When Saving the Planet, You Have to Streeeetch The Truth

By Steve Goddard

I’m a Real Boy!

The National Wildlife Federation has quite a history of stretching the truth when it comes to “global warming.” But I think they have outdone themselves.

This summer’s stifling, deadly heat along the Eastern Seaboard and Deep South could be a preview of summers to come over the next few decades, according to a report about global warming to be published Wednesday by the National Wildlife Federation and the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America. In fact, according to NWF climate scientist Amanda Staudt, the summer of 2010 might actually be considered mild compared with the typical summers in the future. “We all think this summer is miserable, but it’s nothing compared to what’s in store for us,” she says. … The report, a supplement to a 2009 report on heat waves, notes that more extremely hot summer days are projected for every part of the country by the year 2050: “Summers like the current one, or even worse, will become the norm by 2050 if global warming pollution continues to increase unabated.”

Interesting theory!  Only problem is that summers have been generally getting cooler across those regions for the last 80 years. Below are the NCDC summer (Jun-Aug) trend graphs for all of the states discussed in the article. More than half of those states have seen declining summer temperatures, and the average trend is -0.1°F per century.

	     Temperature    degF / Decade
Louisiana	81.17	        0.01
Mississippi	79.75	       -0.15
Alabama	        78.96	       -0.15
Florida	        80.93	        0.08
Georgia	        78.9	       -0.1
South Carolina	78.55	       -0.03
North Carolina	75.8	       -0.02
Virginia	73.41	       -0.06
Maryland	73.34	        0.09
Delaware	74.15	        0.14
New Jersey	72.23	        0.08
Pennsylvania	68.98	       -0.15
New York	66.83	       -0.08
Connecticut	68.97	        0.12
Rhode Island	68.77	        0.18
Massachusetts	68.15	       -0.02
New Hampshire	65.41	        0.04
Vermont	        65.24	       -0.07
Maine	        63.84	       -0.1

As CO2 has increased from 330 ppm to 393 ppm, summer temperatures have declined.

But it gets worse. Note in the plot below that the states with the highest population density generally also have the highest temperature trends. There is a UHI signal which is corrupting the temperature trend. NCDC is supposed to adjust for UHI, but it is pretty clear that they are not doing a good job. Rhode Island has the second highest population density in the US, and the highest summer temperature trend in the group.

If UHI was properly adjusted for, there would likely be little or no upwards trend in most of the states which currently show one.

Philadelphia finished July with an average temperature of 80F. That is one degree cooler than the years 1793 and 1838, and tied July 1791, 1798, 1822, 1825, 1828, and 1830. July was almost as hot as it was 217 years ago, when CO2 was at 290 ppm.

Apparently NWF believes that three weeks of hot July weather is more significant than a couple of centuries of climate data. Because hot weather is climate – when it is your job to shout fire in a crowded theatre.

Louisiana

Mississippi

Alabama

Georgia

Florida

South Carolina

North Carolina

Virginia

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Pennsylvania

New York

Connecticut

Rhode Island

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

Vermont

Maine

Advertisements

127 thoughts on “When Saving the Planet, You Have to Streeeetch The Truth

  1. Are those graphs of the topographical relief of the east coast, because if they are, they are pretty accurate [Basically FLAT].

    Oh….temperature trends. Wow.

    Once again, in trial, the case gets thrown out.

    Excellent job, Steve.

    Who are the contributors to the NWF? Whoever they are…are wasting their money on a large scale.

    With a scientists like the NWF employs, who needs an idiot?

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  2. One really has to wonder on what they are basing their “predictions”, because it certainly isn’t observations.

  3. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. Stephen Schneider PBUH

    I don’t think they have been very effective either.

  4. We are about to head into a hot spell in NE Oregon if not the rest, I expect the Warmist Trolls to emerge from under the bridge and start screaming…

  5. The link below will take you to a set of graphs for Yakima, WA, USA.
    There is nothing out of the ordinary shown. It all looks so normal that watching corn grow is more exciting. A signal of “global warming pollution” seems not to show itself for this part of the globe. How does “NWF climate scientist Amanda Staudt” explain all the places in the world with a similar non-signal?

    http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/climate/temp_graphs.php?stn=KYKM&submit=Change+Station&wfo=pdt

  6. I asked this question on another thread, and it fell flat. Maybe this thread is more appropriate.

    If you can use meteorology to explain why the temperature outside is X degrees (well, weathermen are punching bags, but generally do a very good job of it) then why do we suddenly need to assume missing components?

    From what I can see, the temperatures don’t become hard to explain until you start the statistical process on them. That, I fear, is when they beg for mercy. So I will trust the weatherman’s 3 day forecast, and no one else. Because at least (s)he can get it right(ish) 99% of the time.

  7. I wonder why such organisations have a corporate policy on AGW? I could be wrong but how are their finances structured and who is pulling the financial strings?
    Over here in little old England land we have groups like the RSPB set up to protect birds yet which has its own AGW corporate policy and receives large amounts of government funding and wind industry funding.
    It seems that money talks in the modern world of wildlife protection, wildlife takes second place to funding stream needs?
    I suppose there are quite a few organisations that were founded by the desire to protect wildlife which have now evolved into corporate money hungry machines and have become so money hungry that the need to increase and protect funding streams overtakes the needs of the wildlife they were set up to protect.
    Over the last decade I believe there has been a concerted effort to subvert and buy off our most valued and trusted national assets, national bodies that mark us out as modern 1st world democracies. These groups have grown in size and wealth and power and influence yet have degenerated into little more than propaganda outlets, a tragedy for us all not least those august bodies who took the bribes in exchange for their independence and effectiveness.
    Corporate funding comes with strings attached, there is always a price to pay when the money men come to town.

  8. I know NWF can help you make your backyard more attractive to local wildlife:
    http://www.nwf.org/gardenforwildlife/certify.cfm?campaignid=WH10ANWF
    but who knows what kind of scientists they hire… lots of low-tier scientists are little better than data crunchers.

    But it’s nice to see WUWT give such respectful prominence to NCDC (National Climatic Data Center of NOAA) graphs. NCDC is an organization that certainly knows global climate:









    I’d like to hear more about the climate scientists employed by the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, if you have that information…

  9. Dave F

    Three day forecasts tend to be very accurate because of very high quality models that have been developed.

    If you talk to the people who make those models, they will tell you that the models break down quickly due to chaos – after three days.

  10. They put a weasel word (could) in the very first sentence. I’m impressed you continued reading it.

    I may have to up the challenge by recognizing weasel phrases going forward. While the weasel words jump off the screen into your face, the weasel phrases require a bit of sleuthing to ferret out (no, I’m not above mangling a metaphor!).

