tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post1888281301671493391..comments2024-03-18T03:27:18.777-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: BlogrollingEliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-13428158730534359252010-02-14T20:41:49.807-05:002010-02-14T20:41:49.807-05:00In case there was any (rational) doubt, here are t...In case there was any (rational) doubt, here are the decadal averages from the GISTEMP global temperature anomaly product:<br />1880s -0.25<br />1890s -0.26<br />1900s -0.27<br />1910s -0.28<br />1920s -0.16<br />1930s -0.03<br />1940s +0.04<br />1950s -0.02<br />1960s -0.01<br />1970s +0.00<br />1980s +0.18<br />1990s +0.32<br />2000s +0.51<br />thanks to BPL. As you can easily see, it is becming rather too warm, too fast for the last 30 years. [Or more, if you prefer to grow a longer fur coat.]David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-71048026568184113692010-02-14T13:00:22.691-05:002010-02-14T13:00:22.691-05:00OK folks, it is not warming, and there is nothing ...OK folks, it is not warming, and there is nothing remarkable about the climate over the last 20 years. And it has warmed and cooled about as it is now for the last 2,000 years. And one of the leading capos of the movement now says as much.<br /><br />So why am I suddenly supposed to be so worried and spend trillions to reverse this non-existent warming and the non-existent catastrophes it is going to cause?<br /><br />Get out of denial, folks. Its over.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-46904062342781864352010-02-14T12:40:19.536-05:002010-02-14T12:40:19.536-05:00cce has got his excellent on-line "book,"...cce has got his excellent on-line "book," The Global Warming Debate, back up, but in a new place: http://laymans-guide.com/.<br /><br />It is the first site I point to, for people who are asking questions scattershot or who have a large range of misconceptions. Definitely at a layman's level, short enough and divided into bite-sized pieces. Nicely narrative rather than pedantic. Both an HTML version you can read, and a narrated slides version you can watch and hear.<br /><br />But almost all the references are live links to more detailed material, including peer-reviewed material.Tom Daytonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-32657352748508249472010-02-14T08:02:40.268-05:002010-02-14T08:02:40.268-05:00You dissing my museum?You dissing my museum?William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-56851067621640276722010-02-13T18:45:27.310-05:002010-02-13T18:45:27.310-05:00Little Mouse is a regular reader of Climate Scienc...Little Mouse is a regular reader of Climate Science Watch.<br /><br />That link rot is a nasty, never ending problem.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-71292291647303622562010-02-13T18:25:46.800-05:002010-02-13T18:25:46.800-05:00Wait a minute, so anonymous is complaining about t...Wait a minute, so anonymous is complaining about there being similar warming rates during 3 periods of warming in the last 150 years or so? The small problem being that the last two lots of warming were mostly down to solar influence, whereas there has been so such influence operating the last 30 years...guthriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17992984293423290387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-26686647163041824692010-02-13T18:25:10.574-05:002010-02-13T18:25:10.574-05:00Anonymous asks:"So you sily people WTF was al...Anonymous asks:"So you sily people WTF was all the fuss about?"<br /><br />Attribution allows us to say why temperature rose in certain time periods, and why it will rise in the future. <br /><br />http://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/<br /><br />See the green line? Up, up and away! See the 1910-1940 - no volcanic activity, compared to previous and subsequent years.<br /><br />WTF is the fuss is that some people can read graphs, the other side is gullible fools who fall for selectively presented "quotations" such as you presented.TheChemistryOfBeerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04228308036995626376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-61139184256984028492010-02-13T13:20:45.922-05:002010-02-13T13:20:45.922-05:00There's nothing new or controversial about Jon...There's nothing new or controversial about Jones statement. All the trumpeting about this statement merely demonstrates ignorance of the climate record and what science says about it.<br /><br />Y'all have a lot of catching up to do.dhogazanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-30142753702889052402010-02-13T11:06:07.177-05:002010-02-13T11:06:07.177-05:00This is what Prof Jones said, and I quote him verb...This is what Prof Jones said, and I quote him verbatim:<br />__________________________<br />Temperature data for the period 1860-1880 are more uncertain, because of sparser coverage, than for later periods in the 20th Century. The 1860-1880 period is also only 21 years in length. As for the two periods 1910-40 and 1975-1998 the warming rates are not statistically significantly different (see numbers below).<br />I have also included the trend over the period 1975 to 2009, which has a very similar trend to the period 1975-1998.<br />So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.<br /><br />__________________________<br /><br />So you sily people WTF was all the fuss about? Nothing to see here, stop having hysterics, move on. This is the capo di tutti capi talking.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-60920746468375823812010-02-13T10:38:53.430-05:002010-02-13T10:38:53.430-05:00When they claim that they are the real experts, th...<i>When they claim that they are the real experts, they are just plain wrong.</i><br /><br />True enough, but unfortunately (if <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/12-1" rel="nofollow">this</a> is any indication) what they are doing is far from a watts of time.<br /><br />Horatio would note that the American public view [scientific] "experts" just like they view magicians. <br /><br />The show is everything.<br /><br />If you can pull a rabbit out of a hat on cue (or stuff a rabett back in -- where he belongs), that's all most people care about.<br /><br />They don't care if there was a trick involved.Horatio Algeranonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12988805467080448954noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-88454473150534439952010-02-13T07:10:03.554-05:002010-02-13T07:10:03.554-05:00"People who are not experts, who are not trai..."People who are not experts, who are not trained and experienced in this field, who do not do research and publish it following standard scientific practice, are not doing science."<br /><br />But... but...<br />Galileo! Einstein! Watts!Truth about sciencenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-56100693098783628082010-02-13T00:21:52.562-05:002010-02-13T00:21:52.562-05:00You've now got Climate Science Watch in the li...You've now got Climate Science Watch in the list twice.CapitalClimatehttp://capitalclimate.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.com