| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Steve Thomas
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:47 pm Post subject: Re: Alaska summer Coldest in Decades: gullible Warming to bl |
 |
|
On Jul 30, 2:52 pm, "V for Vendicar"
<Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]"ZB00N" <ZB...@z00z00.com> wrote
What cooling trend is that?
This one.
No seriously. What cooling trend?
Here are the global average temperatures since 1958. "o" = trend line.
Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.
And most recently the rate of increase is about 2>C per century.
View with mono spaced font.
1958 14.08 *******o***************
1959 14.06 ********o************
1960 13.99 *********o******
1961 14.08 **********o************
1962 14.04 ***********o********
1963 14.08 ************o**********
1964 13.79 **===========o
1965 13.89 *********====o
1966 13.97 **************o
1967 14.00 ***************o*
1968 13.96 **************==o
1969 14.08 *****************o*****
1970 14.03 ******************o
1971 13.90 **********=========o
1972 14.00 *****************===o
1973 14.14 ********************o******
1974 13.92 ***********==========o
1975 13.95 *************=========o
1976 13.84 ******=================o
1977 14.13 ************************o*
1978 14.02 ******************=======o
1979 14.09 ***********************===o
1980 14.18 ***************************o**
1981 14.27 ****************************o*******
1982 14.05 ********************========o
1983 14.26 *****************************o*****
1984 14.09 ***********************=======o
1985 14.06 *********************==========o
1986 14.13 **************************======o
1987 14.27 *********************************o**
1988 14.31 **********************************o****
1989 14.19 ******************************=====o
1990 14.38 ************************************o*******
1991 14.35 ************************************o****
1992 14.12 *************************============o
1993 14.14 ****************************===========o
1994 14.24 **********************************=====o
1995 14.38 ****************************************o***
1996 14.30 **************************************===o
1997 14.40 ******************************************o**
1998 14.57 *******************************************o*************
1999 14.33 ****************************************===o
2000 14.33 ****************************************====o
2001 14.48 *********************************************o*****
2002 14.56 **********************************************o*********
2003 14.55 ***********************************************o*******
2004 14.49 ************************************************o**
2005 14.62 *************************************************o**********
2006 14.54 **************************************************o****
2007 14.57 ***************************************************o*****
-------------------------------------------> Temperature
Correlation Coefficient .8529209
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VMu14mBXAs
[/quote]
Are those numbers from the liar at NASA? URAH FUCKIN
MMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:33 pm Post subject: Re: Alaska summer Coldest in Decades: gullible Warming to bl |
|
|
"Steve Thomas" <misledrkstar@aol.com> wrote in message
news:cbf0a8e9-89df-4e5f-9672-fcc94a8110ac@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 30, 2:52 pm, "V for Vendicar"
<Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]"ZB00N" <ZB...@z00z00.com> wrote
What cooling trend is that?
This one.
No seriously. What cooling trend?
Here are the global average temperatures since 1958. "o" = trend line.
Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.
And most recently the rate of increase is about 2>C per century.
View with mono spaced font.