  11. Steven:

    Of course, I am aware of that. What is a little puzzling to me, though, is that there is a portion of the temperature record that is unexplainable to scientists studying climate when this portion of the temperature record is explainable by modern meteorology. Or do meteorological models include CO2 in the model?

    If they don’t, then what happens to the temperature, which has been explained once already by meteorology, that makes it suddenly mysterious to climate scientists, who need to add forcing to explain it?

    In short, is there a way to quantify which portion of the daily temperature is CO2?

  12. Anu says:
    August 12, 2010 at 9:28 pm

    I’d like to hear more about the climate scientists employed by the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, if you have that information…

    —–
    Personally, I’d be interested in what the unemployment rate for climate scientists is lately!

  13. But, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but the MODELS! The MODELS!

    Uh, um, er, uh, and, erm, uuuuh, and you are using UNADJUSTIFIED raw data, you rascal you! Now be a good boy and cover your eyes and I’ll just automagically ADJUSTIFY that baaaaaaad old data into something that mommy and daddy approve of…

  14. I’d put $100 against her theory but by the time 2050 rolls around it will only be like betting 10 cents.

  15. Meanwhile, it’s Fall already in Breckenridge, CO. I’ve already seen leaves turning yellow, mushrooms and fall berries are appearing, and Canada Geese are honking overhead, already on their migration to the South. We had about 10 days of warm, sunny weather this summer, and the rest of the time we had cold, rain, hail and thunderstorms. It’s just weather though.

  16. I lived and worked in Singapore for some years. Hottest most humid place I have experienced. Took about six weeks to get used to it. Life was quite normal. As far as I am aware it is still the same fifty years later.

  17. The “y” axis on your graphs makes it look as though something is happening.

    When the left axis is in tenths of a degree we are talking INSIGNIFICANT!

  18. Goddard,

    Just a couple of unbiased points.

    1. The article reads:

    “A federal report by the U.S. Global Change Research Program in 2009, which much of this report was based on, found that average temperatures in the USA have increased more than 2 degrees Fahrenheit in the past five decades, largely as the result of emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, which are produced by burning fossil fuels.

    But can this summer’s heat be directly attributed to global warming?

    Staudt concedes that it can’t, as does Chris Fenimore, a physical scientist at the National Climatic Data Center, who was not part of the study: “It’s not really possible to pin a single event on climate change.”

    However, Fenimore notes that the frequency at which these extreme weather events are occurring — such as extreme heat or cold — are on the increase.”

    The NWF does’t attribute the weather to AGW.

    2. Why is it that it is that this organization is ridiculed here in Confusionist Village, for predicting higher future temps. when at least they have a record of increasing US temp. to go on. While its an accepted, even central article of faith for confusionists here to predict an imminent Great Cooling based on what, the last centuries global temps.?

  19. For about every year of my life that I remember, my mother has complained that the summers in Kansas just aren’t hot like they used to be. So with this really hot summer hitting us as well, temperatures are reaching historically precedented levels. Oh my!

  20. Cassandra King says:
    August 12, 2010 at 9:26 pm
    I wonder why such organisations have a corporate policy on AGW? I could be wrong but how are their finances structured and who is pulling the financial strings?

    http://tinyurl.com/27l5t4e
    “…the National Wildlife Federation filed 427 lawsuits;…”
    Their money comes from the U.S. tax payer.
    We really need to stop this….NOW!

  21. Village Idiot says:
    August 12, 2010 at 10:22 pm

    GISS has zero credibility. They have been caught too many times fudging data and making it up out of thin air.
    The heat wave in Russia is nothing more than a 1 in a row for the likes of GISS, NOAA and the IPCC.

  22. John Brookes says:
    August 12, 2010 at 9:59 pm

    I suppose it is silly to say that while my weather here is anomalously cool this summer (and No. Calif. in general), it is by coincidence that the GCMs have us repeatedly anomalously high.
    Here’s my proof of it: http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/WeavervilleClimate.htm
    A most cool summer as they go in No. Calif., with meteorologists shaking their heads openly on the nightly news over the strange Sacramento Delta Breeze extended addition, the likes of which have never been seen in modern times.
    What Global Warming? Not at all. Our newspaper reports odd weather in the 19th Century, and talk of our climate changing well over 120 years ago.

  23. If I was to send a CAGW believing friend an example of why I am a skeptic, this article would be one of my examples. It shows simply how data can be twisted to sell alarmism. These alarmists really are like pushers. No wonder they need so much money.

  24. Village Idiot wrote:

    “However, Fenimore notes that the frequency at which these extreme weather events are occurring — such as extreme heat or cold — are on the increase.”

    Is it true that the frequency is really increasing?

    Somewhat agree with you on the Great Cooling point. Pretty hard for me to get concerned about that either.

  25. Steve G “… the [weather] models break down quickly due to chaos – after three days.”

    And they’d break down much more quickly if they weren’t updated with new observational data at least twice a day.

  26. John Brookes says:
    August 12, 2010 at 9:59 pm

    “I suppose it would be silly to point out that the USA in[SIC] not the world?”

    Yes and no.

    No, obviously, it isn’t the world. Yes, it is silly. While temps are unique to location, weather patterns are just that. You can watch them go around the globe. They go in an easterly direction. One can use the patterns to be predictive of the rest of the globe, be it in Russia or the U.S., or Europe. Of course, that wasn’t really the point of the post. If it were, it would have probably included the Southern Hemisphere.

    But, that isn’t the reason your statement is “silly”. The post, referencing the article wasn’t talking about the world. The article itself was referencing the U.S.

    Let’s review, the article from the “National Wildlife Federation”….stated, “This summer’s stifling, deadly heat along the Eastern Seaboard and Deep South could be a preview….”

    Now, it could be the “National” was referencing some other nation. However, I’m hard-pressed to think of any nation the NWF was referencing other than the U.S. Perhaps you have some other insight? When it speaks of the “Eastern Seaboard”, do you believe it is speaking of the eastern coast of Taiwan, or perhaps, Mozambique? When it literates the “Deep South”, are you imagining the Antarctic? Or perhaps Gibraltar? Maybe even South Africa?

    Steven’s response to the article is confined to the U.S. because the article itself was referencing the U.S. It is true that most of us in the U.S. are ego-maniacs, but, if you can’t figure out the context of the article or the response, perhaps the issue isn’t the megalomania we have, but rather the comprehension of the reader, which, in this case would be you.

    Sorry for the curt tone, but I lost at pool tonight and you were there in all of your insinuated accusatory glory.

