Dr. Ryan Maue posted one of his WeatherBell analysis maps on Twitter today, and the result is no Headline maker, it is simply “normal”.
He writes (image follows):
February 2013 global temperature anomaly compared to 1981-2010 mean: -0.001°C or 1/1000th of a degree below avg.
It will be interesting to see what the other climate data sources show for February.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
With normal global temps in Feb 2013, it’s not looking good for James Powell’s wager that he made against skeptics in November 2009.
“I’ll bet any of them that five years from now our global temperatures will be higher than they’ve been,” he said. “If that’s not true, then there’s something fundamentally wrong with the science and our understanding of it.”
It’s down to 21 months to go and it’s not going his way. See http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/11/climate_skeptics_meet_james_po.html
Bingo!
Has Mosher has revealed the fatal flaw of alarmists? Their central crime against science?
Mosher, “I then explained that if people accept the results of the model, they implicitly accept the physics”
Theo Goodwin pointed out the obvious,
“Models are one thing and well confirmed physical hypotheses are another”.
I’m just a curious layperson, but IMO this seems to be Exhibit A in the case against the alarmist’s most central AGW argument.
Their “purposefully mendacious” [Watts] acceptance of their “models=proof of physics” is the trip wire that blows their case.
Hey Mosher,
Nice try. Your low brow attempt to conscript skeptics into becoming accomplices in your crimes by way of some twisted “implicit acceptance” is a sloppy fail that backfired.
What you have done is provide the rope to hang your invented science..
i just love it when alarmist trolls like “phobos” show up here. they start out strong, disagreeing with everything and very rapidly run out of steam and disappear when they are called out.
Peter Pond says:
February 28, 2013 at 11:02 pm
It seems there may be a serious problem with the Perth weather stations recording devices.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/
February 2013 global surface temperature – at normal
Global surface temperature is right on the long-term mean of the last 132 years as shown:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/mean:732/plot/hadcrut3vgl/compress:12/from:1875/plot/esrl-co2/compress:12/scale:0.003/offset:-1.04/detrend:-0.2/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1974/to:2004/trend/plot/hadcrut3vgl/mean:732/offset:-0.26/plot/hadcrut3vgl/mean:732/offset:0.26/plot/esrl-co2/compress:12/scale:0.003/offset:-1.3/detrend:-0.2/plot/esrl-co2/compress:12/scale:0.003/offset:-0.78/detrend:-0.2/plot/hadcrut3vgl/scale:0.000001/offset:1.5/from:1880
Note also in the above graph that the secular global warming rate is about 0.1 deg C/decade, which is half IPCC’s 0.2 deg C/decade.
Stephen Mosher: I pointed folks to the documentation to the model and the radiative physics core that it used.
I then explained that if people accept the results of the model, they implicitly accept the physics
I am glad that you retried.
Mosher writes: I then explained that if people accept the results of the model, they implicitly accept the physics.
++++
What if nature does not accept the results of the model?