1958 14.08 *******o***************
1959 14.06 ********o************
1960 13.99 *********o******
1961 14.08 **********o************
1962 14.04 ***********o********
1963 14.08 ************o**********
1964 13.79 **===========o
1965 13.89 *********====o
1966 13.97 **************o
1967 14.00 ***************o*
1968 13.96 **************==o
1969 14.08 *****************o*****
1970 14.03 ******************o
1971 13.90 **********=========o
1972 14.00 *****************===o
1973 14.14 ********************o******
1974 13.92 ***********==========o
1975 13.95 *************=========o
1976 13.84 ******=================o
1977 14.13 ************************o*
1978 14.02 ******************=======o
1979 14.09 ***********************===o
1980 14.18 ***************************o**
1981 14.27 ****************************o*******
1982 14.05 ********************========o
1983 14.26 *****************************o*****
1984 14.09 ***********************=======o
1985 14.06 *********************==========o
1986 14.13 **************************======o
1987 14.27 *********************************o**
1988 14.31 **********************************o****
1989 14.19 ******************************=====o
1990 14.38 ************************************o*******
1991 14.35 ************************************o****
1992 14.12 *************************============o
1993 14.14 ****************************===========o
1994 14.24 **********************************=====o
1995 14.38 ****************************************o***
1996 14.30 **************************************===o
1997 14.40 ******************************************o**
1998 14.57 *******************************************o*************
1999 14.33 ****************************************===o
2000 14.33 ****************************************====o
2001 14.48 *********************************************o*****
2002 14.56 **********************************************o*********
2003 14.55 ***********************************************o*******
2004 14.49 ************************************************o**
2005 14.62 *************************************************o**********
2006 14.54 **************************************************o****
2007 14.57 ***************************************************o*****
-------------------------------------------> Temperature
Correlation Coefficient .8529209
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VMu14mBXAs
[/quote]
Are those numbers from the liar at NASA? URAH FUCKIN
MMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oops - one post too late. lol |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:52 pm Post subject: Re: How odd that NO.ZOB missed this one |
|
|
"ZB00N" <ZB00N@z00z00.com> wrote in message
news:48900c32$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
[quote]
"Fran" <Fran.Beta@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f9fd34f2-aca0-438e-87f4-aa19cb90d358@z26g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 30, 10:28 am, "ZB00N" <ZB...@z00z00.com> wrote:
"Fran" <Fran.B...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5966470e-909f-4cda-aafc-2d58e7960a4f@j7g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 29, 5:21 pm, "ZB00N" <ZB...@z00z00.com> wrote:
"Fran" <Fran.B...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:98ed74a3-0697-48c8-84c1-0666af92f3db@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 29, 4:09 pm, "ZB00N" <ZB...@z00z00.com> wrote:
"Fran" <Fran.B...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b36a6440-2448-48c9-a613-7f692f6ef84e@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 29, 5:32 am, "John M." <john_howard_mor...@hotmail.co.uk
wrote:
On Jul 28, 7:11 pm, Rich <some...@someplace.not> wrote:
John M. wrote:
On Jul 28, 2:12 pm, Poetic Justice
@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote:
[...]
I do chastise people for accepting revealed religion without
one
shred
of evidence for its possible truth.
But you support people who accept AGW without one shred of
evidence.
I don>t know of any such person. If I did I would supply them
with
the
references they need to locate the abundant evidence out there.
Perhaps you>re proposing here that evidence is only evidence if
there
is absolutely no possibility of counter propositions to its
content?
Funny how that works.
Or numbers like 50,000 species extinctions each and every year
for
which
there is not one shred of evidence, but should be.
Only because you have failed to understand the basis for such a
statement. Or you have understood, but cannot accept this way of
dealing with prediction.
Well...laugh at them is more in my
line. And I feel sorry for the generations of children who
are
then
abused by these same dupes, forced to accept the same idiotic
gobshite, growing up unable to see and reason for themselves,
believing the nonsense that has been stuffed into their heads
is
reality.
The victims of the church are abused, and as terrible as that
is,
the victims of AGW are starving. We (are told to believe) we
need
biofuels, they seem to think they need food. Which do you think
best John?
Food, of course. Even if most of it goes down the throats of
child
abusers aka. proselytising parents. Biofuels from cropland is
ridiculous.
Not only ridiculous, but constructively, a furphy, because in the
only
case where this applies (corn to ethanol), the connection between
this
and the price or availability of any food stuff is at best tenuous.
Much of the corn raised in the US is used for convenience foods
rather
than food per se, so its contribution to nutrition is zero. A
substantial portion of corn ethanol comes from non-edible portions
of
the corn.