  27. Dave N says:
    August 12, 2010 at 8:54 pm
    One really has to wonder on what they are basing their “predictions”, because it certainly isn’t observations.

    I suspect that the process is as follows.

    1. Pseudo-scientific belief in Catastrophic Man Made Warming – Check.
    2. Ignorance of the value and purpose of rigourous Empirical Tests – Check.
    3. Belief the Climate Models are able to predict the future (i.e. 90 Yrs) – Check
    4. Ignorance 0f the corruption of the surface temperature record – Check
    5. Belief that warming temperatures will lead to extreme weather events – Check.
    6. Actual recorded observations that CO2 is increasing in the Atmosphere – Check.

    Hence CO2 is increasing – therefore predict Catastrophy.

  28. Cassandra King says:
    August 12, 2010 at 9:26 pm

    CK, the “Bishop Hill” blog has a brief article “Could Greenpeace go bust?
    Greenpeace needs ‘to bring in more than $700,000 a day just to keep the lights on’
    http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/8/10/could-greenpeace-go-bust.html

    Links from the Bishop Hill article ; http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/08/09/greenpeace-needs-to-bring-in-more-than-700000-a-day-just-to-keep-the-lights-on/
    and
    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7222

    Greenpeace which was founded in 1970 or thereabouts is just one of the many so called activist environmental groups.
    The majority of these activist environmental groups are getting close to 40 years old and at that age are probably well into their third generation of administrators.
    My mother had an old german saying, “Clogs to clogs in three generations”.
    I have seen this pattern so often in my 7 decades.

    The founders, the first generation are vigorous and dedicated at building the organisation.
    The second generation are industrious at following the precepts of the founders.
    The third generation are opportunistic and are prepared to sell the organisation’s
    principles for a bowl of gruel and that is where the environmental organisations stand today.
    They are on the downhill run to decay, corruption and eventual irrelevancy and when that stage is reached and it is still a couple of decades off, then they will slowly dissappear from the face of the Earth and future generations will be left to wonder why they ever appeared and what was their relevancy..

  29. Be on the lookout for some “down adjustments” to NH ice as the current trend is unacceptable to the AGW. This seems to happen nearly everytime at this time see previous data adjustments

  30. Re previous for example CT has stopped time lapse video of NH ice at 10/08/2010 me paranoidal. Also all charts stopped 4 days ago LOL

  31. Richard111:
    I can tell you that Singapore is as hot and humid as it was in my childhood in the ’50s when I first lived there. Now I live in Manila, likewise hot and humid, visit Hong Kong, Singapore, Beijing and Tokyo frequently, and all are as hot and humid as they ever were in summer and probably always will be until the next, naturally occurring, ice age. And life still goes on all across Asia.

  32. This is the type of nonsense that drives people mad. THE HANSEN SUMMER PANIC ANNOUNCEMENT. Sheeeesh. When does it end? (I know. About December. When Al Gore times his speeches.)

  33. It has been pointed out loads of times that cold kills far more than heat.

    It should also be pointed out that there is loads of evidence that increases in Asthma and allergies are attributable to a number of features in modern living and any contribution from hot weather is extremely tenuous. Start looking at the ventilation in modern centrally heated and air conditioned rooms. Start looking at air pollution problems. Start looking at changes in diet (especially more and more highly pre-processed food).

    But they waste time and energy milking the poor tired old AGW cow.

    Perhaps they should be described as Shills for BigSnakeOil.

  34. Anu: August 12, 2010 at 9:28 pm
    I know NWF can help you make your backyard more attractive to local wildlife

    Yeah, but you just need a bit of common sense for that — and you don’t have to pony up $20 for a sign telling the birds “Food, water, cover, and concealment here.”

  35. Good work Steve

    Perhaps you might like to investigate the veracity of 2010 temperature figures-the so called ‘warmest year on record’. I picked this up from one of the links.
    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2012609669_climate13.html

    “Worldwide temperature readings, meanwhile, show that this January-June was the hottest first half of a year since record-keeping began in the mid-19th century. Meteorologists say 17 nations have recorded all-time-high temperatures in 2010, more than in any other year.”

    There are 200 nations on Earth of which perhaps 40 have temperature recoreds back to 1850. So if 17 are having their warmest year ‘ever’, the overwhelming majority-183-aren’t and didn’t even have a historic record to compare to anyway .

    Some places are warming, some are static, some are actcally cooling. Urban databases have now become the norm and don’t begin to reflect the UHI effect, let alone station moves or poor siting.

    The warming signal is overwhelming the cooling signal but this doesn’t mean to say there is universal global warming-just hot spots.

    tonyb

  36. This summer’s stifling, deadly heat along the Eastern Seaboard and Deep South could be a preview of summers to come over the next few decades,

    Had they really gone down to the ‘deep south’ they would have come accross Latin America where in July it was reported:

    Cold snap freezes South America – beaches whitened, some areas experience snow for the first time in living memory
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/20/cold-snap-freezes-south-america-beaches-whitened-some-areas-experience-snow-for-the-first-time-in-living-memory/

    And what about the ‘milder’ winters which is a signal of global warming?

    October Through March Was the Snowiest On Record In The Northern Hemisphere
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/13/october-through-march-was-the-snowiest-on-record-in-the-northern-hemisphere/
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/15/the-snow-line-is-moving-south/
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/06/the-frigid-hit-parade-over-1200-new-cold-and-snow-records-set-in-the-last-week-in-the-usa-more-in-progress/

    Also in Mongolia thousands of cattle lay dead due to extreme winter cold, China hit by record snow and the UK hit by the coldest temperatures and snow in 40 years.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_2009%E2%80%932010_in_the_United_Kingdom

    Let’s ignore these inconvenient fact and focus instead on heatwaves. The problem with this is that the global warming sign will show itself in milder winters.

  37. “Note in the plot below that the states with the highest population density generally also have the highest temperature trends.”

    I strongly doubt that result is statistically significant. Perhaps you could use an appropriate test to find this out though.

    “There is a UHI signal which is corrupting the temperature trend.”

    Non sequitur. This is obviously your very firm preconception, but it doesn’t follow from the data. There is also a relation in the US between population density and latitude, which is obviously not causal. Temperature trend, though, is causally linked to latitude. You obviously haven’t considered this at all.

    “If UHI was properly adjusted for, there would likely be little or no upwards trend in most of the states which currently show one.”

    Pure supposition and wishful thinking on your part. It is not impressive to make a claim like this without any attempt at a quantitive analysis.

  38. Amanda Staudt, says “Summers like the current one, or even worse, will become the norm by 2050 if global warming pollution continues to increase unabated.”

    Um, Amanda, summers “like the current one, or even worse” ARE the norm!

