Friday Funny – how to do climate graphs

Alarmist cherrypicking of dates = good. Genuinely sceptical cherrypicking of dates = bad.
You can establish cooling, warming, or static trends depending on whatever arbitrary dates you cherrypick It is the alarmist believers of the cAGW religion who insist that their own cherry picking is not cherrypicking and that the only accurate and legitimate dates are ones which show warming and any other dates are “cherry picked”.

Video – Funny, Funny, Just so Funny – I laughed till I cried. Yes this was the Friday funny’s at their best.
Regards to Gator.

It’s worse than that. If SkS says we’re in a “pause” of global warming, nobody says a peep. If 16 scientists say there’s a lack of global warming, the cognoscenti erupt. Even if it’s the same period everybody’s talking about.

As my primary school teacher used to say, ‘Two wrong’s don’t make a right!’

I cannot stand that show. It’s not the acting. It’s not even the concept. It’s the absurd stereotyping of smart people that Hollywood gets away with. Apparently to be a genius you are required to be socially inept, at least according to the pretty people of the world. That’s the take-away message from the absurd characters, at least for me.
If I want funny and smart, I’ll re-watch “Real Genius”, tyvm.

The SkS graphic shows that within a period of overall rising trend you can spend almost the entire time claiming a falling trend by referencing short periods.
The IPCC graphic shows that within a period of overall rising trend there are multidecadal periods of increases that are higher than the overall trend.
All “MrSean2k”, Josh and others have done is shown they didn’t understand the point.

Anthony
Here is my contribution, feel free to use it if appropriate

Someone should also point out to the likes of SS the difference between “cherry picking” (does not prove a theory) and a “counterexample” (does disprove a theory).

“Does anybody know why a multidecadal temporal window is “science” in a planet whose existence has lasted 4.5B and counting?”
Approximately 30 years is the period at which short term variability tends to cancel out and reveal the true climate response to external factors. The longer the time period the less chaotic and variable the response is e.g. over 100 years increasing solar activity will lead to higher temperatures regardless of how complex the climate system is or how poorly it is understood.
The shorter the time period the more variability, complexity and chaotic elements have to be understood e.g. why is winter 2011 warmer than 2010, why is winter 2010 colder than 2009. The answer to that relies on a very precise understanding of the very specific phenomenon that drive short term variability. This is not understood which is why even in, say, October, nobody could reliability predict whether winter 2011 would be cold or not.
The age of the Earth is a complete misdirection. It has no bearing whatsoever on how climate behaves nor do factors in play 1.2 billion years have any relevance beyond understanding how the planet worked 1.2 billion years ago.

Sharper00 – you’re mistaken. The 30 years period has been plucked out of…thin air and everybody in the field knows there are climate phenomena at all timescales, from seconds to geological eras. As you won’t believe me, please believe Gavin Schmidt.
As for longer periods showing less of a chaotic behavior I guess ice ages never happened.

“The 30 years period has been plucked out of…thin air and everybody in the field knows there are climate phenomena at all timescales”
Nobody said there were not climate phenomena at all timescales. As above, on longer timescaled short term phenomena tend to cancel out. By their nature long term climate phenomena do not drive short term variability. Your assertion that the 30 year period is simply an assertion without evidence or suppport, I look forward to your body of work showing that can achieve superior analysis and understanding of the Earth’s climate using your method.
“As for longer periods showing less of a chaotic behavior I guess ice ages never happened.”
I don’t think you know what chaotic behaviour is. Chaotic systems exhibit a high degree of variability in their behaviour based on small differences in conditions, for example if you’re trying to predict exactly when a hurricane will form it’s very difficult even small factors can make the difference between nothing happening and a hurricane happening.