Moreover, corn is used because sugar is protected. Were sugar not
protected, it would be used. Sugar is not a staple food and
contributes nothing to nutrition -- indeed, it subtracts from it.
Rich does like dredging out this old canard though ... He>d be
better
off eating it ;-)
**********************
ROTFLMAO
If others are to believe you, you do a lot of rolling on the floor
and
losing your arse. Little wonder that you so regularly fix it back
onto
the wrong end.
NOT A CANARD FRAN BABY!!
As if you>d know one from a goose ...
You conveniently left out the use of scarce, available agricultural
land
for the growing of these insidious crops!!!
Which insidious crops?
Sugar? Tea? Coffee? Cocaine? Tobacco?
**************
Any of the above, if used for biofuels whilst food prices soar and
humans go hungry.
So you>re for stopping these crops from being planted "whilst food
prices soar and
humans go hungry"?
Yes or no?
Fran
Yes and no!
If grown for biofuels YES, if grown for food NO!
Ok ... so let me get this quite clear.
So long as "prices soar" and "humans go hungry" you>re for the
regulation of agricultural land by the state so as to exclude biofuels
but to permit all other usages?
Fran
*****************
OK, I>ll simplify ...
It is immoral to set aside good agricultural land for biofuels,
especially when this is done in the name of an unproven "climate crisis",
when the direct consequences are food shortages and soaring food prices,
as we have now!!!!
Methinks this situation is part of the AGW socialist agenda to severely
reduce the world>s population!
[/quote]
Post another 50 andrew bolt droolings, it makes more sense than you do.
lol |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:53 pm Post subject: Re: Yes, the World is NOT Warming. |
|
|
"ZB00N" <ZB00N@z00z00.com> wrote in message
news:488ffe3d$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
[quote]
"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:1a4436ca-7ac1-4f89-aed5-f6bf6309d0e1@z26g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 29, 2:11 pm, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://www.climatechangefraud.com/images/stories/graphs.jpg
Despite Dunderbar>s lies, the global mean surface temperatures
continue to rise.
That the surface of the Earth has warmed over the last several
decades is a fact supported by many independent sources . . .
*******************
Methinks
[/quote]
Nope. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:07 pm Post subject: Re: Quote of the Week |
|
|
"ZB00N" <ZB00N@z00z00.com> wrote in message
news:488fbe71$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
[quote]
"James" <kingkongg@iglou.com> wrote in message
news:488f4973$0$19682$d94e5ade@news.iglou.com...
"As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice
caps in the Arctic, shrinking the coastlines in the Atlantic, and
bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya." Barack Obama from his
Berlin speech, July 24, 2008.
ROTFLMAO
No proof.
No evidence.
IOW total and utter misinformed hysteria!
And this idiot wants to be president?????
Oh my gawd.
[/quote]
Made-up crap. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: Re: Global Warming Blog 2008 post #152 - What Congress Can D |
|
|
"ZB00N" <ZB00N@z00z00.com> wrote in message
news:489015d0$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
[quote]
"arclein" <arclein@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:650d1e00-7ac5-4596-9305-2a1e59ccd8f0@v8g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
I maintain a blog on global warming, application to agriculture, and
related environmental subjects since mid 2007 and post daily Monday
to Friday.
I welcome new thoughts on the various topics introduced and look
forward to the championing of new topics.
So what are your thoughts on the current global cooling trend?
[/quote]
La Nina. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:50 am Post subject: Re: Is There Global Warming? |
|
|
"ZNB00" <ZNB00@doodooo.com.au> wrote in message
news:47cce3af$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
[quote]
27 Feb 2007
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2007/02/global-warming-truth-or-dare.html
Before 'climate chaos' became cliché, many scientists advanced evidence
for detected amounts of global average Earth surface temperature increases
occurring in the post-industrial age. These reports, taken as a whole,
were the main original catalysts towards constructing the global warming
myth, so it is useful to critically examine their validity.