    (as the data clearly show)

  39. Part of no trend comes from starting the curves in 1930 as the 30’s were in general warm in the US. Start in 1850 and you would probably have slight uptrends on average.

    But in any case, in no place but the GISS temperature model is the US rapidly heating.

  40. I swear, Holy Hologram and Bill Tuttle should start a Climate Comedy Club. Some of the comments and one-liners really get me going. Thanks!

    Hey, RW,
    Yea, maybe your right with your comment, :”This is obviously your very firm preconception”. Read Anthony’s work on the surface stations, and go back to the archives here for awhile and buck up matey.

    A preconception from Steve based on factual data and observation? I’ll take that any day of the week over the stuff getting shoveled down our throats by the IPCC and MSM. But, maybe you’re not used to that kinda subjective stuff, eh?

    Another great job Steve…Thank You.

  41. RW,

    Nice try at obscuring the obvious.

    Northern states Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Vermont and Maine all have negative slopes, as do southern states Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. There is no link to latitude as you claim.

    The states with the highest trends are the small urban states, Rhode Island, Delaware, Connecticut and Maryland.

    75% of the states with population density over 300 have a positive trend. 80% of the states with a population density less than 300 have a negative trend.

    y = (a*x) + b

    Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
    =======================            ==========================
    
    a               = 2176.73          +/- 585.5        (26.9%)
    b               = 380.166          +/- 59.03        (15.53%)
  42. Steve Goddard

    Are the State graphs just for the month of July or for several summer months combined? Also, what organisation is the source of the data, please? I want to quote your information, but I know the first thing the doubters will ask is “where do those figures come from?” I would like to be ready with the answer, please.

  43. RW

    Do you think that Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, New York and Pennsylvania are in the south? You might raise some Yankee ire with your latitude theory.

    The slope has a 27% error. All lines within the error bars show a positive correlation between density and temperature trend.

    Nice try.

  44. Interesting dicussion about when local weather/climate can be taken as guide to global weather/climate changes. The English are notoriously fixated on this small island’s ever changing weather. I for one patiently await the latest pixel added to HadCet:

    ‘Central England Temperature is representative of a roughly triangular area of the United Kingdom, enclosed by Bristol, Lancashire and London. The monthly series begins in 1659, and is the longest available instrumental record of temperature in the world.’
    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/science/monitoring/hadcet.html

    Which to my untrained eye shows a steeply sustained cooling over middle England at a time when temperatures were, according to our Government, rising inexorably .

  45. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch had an article about the heat on Tuesday, accompanied by a graphic that said the city’s had 2 days of triple-digit weather so far this year while listing 12 years from the last century that had 10 days or more, including 37 days in ’36. Sounds unprecedented to me…

  46. Just looking at the table shows the lack of any trend in this data (with the possible exception of population density as noted by Steve).

    Compare these pairs of neighbouring states:

    Delaware = +0.14
    Pennsylvania + -0.15

    Massachusetts = -0.02
    Rhode Island = +0.18

    Connecticut = +0.12
    New York = -0.08

    With variation like this, we are either talking random or highly localized driving factors, not levels of well-mixed greenhouse gases.

    Enough said?

  47. Some observers are starting to separate the wood from the trees:

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727730.101-frozen-jet-stream-leads-to-flood-fire-and-famine.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news

    From that article:

    “Now he says he has evidence from 350 years of historical records to show that low solar activity is also associated with summer blocking events (Environmental Research Letters, in press). “There’s enough evidence to suspect that the jet stream behaviour is being modulated by the sun,” he says.”

    Well they are getting there slowly. It’s not just 350 years. It’s as far back as we can discern and it’s winter as well as summer. They just need to add the other components that I’ve described elsewhere and then join the dots.

    “Earlier this year astrophysicist Mike Lockwood of the University of Reading, UK, showed that winter blocking events were more likely to happen over Europe when solar activity is low – triggering freezing winters (New Scientist, 17 April, p 6).”

    It’s nice to be vindicated on my general climate overview.

  48. The article quoted by Steve is at USA Today and it has a poll with it. Interesting results:
    Is global warming real?

    Yes, it’s entirely caused by humans – 18%
    Yes, but its due to both human and natural factors – 38%
    Yes, but it’s part of a natural climate cycle – 27%
    I don’t know – 4%
    No, it’s a complete hoax – 14%

    TOTAL VOTES: 21994 (@ ~08:30am EST)

  49. “I suppose it would be silly to point out that the USA in not the world?”

    Well, it was the NWF that was using the Eastern and Southern US heat wave (a regional WEATHER phenomenon) to make an argument FOR global warming, so this article is merely thoroughly debunking that. Did you mean to point that out to us here, or did you mean that we should be pointing that out to the NWF “scientists”?

  50. Village Idiot,

    You are silly to claim “unbiased points” and then throw in a GISS temperature record. All GISS does is add bias to raw data to come up with their figures. You will have to do better than that.

  51. Re: Henry Chance
    “Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. Stephen Schneider PBUH

    I don’t think they have been very effective either.”

    While I do not agree with everything Mr. Schneider says, I believe this quote is taken entirely out of context. In the full and original quote he was actually arguing against the soundbite methdology of typical climate “science”. The misquote that gets the most circulation started with an editorial in the Detroit News where important phrases were selectively removed.

    The full quote from Discover magazine (below) may not endear you to Mr. Schneider, but certainly not as damning as the misquote.

    “On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This “double ethical bind” we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.”

    Notice the final sentence which is often omitted.

  52. How do we know what temperature is ‘normal’ for the earth?

    And to extrapolate, what level of CO2 is ‘normal’?

    Doesn’t anybody think past their noses.

  53. “”75% of the states with population density over 300 have a positive trend. 80% of the states with a population density less than 300 have a negative trend.””

    And if you adjusted all of the temperatures down for UHI (instead of up like they do) you would have no warming at all.

    The states with warming would show none, the states with cooling would show even more cooling.

    Just on these numbers, adding up the raw, shows cooling.

    “poof” there it goes………….

  54. There’s even a video:
    Heat Wave Report-Behind the Scenes of the Satellite Media Tour | Al Gore Videos http://bit.ly/aprFiH

    Neat – Amanda gets to wear the little earpiece and everything!

    Covered by USA Today, Time, CNN Radio, CBS Radio and local television news. Pretty good for a *5-page* “report” that is mostly big pretty pictures http://bit.ly/b8JdFY

    …What grade would it get if it was handed in for an undergraduate course?

  55. How do we know what temperature is ‘normal’ for the earth?

    Careful! NASA chief Michael Griffin said about that same thing… and got eviscerated by the press.

