Dr. Roy Spencer's Keynote Speech at #ICCC9

Chuck L:
At July 14, 2014 at 6:23 am you ask me

Richard Courtney, I was not aware that the lag was present in short-term timescales. What are error bars for short-term to longer time scales?

The short-term lag of CO2 changes behind temperature changes is between ~5 and ~9 months depending on latitude. The seminal work of Kuo et al. determined the lag at Mauna Loa to be 150 +/- 6 days.
I don’t know a published error estimate of the typical lag of CO2 behind temperature at longer time scales which is indicated by ice core data. Eyeballing suggests about 800 years +/- ~100 years for the Greenland ice cores.
I hope that helps.
Richard

Thanks Anthony for making this presentation available. Roy Spencer’s succinct summary of the “Global Warming Issue”, is one of the best I have seen for all audiences and I would highly recommended it and its circulation.
Based on the facts: Why aren’t scientists, environmentalists, politicians, the media, and concerned citizens advocating the production of MORE CO2 rather than the insane warmists policies that will not work to produce less or no CO2? The so called skeptics need to thoughtfully change the conversation. Facts and logic matter. The so called skeptics will win every debate if it is fact and logic based.
The real problem is not AGW. The real problem is not CO2 emissions. The real problem is Western countries are wasting trillions of dollars on green scams that do not work (do not significantly reduce CO2 emissions, the conversion of food to biofuel is the worst example that insane policy will lead to starvation and unimaginable loss of habitat if it is not stopped) Nuclear power is the long term answer for most energy requirements unless there is a breakthrough in fundamental physics. The money that is being forced to be spent on green scams, should be spent on education, health care, roads, bridges, high speed internet, nuclear power plant optimized/standardized design, natural gas production, coal plant optimization/standardized design, environmental protection, energy conservation, and so on.
The so called skeptics are saying that warmist’s policy is irrational (there is no AGW/CO2 problem to solve), unsustainable, damaging to the environment, and so on which is quite different to the assertion that we are skeptical about global warming/climate change.

Thank you for the link to this fascinating conference. When first I saw Al Gore’s film, I took notes, and I still have them. My comments refer mainly to the flimsy glossing over of information for propaganda purposes – for example, the CO2 we’re producing ‘thickens the atmosphere’, and I wrote that ‘so far, Gore has given no units for the data shown’. I also read his book. Having a solid scientific education myself, I immediately thought Gore’s book the most blatant and skilfully produced propaganda publication I’d ever seen.
Thankfully, I then came across books by S.Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Ian Plimer, Robert Carter, and Roy W. Spencer, and I would like to take a moment to thank these gentlemen for their work in putting across complex ideas in a way that a non-specialist layman can understand. Their help via the printed word has been invaluable.
I’ve often found myself wondering why I’ve spend so much time reading books and other publications on the alleged man-made global warming, as well as visiting WUWT and Jo Nova’s website.
I’ve contributed letters to newspaper discussions on the subject, and written letters to Members of Parliament (MPs) here in the UK. I’ve also opposed planned wind turbines by writing to local government officials.
The reason for doing all this is almost certainly because this twisting of science is something I feel strongly about. Also, if truth be told, the smug arrogance of the activists, including those with university degrees who should know better, irritates me and there’s nothing better than ‘putting one over’ them in print!
I’ve noticed that whenever real-world data is presented, no figures are ever produced by these people as a riposte. The points made are sidestepped. This has been the case with a Member of the European Parliament I’ve written to, and also my regional Member of the British Parliament.
The Heartlands Conference gives me a warm feeling of hope.

Ulric Lyons says:
July 14, 2014 at 10:29 am
………..
Yes, to a lesser degree, since the spring and autumn are transitions between the winter (negligible correlation) and summer (high correlation).
Instead quoting a lot of numbers I have added info to the LINK .
Sadly, very few people are interested in the CET (including those directly affected by it) and even fewer do have in depth knowledge of its main features.

vukcevic says:
“Yes, to a lesser degree”
Look again, the Spring variation is greater than the Summer.

I agree, it would be great to have the individual presentations in YouTube format so I could link them to my friends, and on Facebook…If I knew how to do it I would tackle the job myself…