong?

    It is extemely interesting to take note of the fact that is substantially warmer in areas with much less greenhouse gas concentrations in the air (e.g. in the Sahara), as compared to tropical regions near the equator (e.g. in Africa) with much much more greenhouse gases in the air. The conclusion appears justified that more greenhouse gases in the air lead to lower surface temperatures! This in sharp contast to the beliefs of warming alarmists.

    Like

  17. Freddykaitroll, did you just seriously show you have absolutely no idea about climate science?

    You might want to talk with an actual climate scientist. They can explain to you that it is rather naive to think that there should be a uniform increase in temperature with increasing CO2 amounts (you could have a look at the climate models) and even more naive to state that the Sahara is warmer than the tropical regions near the equator and that this contradicts the influence of greenhouse gases. Small hint: at night the Sahara can show subzero temperatures, something that never ever happens in a tropical rainforrest.

    Tell me, freddykaitroll, why do I understand this rather basic aspect of climate science better than you, who claims to be such an expert? Is it perhaps because your knowledge is just “my ideology says…”?

    Like

  18. Marco, any reaction to Isla De Pascua? I know you don’t like it since the linked GISS chart does not meet your biased ideas about AGW.

    Like

  19. Does fredyykaitoll really expect an answer to his cherry-picking “problem”?

    How does he account for this:

    (With the exception of the El Nino year 1998, the last 15 years were warmer than ANY other year since measurements began)

    and this

    and this:

    http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.png?%3C?php%20echo%20time%28%29%20?

    Artic sea ice extension is already poised for another all-time low and there is no mistaking the development of the sea ice volume, which clearly shows the impact of global warming.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s