    BTW. I’ve lived here in the San Joaquin Valley of California off and on since 1978 (crap I’m getting old… I blame global warming). This summer is definitely the coolest I can remember. Of course, it’s probably the warmest according to GISS.

  56. stevengoddard

    I would generally agree with your summary of Schneider. I just think if we are going to criticize someone we should atleast put the quotes in the right context, else we slip into cherry picking as we often criticize the MSM for.

  57. Look guys, I seems clear to me and I have plenty of evidence….. Summer for any given area, is hotter than Winter…. I know, I know. It’s a radical hypothesis…. But I’m gonna stick to it.

  58. Steve Goddard,

    re: “Is there some reason why we should care about warming which occurred prior to 1930?”

    Yes you/we should care. The data source you use begins in 1895, a fact which is known to most people who cite the data and use it in analyses. By choosing to start in 1930, you may cause people to suspect your motives.

    And yes, your choice of start data does matter. For example, you cite an Alabama summer temperature trend of -0.15 degF pre decade. Using the entire series from 1895 gives a trend value of -0.09 degF per decade.

    I am assuming you had a reason for starting in 1930 – perhaps you could share it with the readers.

  59. I’ll tell you, if it gets any hotter around here it is going to start to feel like the 1930s….HOBO

  60. stevengoddard says:
    August 12, 2010 at 11:27 pm

    And reports of dew all over the ground in parts of Sacramento yesterday. You wouldn’t know it if you didn’t live here, because those Anomalously GISSed Weather reports fed into the Great Climate Massagers.

  61. “The report, a supplement to a 2009 report on heat waves, notes that more extremely hot summer days are projected for every part of the country by the year 2050: “Summers like the current one, or even worse, will become the norm by 2050 if global warming pollution continues to increase unabated.” ”

    The statement is about heat waves, not average temps in selected states. SG is cherry picking as usual. Even so average summer temps in the lower 48 is going up.

    June-July-August: http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/jjatrend.gif

    Also see January-February-March: http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/jfmtrend.gif

    Everyone knows the world is warming and every indicator is that our GHG are the primary cause. You want to wait until 90% of the phytoplankton is gone before we do something?
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7306/edsumm/e100729-03.html

  62. BillW

    We had an extensive discussion last month where it was decided by our warmist friends that the only sensible way to measure a trend is peak-to-peak.

    That is exactly what I did. Hansen prefers trough to peak – to get maximum BS effect.

  63. I’m with Sonicfrog and Michael Griffin on this – maybe I missed it, but have any of the prognosticants of doom ever come out with a “normal” number for either CO2 or Temperature? Do they have the first frikkin clue?

    Nah. Too busy spooking the herd by zooming in on relatively minor and temporary changes then proclaiming it’s the end of the world.

    And can anyone tell me why a NASA research group that is only very tenuously connected to supporting NASA Ops is located in the middle of Manhattan? Maybe Hansen et al wouldn’t be on about “too many people” if their facility was in the middle of a West Kansas cornfield somewhere, and they didn’t have to commute in NYC traffic.

  64. “Everyone knows the world is warming and every indicator is that our GHG are the primary cause. You want to wait until 90% of the phytoplankton is gone before we do something?”

    want a glass of warm milk?

    Mike, as long as you keep believing all this crap, you’re going to drive yourself crazy.

  65. Gaylon: August 13, 2010 at 4:22 am
    I swear, Holy Hologram and Bill Tuttle should start a Climate Comedy Club.

    Thank you, but it really wouldn’t be fair — RC was doing it first…

  66. To Steve Goddard

    I’d be interested to see a simple scatterplot of every available actual atmospheric temperature measurement vs time with no adjustment, homogenization or etcetera with a simple OLS linear regression from first to last, followed by a series of breakouts of data by parameters which we can reasonably expect would produce predictable absolute cooling such as increasing altitude and latitude, or warming such as local population density, followed by breakouts of parameters which we can reasonably expect would produce increasing variability such as increasing distance from major bodies of water, followed by a an analysis which accounts for the effects of known periodic phenomina such as PDO, AMO, Arctic Oscillation, etc. I am really suspicious of attempts to “homogenize” disparate temperature records and to adjust for extraneous variables by ad-hoc algorithmic estimates, rather than accounting for them by explicit statistical analysis.

  67. Bill W.

    You (perhaps inadvertantly, perhaps purposely) have made a point that MANY of us have made in the past. The choice of starting point is either “where the data set started” which has nothing to do with “climate”, or “arbitrary pick of starting point” which also has nothing to do with climate.

    For example, if you pick 1850 as the start date, we just started coming out of the LIA at that time, so anyone but a fool would certainly fervently hope that we had warmed since then (or it would still be way too cold!). Also, the 1930s (especially the mid-1930s) were pretty darn warm, so showing a cooling trend from the 1930s is pretty easy to do in many locations.

    Starting point determines both the average and the trend, and you can make SIGNIFICANT changes to both the average and the trend just by picking a different starting point.

    So, the question becomes, “How do we determine a VALID starting point to use?”

    The other question becomes, “How much data do we need to REALLY determine true climatic trends?” (I would say at least 1000 years would be nice to have, but that is obviously no where near what is currently available).

    And, finally (for now) how do we determine when a purported “trend” is statistically significant above the noise/error in the data? BOTH sides of the AGW debate are guilty of “uncertainty avoidance” in a BIG way!!! Scientists should always show the uncertainty in their data. If a purported trend is +0.1 F/Decade +/- 0.5 F/Decade, it becomes clear that the trend is probably buried in the noise and is perhaps not a significant trend. On the other hand, if a purported trend is +0.1 F/Decade +/- 0.001 F/Decade, we can see that the trend looks significant.

  68. @ Mike says:You want to wait until 90% of the phytoplankton is gone before we do something?

    If phytoplankton is really disappearing at a rapid rate, why has the entire ocean food chain not collapsed? Use some common sense. This is garbage science.

  69. Mike,

    You really missed my point to Steve. I don’t have a problem with him starting in 1930; I just asked him to explain it – to avoid attacks like the one you make here.

    The two trends you cite from NOAA’s data are not relevant in comparison – they use data from 1941 to 2005, with a trend beginning in 1976. Give me a break!

    Furthermore, I’m not sure whether a single OLS regression covering 80 (or 115) years is really the best way to look at this data. Unfortunately, that’s the way NOAA/NCDC has always done it, so that’s the way it’s done in the climate change community. The OLS fit does produce a single slope estimate, which is useful in making correlations to other natural phenomena (and in spreading fear).

