Tom Nelson runs a great aggregator blog. he’s got his pulse on climate news all over the globe. He’s also got a keen eye for news detail and offers some interesting insights. I had to chuckle then when he pointed out this hilarious media paradox:
Settled science: Can everyplace really be warming much faster than everyplace else?
[Africa: Allegedly warming faster than the global average]
Prof Gordon Conway, the outgoing chief scientist at the British government’s Department for International Development, and former head of the philanthropic Rockefeller Foundation, said in a scientific paper that the continent is already warming faster than the global average
North Pole Heating Faster than anywhere else
Many scientists seem mystified as to why the North Polar region is warming up several times faster than the rest of the planet.
Australia warming faster than rest of globe, climate report says
Kuwait: Alarm as Gulf waters warm three times faster than average
The seawater temperature in Kuwait Bay has been increasing at three times the global average rate since 1985
Antarctic air is warming faster than rest of world – Times Online
AIR temperatures above the entire frozen continent of Antarctica have risen three times faster than the rest of the world during the past 30 years.
Tibet warming up faster than anywhere in the world | Reuters
(Reuters) – Tibet is warming up faster than anywhere else in the world, Xinhua news agency said on Sunday.
European temperatures rising faster than world average, report says – The New York Times
Sundarbans water warming faster than global average
In the Sundarbans, surface water temperature has been rising at the rate of 0.5 degree Celsius per decade over the past three decades, eight times the rate of global warming, says a new study.
Climate change heating up China faster than rest of the world – report
In a new report, the China Meteorological Administration now says climate change is heating up the People’s Republic faster than the rest of the world
Spain warming faster than rest of northern hemisphere: study
The country has experienced average temperature increases of 0.5 degrees Celsius per decade since 1975, a rate that is “50 percent superior to the average of nations in the northern hemisphere”, the study by the Spanish branch of the Clivar research network found.
U.S. West warming faster than rest of world: study
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – The U.S. West is heating up at nearly twice the rate of the rest of the world and is likely to face more drought conditions in many of its fast-growing cities, an environmental group said on Thursday.
A New Leaderboard at the U.S. Open « Climate Audit
Four of the top 10 are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900.
Global warming is occurring twice as fast in the Arctic as in the rest of the world
Lake Superior is Warming [much stronger than the global average]
The really striking thing here is that the long-term trend in Superior is so much stronger than the global average. Well, we know that the upper midwest is warming more rapidly than the global average, but not this much more rapidly.
Himalayas warming faster than global average
New Delhi, June 4 (IANS) Northwestern Himalayas has become 1.4 degrees Celsius warmer in the last 100 years, a far higher level of warming than the 0.5-1.1 degrees for the rest of the globe, Indian scientists have found.
[Korean Peninsula]: Allegedly warming twice the global average]
According to the Korea Meteorological Administration, the climate has been warming on the Korean Peninsula twice more rapidly than in the rest of the world over the past century.
That’s why there’s snow on the palm trees in Argentina.
/SARC ON
It’s looking very bad and is going to get much warmer this winter.
The lesson is NEVER EVER believe you own lying eyes! Don’t deny it you coolers.
/SARC OFF
Quite a few people MUST be lying. We have called tham brazen liers and have been called nasty “deniers.” Oh the irony!!!
Typo correction:
We have called them….
Oh come on. Isn’t this just a demonstration of a positive feedback cycle that the AGW crowd has been talking about all these years?
PJB: July 25, 2010 at 2:12 am
[Response: Thanks for passing by. In future I will simply assume you are a conduit for untrue statements rather than their originator. And if we are offering advice, might I suggest that you actually engage your critical faculties before demanding that others waste their time rebutting nonsense. I, for one, have much better things to do. – gavin]
I might suggest that a course in Logic for the Incurably Hubristic would be a good use of his time…
[snip – sorry, flamebait that will just waste everybody’s time ~mod]
Scientists are now rewarded with grant money if they find proof of global warming, hence this proliferation of “hot spots” to the point where they compose the majority of every continent on the planet.
The clear solution to global warming: Start giving massive grants to those who find “cold spots.” Within a decade most parts of the globe will be found to be colder than average. Problem solved. (Until they come up with a tax scheme to fight global cooling, that is.)
The Calamitologists are running amuck.
It’s a common fallacy of logic, called “enumeration of favourable circumstances”, aka “reporting the hits and ignoring the misses”.
If baseball worked like climate science, every player would have a 1.000 batting average, all the teams would be government-funded, league standings would be determined by computer projections instead of actual scores, and the world series winner would be picked in a pub in Leeds, by two cricket players and a luge coach.
Settled science: Can everyplace really be warming much faster than everyplace else?
At last, the Mother of all Post Normal Science “tipping points”, automatic infinity – or else maybe we must be in Heaven because we all should have died by now?
As long as there is one place that is below average, then it is certainly possible for all of the other places to be warming above average.
Steven Mosher says:
July 24, 2010 at 11:58 pm
True, but most of the warming should be within 1 std of the trend, right? The articles all point to significantly faster, which would, to me, certainly suggest that it is more than 1 std away from the trend.