    Perhaps it would be more productive to use statistical process control theory and re-cast the annual data in the form of a control chart. This is widely used in manuacturing when a critical product parameter can be measured (e.g., a dimension, mass, chemical composition), but the underlying process that determines this parameter is too complex to be expressed in a predictive equation.

    Such an effort using the same NCDC time frame of 1895 to the present would yield a warming trend from the beginning of the data set up to about 1946, a strong cooling trend to 1980, and a warming trend from 1980 to a couple of years ago. The weakness here (or perhaps it is a strength) is that SPC methods do not allow you to make predictions long into the future. You can, however, react fairly quickly to changes in trend – like the one resulting from the most recent PDO reversal?

  70. Steven,

    Thanks for the great work – it is further proof of the old saying. “nothing ruins the truth like stretching it.”

    I am in the desert southwest of the US and we have had another mild summer. Where is the heating? CAGW can’t account for it and it’s a travesty that they can’t.

  71. MJB says:
    August 13, 2010 at 5:49 am
    Re: Henry Chance
    “Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. Stephen Schneider PBUH

    MJB says:

    While I do not agree with everything Mr. Schneider says, I believe this quote is taken entirely out of context. In the full and original quote he was actually arguing against the soundbite methdology of typical climate “science”. The misquote that gets the most circulation started with an editorial in the Detroit News where important phrases were selectively removed.
    ——————–

    The most glaring deficiency in Schneider’s statement doesn’t concern his scruples but his mathematical and analytical prowess.
    He speaks of a “double ethical bind” when there is clearly, at most, a single bind, and it is not clear that it’s even an ethical one.
    When one is between a rock and a hard place, one is in a bind, equally perhaps, when between the devil and the deep blue sea. That is to say that two unyielding entities create a single bind. For the formation of a double bind a third unyielding entity would be necessary.
    Schneider cites only two obstacles and, though one of them is clearly in the ethical domain, the other is more, from his own words, of a desire. I take that to be something between a yearning and a whim.
    So, I question whether the dilemma can even be rightly characterized as an ethical bind; it’s akin to being between a rock and a figgy duff.
    The factor-of- two exaggeration is extraordinary, even in the arena of politiclimatology.

  72. Mike,

    In 1995, most of the central US has 30+ days of 90 F temperatures. In 1998, most of the central US again had 30+ days of 90 degree temperatures. In 2010, most of the central US has had 20 days of 90 degree temperatures. Hardly notable as far as “heat waves” are concerned.

    Further,
    “Everyone knows the world is warming and every indicator is that our GHG are the primary cause. You want to wait until 90% of the phytoplankton is gone before we do something?” These 2 sentences are completely unscientific and lack any backing whatsoever. If you want to debate with people here, you might want to try using facts instead of fiction. Debating fiction is a complete waste of time, so 99% of us here will not indulge in that practice.

  73. Yup, that Amanda Staudt is some climate expert:
    http://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/Media-Center/Faces-of-NWF/Amanda-Staudt.aspx

    At least she has a Ph.d in Atmospheric Science, but her publication record is REALLY weak. She’s got some JGR publications on biomass burning that aren’t listed there, like the game changers:
    “Global chemical model analysis of biomass burning and lightning influences over the South Pacific in austral spring ”
    and
    ” Continental sources, transoceanic transport, and interhemispheric exchange of carbon monoxide over the Pacific ”

    Now adays, in the weather IS climate department, she’s into calling everything Global Warming’s “wake-up call” hahaha.

    Man I wish I could write biased non-peer reviewed literature reviews citing irrelevant non-actual climate-related references! What a joke!

    http://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/Media-Center/Faces-of-NWF/~/media/PDFs/Global%20Warming/Reports/NWF_Heatwaves_Optimized.ashx

  74. MJB says:
    August 13, 2010 at 5:49 am

    … which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change…

    Please note the built in bias in the above. He assumes a “risk of potenially disastrous climate change”. So right there he violates the if, ands, buts idea of telling the whole truth. He cannot be doing both as his last sentence indicates because of his bias.

  75. Re the first graph: Population density is the independent variable and should be on the x-axis. Then ,since it can be reasonably assumed that density has negligible random error,a least squares regression analysis of y on x is appropiate to give the trend line and statistical parameters(which will differ from an x on y analysis.) . L00k at the graph sideways to get my point. Otherwise,keep up the good work Steve .

  76. It is sad that I cringe every time someone links a “Nature” article. I think that at one point it used to be a fairly respected “science magazine” although it never rose to the level of “scientific journal”. Now it is simply a propaganda instrument and has little, if any, real scientific value.

  77. NCDC data – fine for proving summer temperatures in Vermont are decreasing since 1930. Authoritative. National Climatic Data Center. Data you can trust.

    What else does NCDC say ?

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=global

    The July worldwide land surface temperature was 1.03°C (1.85°F) above the 20th century average of 14.3°C (57.8°F)—the warmest July on record.

    For the year-to-date, the global combined land and ocean surface temperature of 14.5°C (58.1°F) was the warmest January-July period on record. This value is 0.68°C (1.22°F) above the 20th century average.

    RSS low-troposphere Anomaly: +0.61°C/+1.09°F (warmest year on record)
    Trend: +0.18°C/decade

    Using NCDC data to prove some irrelevant point about summer temperatures in Vermont just sets up skeptics for bigger losses in bigger battles – you’re really going to have to step up your game in the coming decade. The data is going to get worse – concentrate on those attack pieces on Mann, Hansen, Gore, etc.

  78. Mike, I know you dont read much but just think about this. Phytoplankton is estimated to generate 70% of O2. If it had halved over past 100 years dont you think we would have noticed this through a declining O2 level? That the AGW supporters would stress heavily the O2 depletion? Maybe reading some articles here is not such a bad idea after all? Start with the one avaluating your Phytoplankton article.
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/31/walking-the-plank-ton/
    http://www.dailytech.com/Oxygen+Depletion+The+Next+Great+Environmental+Scare/article12691.htm

  79. @Mike Ford: “I’d put $100 against her theory but by the time 2050 rolls around it will only be like betting 10 cents.”

    Put it into an interest earning savings account and by 2050 its value could be substantial. Even Eistein agreed that the most magical math of all was compound interest. Much more rapid growth than CO2 forcing seems to be having on climate, if I’m reading these graphs right.

  80. Yea i was afraid when it got unusually hot this year that theyd use it as proof of global warming. Unfortunately the whims of people probably follow that trend. When it got cold as heck this winter people were always joking about global warming here, now that its 109 people now start believing even though its just a hot summer.

    I went into a supermarket the other day and was curious about the blacktop in the parking lot, and wondered how much an extra effect that all the streets going from grey to black lately will have on local temps. Needless to say though when I got back out, my black leather, black car on blacktop recorded an outside temp of 131. lol.

  81. Surely summer is when its lighter at night – doesnt seem neccessarily warmer here – UK , all yesterday I could see my breath in the air – warming is when you sit nearer the fire !! Please could we have our summer back , we are rapidly running out of time for any warmth .

  82. “… [US] states with the highest population density generally also have the highest temperature trends. There is a UHI signal which is corrupting the temperature trend. NCDC is supposed to adjust for UHI, but it is pretty clear that they are not doing a good job. Rhode Island has the second highest population density in the US, and the highest summer temperature trend in the group.”

    Why is it that many of those with a dedicated environmental agenda feel the need to stretch the true verifiable facts past the breaking point to doomsday scenarios? We don’t put up with people yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire, so why do we put up with people yelling fire on a planet when there is no fire that can be proven with hard evidence? It’s irresponsible of anyone to make exaggerated climate claims especially if they are a professional in that field or if they are an environmental group or politician.

    What do you do with these doomsday climate alarmist extremists?

    “A Maryland man [Nick Nefedro] who refers to himself as a Gypsy is claiming discrimination in the case of a Bethesda, Maryland law that forbids “foretelling the future.”

    It’s illegal in one Maryland county to tell fortunes! Hmmm… what about that guy with the movie?
    http://pathstoknowledge.net/2009/08/28/fortuntellers-soothsayers-doomsayers-climate-forecasters-all-illegal-in-maryland

  83. stevengoddard says:
    August 13, 2010 at 7:20 am

    BillW

    We had an extensive discussion last month where it was decided by our warmist friends that the only sensible way to measure a trend is peak-to-peak.
    ————–

    Steve,

    IIRC, one math wiz showed that when taking a linear trend of a cyclical function you could show any trend you wanted by choosing the start date. He showed for that dataset that he could get a full range of positive and negative trends.

  84. Mike says:
    August 13, 2010 at 9:03 am

    Wow, I am truly amazed at your naivety. The NASA article conveniently forgets to take the records highs back to the 1930s. Want to guess why? The 1930s swamp every decade since. Now, why would they lie to you?

    You’ve already been given the plankton article by Willis. Read it. While you’re at it consider why there aren’t dead and staving fish washing up all over the world. Anyone with a miniscule amount of common sense knows that article is ridiculous.

    Got any other references or are you tired of showing how little critical thinking you apply to articles that support you belief system?

  85. Rob Potter says:
    August 13, 2010 at 5:21 am
    Oops, should be:

    Rob, 2 things.

    1: No oops necessary. I always look at the cap key symbol as most do and figured it out.
    2. Delaware is not next to Pennsylvania! it can’t be! It is next to Virginia! just ask Former Virginia Governor and now DNC head Tim Kaine (aka Ted Matthews).
    ;)

  86. stevengoddard,

    “Is there some reason why we should care about warming which occurred prior to 1930?”

    If there’s no reason to care about warming prior to 1930, why we should care about warming prior to 1931? Or 1932? Or 1940? Or 1950? Is there something magical about an 80 year period other than that it gives you a result you like? If you had demonstrated the temperature record in question had a clear 80 year cycle, your doing trends peak-to-peak explanation might make sense but I don’t think you or anyone has demonstrated that.

  87. Charlie (my dog) and I were talking about all this and Charlie said: “One way to look at it (everything about co2 I mean) is that the up-tick in co2 is caused by the down-tick in fidoplankton. As the fidoplankton gets sicker and sicker the co2 ticks-up-and-up. Based on other things, like the amount of plastic in the gyres, and all the toilet water and bilge water from all the super ships (that includes the Nuc Navy I think) dumped in the ocean over the last century, it’s no wonder at all that the fidoplankton have been decimated. That’s it! The Fidoplankton is dying big time! Co2 is just an indicator, the real problem is supertankers, container ships, and Princess Cruise Lines and the like; it ain’t on land that we got a problem, it’s the ocean’s that’s dying and what’s dying is the fidoplankton.

  88. I asked Mr. Cherry Tamino on what he based his statement “1975 is a good estimate of when the global trend changed to its modern value”. But he does not take inconvenient questions (Ok I had a few more but only questions). Is it not funny that he picked the year the oil quadrupled as the start of modern warming?

  89. From the article: “The East just sweltered through one of its hottest Julys on record, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported Monday. Every state from Maine to Florida endured one its top-10 warmest Julys since records began in 1880. Two states, Delaware and Rhode Island, had their hottest July ever.”

    Did anyone here happen to notice THIS story?

    US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced

    Seems things have been getting a bit “warmish” in Lake Michigan this past July…

  90. Addendum to previous message: NOAA says that one of their satellites has degraded.

    The very BEST thing that can be said about a 604 F temperature in Lake Michigan is that they did not look at their data when it averaged out so “hot”. And that is totally incompetent.

    This isn’t just a computer (satellite) error, it is a failure to follow up, to investigate WHY the temperatures were showing 10-15 F hotter than average.

    Had this been a financial program, financial analysts would be all over it, wondering why they’d had such a profit windfall BEFORE making a public announcement about it.

    But good ol’ NOAA went ahead and announced the hottest summer ever. They haven’t learned anything since the Russian temperature fiasco last October.

  91. I’ve got a news flash for the NWF and AAFA. Heat waves are due to blocking patterns.

    Dr. Landscheidt 20 years ago predicted a Grand Solar Minimum starting in 1990, bottoming out in 2030 and ending in 2070. Today we are right on schedule heading into another Little Ice Age. It is planetary mechanics, mainly Jupiter, with help from Saturn and Uranus, which provides the torque that changes the Sun’s angular momentum, causing very predictable eruptions, which ultimately dictates our climate.

    CO2 is just coming along for the ride and holding on for dear life!

  92. Larry J. Schweiger is president and chief executive officer of the NWF. He also happens to be a board member of the “Alliance for Climate Protection”, with has Al Gore as chairman (need one say more). Basically we are talking about Agenda 21, which is getting more attention these days, and about which plenty of interesting articles have been written. You can even watch “Agenda 21 For Dummies” at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM&feature=player_embedded

  93. Pascvaks: August 13, 2010 at 1:46 pm
    Charlie (my dog) and I were talking about all this and Charlie said: “One way to look at it (everything about co2 I mean) is that the up-tick in co2 is caused by the down-tick in fidoplankton.