Of course we can laugh at their alarmist headlines.
Yet atmospheric circulation -not the out of date tri-cellular model used by some posters here- could very well yield zones where the warming is faster than the calculated, manipulated average of a GISS. It simply can result from renewed advection of warm air as a consequence of… strengthening of polar cold air anticyclonesor MPHs.
I think maybe you meant to say “he’s got his finger on the pulse of climate news”? The way you have it doesn’t make any sense.
You missed other pertinent phrases:
“…faster than the rest of the planet.”
“…three times faster than the rest of the world…”
“…warming up faster than anywhere else in the world…”
“…faster than the rest of the world”
“…nearly twice the rate of the rest of the world”
“…twice more rapidly than in the rest of the world”
It’s called Fiction.
chris Riley says:
July 24, 2010 at 10:30 pm
… What we are seeing here is not bad science it is the opposite of science (whatever that is called).
_________________________________________________________
I think the word you are looking for is propaganda.
Yesterday , on some newscast , I heard someone state that this past decade has been the hottest since ACCURATE thermometers have been in use . Since the temperature records have shown that the thirties were as warm , I assume that said accurate measurements began circa 1980 . Considering that the graphs presented in Bob Tisdale’s earlier post show a temperature rise of about .6 degrees over the last century , is it not possible that the “accurate” thermometers simply got a slightly higher reading from the get go ? I realize that is a rather simple question – it comes from a simple man – but it would explain a lot . I also remember that this has been covered before , but my simple memory needs refreshing . BTW , kudos to Judith Curry , who may be in the warmist’s camp , but has found out what happens when you cross the “team”. Word to the wise , Gav , hell hath no fury ….
Planet Earth is a hollow sphere with the Sun located at its interior center. As Old Sol pulses in geostatial rhythm, TSI illuminates continents and seas plastered on the outer shell like motifs on a decorated Christmas ball. All scintillate as pulses simultaneously impact each area in turn, so that any may in fact warm faster than all others at any given moment.
Since our planet is not flat, the science of a Hollow Earth is settled. Prove us wrong!
Some thoughts on “normal” versus “anomaly”.
What does it mean to be “normal” in a statistical context? Think of the Bell Shaped Curve. That curve can be described with a “mean” (the calculated central average value) and the standard deviation ( a statistical measure of the spread in the data). Once we know the mean and standard deviation, we can compare sub-sets of data against the ‘normal’ distribution, and we know that 99.7% of the data will fall in the range of the mean +/- 3 standard deviations. That is to say, for 1000 values from that population, only 3 would be expected (either high or low) outside that +/- 3 standard deviation range.
There are statistical tests to determine that the ‘shape’ of the curve is the same above and below the mean (is the data normally distributed or skewed high/low). There are also tests to determine whether a comparison population of data are statistically the same or statistically different from that ‘normal’ population.
Then comes our consideration of ‘anomaly’. If a small bit of data is say 4 or 5 standard deviations away from the mean, that is outside the normal distribution and therefore ‘anomalous’. When that data falls that far out of the ‘normal’ distribution, we often look for a ‘special cause’; perhaps an instrument error or a bad data file or some unusual occurrence (e.g. a volcano spews ash or warms up and melts some ice).
The climate folk have taken the word ‘anomaly’ – which should be understood to mean WAY OUTSIDE of Normal (+/- 3 std deviations) – and they are using it to describe tiny, barely measurable, variations from the mean.
The late Dr Deming, world acclaimed for his statistical and quality consultations, warned management that – to make decisions without understanding the statistics was the height of folly, and that over reacting to small perceived changes typically made things worse.
Then recall the post Climategate interview with Dr Phil Jones, when asked about temperature trends for the past several years, he replied that they were ‘not statistically significant’. Hence .. no anomaly.
You see folks, there is no conspiracy. Just one big gigantic coincidence that only makes it seem like a conspiracy. Even big oil supports climate legislation. But most greens are on the low end of the IQ scale, to ever understand what is at stake.
Sad news: Already 400 died in Peru’s extrem winter.
Another case of global warming?
Hey Anthony, ref. your reply to my informative post: “Hey genius, look at the tags; “humor”. Try it sometime before you get so seriously worked up over something funny, you’ll live longer.”
– Thanks for calling me genius, you might even be on to something! Don’t worry, I’m neither worked up or out – just glad to inform about facts that made your “joke” a bit dull. By the way, even some of your followers seemed to be taking your humorous post rather serious, so I am really glad that you enlightened us here …
REPLY: always happy to help – Anthony
Jaypan
In recent posts the AGW party line on animal cold deaths in S America is that they are down to bad husbandry (it couldn’t be the cold since the globe is warming, nowhere faster than S America). So 400 people dying in Peru’s extreme cold must be their own fault, or “poor life choices”. In fact they are “useful idiots” since it means 400 less global warming skeptics.
Have you noticed what charming people career scientists are? (Career scientist means AGW supporting scientist.)