    No, no, no! Charlie has it exactly backwards — the CO2 up-ticks are infesting the fidoplankton, which is the reason they’re dying! But, there’s HOPE — I have developed a CO2Up-flea and CO2Up-tick nanocollar which will protect the fidoplankton from the depredations of those voracious pests. Yes, friends, for only $29.95 — less than the cost of only 3,000 tons of carbon offsets! — I will personally affix one of my CO2Up-flea and CO2Up-tick nanocollars *directly* to the Golki structure of a poor, helpless diatom! We can save the world at a mere fraction of the current US national debt!

    Please use small, unmarked bills when ordering your CO2Up-flea and CO2Up-tick nanocollar(s).

    Euros not accepted.

  94. wwf says:
    August 13, 2010 at 4:31 pm
    The peak-to-peak argument is nonsense – there is no evidence or reason for any 80-year cycle and merely provides a means for which Steve Goddard has cherry picked a covenient period to provide these plots. As far as I’m concerned that makes the argument a fabrication.

    [snip]

  95. wwf,

    If you believe that the 1930s did not have a peak and the 1960s did not have a dip, why do you object to my use of 1930 as a starting point?

    If Mann’s hockey stick was correct, I should be able to pick any date in the past one hundred years and see a steep upwards trend to the present.

  96. Exactly who thinks this summer is miserable? Compared to last year when it rained most weekends around the Great Lakes, or the summers when I was a kid that you could guarantee that August would be rainy and cool, I like this summer.

  97. Steven Goddard.

    Impeccable logic-with the hockey stick ANY measurement should-as you say-show a steep linear increase. In addition, surely a trend- as defined by the WMO- is anything more than 30 years, so selecting ANY length of time greater than this-provided it finishes at the present- is surely valid?

    tonyb

  98. Given how the NWF streeeetches the truth about wildlife ‘crises,’ their pronouncements on the climate are completely predictable.

    Sad. Once upon a time I was an ardent supporter of what they did, back when they were a much different organization.

  99. Most of the controversy about warming is caused by people who sit in an airconditioned office, when they go outside they think “Jesus it’s hot! it must be true about global warming”Should try living without airconditioning to expirience REAL weather and seasonal patterns.

  100. Don E says:
    August 13, 2010 at 9:35 am

    Why start at 1930?
    ______________________________
    Djon says:
    August 13, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    stevengoddard,

    “Is there some reason why we should care about warming which occurred prior to 1930?”…..

    Is there something magical about an 80 year period other than that it gives you a result you like?
    ____________________________________________________________
    wwf says:
    August 13, 2010 at 4:31 pm

    The peak-to-peak argument is nonsense – there is no evidence or reason for any 80-year cycle and merely provides a means for which Steve Goddard has cherry picked a covenient period to provide these plots. As far as I’m concerned that makes the argument a fabrication.
    ______________________________________________________
    Looks like you will have to PROVE it is ” the argument a fabrication.” because the cycle is clearly visible in my nearby city, Fayetteville NC Here is the raw 1856 to current Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation Amazing how the temperatures follow the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) as long as the weather station is not sitting at an airport isn’t it? You will notice the cycle is about 70 years or so long.

    In addition to the 70-80 year NAO cycle, there is also a 80 year sunspot cycle, called the Wolf-Gleissberg cycle, therefore Goddard’s choice of 1930 to the present makes a lot of sense since it includes both a full NAO and a full Wolf Cycle without getting into a time period with uncalibrated thermometers and spotty records.

    Journal of Cosmology, 2010, Vol 8, 1983-1999.
    JournalofCosmology.com, June, 2010
    The Forthcoming Grand Minimum of Solar Activity
    S. Duhau, Ph.D.,
    Departamento de Física, Facultad de Ingenieria, Universidad de Buenos Aires, 1428, Bs. As. Argentina.
    and C. de Jager, Ph.D.,
    Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research; P.O. Box 59, 1790 AB Den Burg, The Netherlands.

    Summary and Conclusions

    “The dynamo system evolves over three kind of quasi-harmonic episodes separated by brief chaotic transitions. These episodes are well represented by a superposition of a cycle and two quasi-harmonic modes: the Gleissberg cycle, the semi-secular and its first quasi-harmonic, the bi-decadal oscillations, around the Transition State (Duhau and de Jager, 2008, De Jager and Duhau, 2009) A transition to a Grand (M or H) Episode occurs only when the three modes are passing simultaneously through the zero point. At that moment the tachocline-convective layer motions are going through a north/south symmetry. Evidence of this fact is provided by the observation of Mursula and Zeiger (2001) that the heliospheric magnetic field changed from northward to southward symmetry around 1930, which is at the time of ending of the 1924 transition…..” http://journalofcosmology.com/ClimateChange111.html

    So there is a second reason for using 1930 as the starting point.

    The North Atlantic Oscillation: Past, present, and future

    1. Martin H. Visbeck * , †,
    2. James W. Hurrell ‡,
    3. Lorenzo Polvani §, and
    4. Heidi M. Cullen
    Abstract

    The climate of the Atlantic sector exhibits considerable variability on a wide range of time scales. A substantial portion is associated with the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), a hemispheric meridional oscillation in atmospheric mass with centers of action near Iceland and over the subtropical Atlantic. NAO-related impacts on winter climate extend from Florida to Greenland and from northwestern Africa over Europe far into northern Asia. Over the last 3 decades, the phase of the NAO has been shifting from mostly negative to mostly positive index values. Much remains to be learned about the mechanisms that produce such low frequency changes in the North Atlantic climate, but it seems increasingly likely that human activities are playing a significant role.

    When the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) is in its positive phase, low-pressure anomalies over the Icelandic region and throughout the Arctic combine with high-pressure anomalies across the subtropical Atlantic to produce stronger-than-average westerlies across the midlatitudes. During a positive NAO, conditions are colder and drier than average over the northwestern Atlantic and Mediterranean regions… ” http://www.pnas.org/content/98/23/12876.full

    THE SOLAR WOLF-GLEISSBERG CYCLE AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE EARTH
    Shahinaz M. Yousef
    Astronomy &Meteorology Dept.
    Faculty of Science -Cairo University
    ABSTRACT“The only continuous solar observations that extend over the important climatic time scale of decades to centuries are those of sunspots, yielding a measure of magnetic activity. There are evidences for the modulation of the amplitude of the 11year solar cycle in a period of about 80 years known as Wolf-Gleissberg cycle. The Cycle seems to be fairly clear in the sunspot record and in its proxy measurements by cosmogenic isotopes. The cycle appears to show up in many meteorological parameters, suggesting that there may be an important sun/climate connection over long periods of time(Hoyt and Schatten 1997)…..” http://virtualacademia.com/pdf/cli267_293.pdf

    It would seem Goddard’s choice is backed up with peer reviewed papers.

Comments are closed.