It was no easy task to arrive at the most cited original estimated rate of
increase of the mean global surface temperature of 0.5 C in 100 years. As
with any evaluation of a global spatio-temporal average, it involved
elaborate and unreliable grid size dependent averages. In addition, it
involved removal of outlying data, complex corrections for historical
differences in measurement methods, measurement distributions, and
measurement frequencies, and complex normalisations of different data
sets - for example, land based and sea based measurements and the use of
different temperature proxies that are in turn dependent on approximate
calibration models. Even for modern thermometer readings in a given year,
the very real problem of defining a robust and useful global
spatio-temporal average Earth-surface temperature is not solved, and is
itself an active area of research.
[/quote]
ROFLMAO Attempts to pretend the first methods are the only methods. See:
satellite, n.
How come reichwhingers think we>re as illiterate as they are? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:56 am Post subject: Re: Is There Global Warming? |
|
|
"polar bear" <polar.bear.555@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b412e858-ebe9-4eb9-9d84-967927b81321@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 4, 11:02 pm, Roger Coppock <rcopp...@adnc.com> wrote:
[quote]Today>s barely detectable effect is tomorrow>s major phenomena.
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Slope1952-2007.jpg
On Mar 3, 9:53 pm, "ZNB00" <ZN...@doodooo.com.au> wrote:
[ . . . ]> As a general rule in science, if an effect is barely
detectable,
[ . . . ]
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
"CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet>s climate on
long, medium and even short time scales." R. Timothy Patterson,
Professor Of Geology, Director Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center,
Carleton University, Canada
Sorry, Dr. Patterson, but
R^2=0.78, p-value < 2.220e-16 is a major correlation.
CO2 or Sunspots: Statistical Correlation Chooses
Statistical correlation is a powerful technique with
very many uses. It produces "R squared" a measure of
whether two series of measures trend together.
(Those who are new to statistical correlation and
"R squared" will find a tutorial on the subject here:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correlation.html
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CorrelationCoefficient.html
Item 20 in the above shows R squared for several graphed
relationships.)
When applied to a time series of global mean surface
temperatures and data from prospective global warming
causes covering the same time period, correlation can
help locate the cause of the observed global warming.
Low "R squared" values, those near zero, can, by
themselves, totally rule out a prospective cause.
High "R squared" values indicate that a prospective
cause is very likely, but do not, by themselves,
'prove' something caused the warming. (Experimental
science rarely 'proves' something like a mathematical
proof does.)
Below are directly observed data for global mean surface
temperature, CO2 concentration, and sunspots for the last
50 years. This is as long as the longest directly
observed record of atmospheric CO2 concentration.
The R^2 value for the correlation of CO2 and planetary
surface temperature is 0.78. The simple rising
line showing heating for increasing CO2 explains a
lot of the variance in the global mean temperature.
The relationship between CO2 and global temperature
is very strong and the anthropogenic greenhouse gas
radiative forcing theory is well supported by these
data.
The R^2 value for sunspots and and planetary
surface temperature is very near zero. These data
clearly do not support any relationship between
sunspot numbers and global mean surface temperature
over the last 50 years. It is very unlikely that
sunspots have anything to do with the current
global warming.
This test applies very easily to all other claims for
global warming causes. It will quickly separate the
wheat from the chaff.
-.-. --.- Roger Coppock
=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Data =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The global mean surface "Temp"erature data are the GISS
adjusted J-D yearly land and sea average, available from
NASA at:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
The "CO2" data are the yearly averages of the monthly data
from the Keeling curve measured at Mauna Loa, available at:
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
"Sunspots" are the yearly averages of the monthly means
in the NOAA NGDC "MONTHLY" file. They are available at
the FTP site accessed through this web page:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/SSN/ssn.html
Year Temp CO2 Sunspots
1958 14.08 315.33 184.5917
1959 14.06 315.98 158.75
1960 13.99 316.91 112.275
1961 14.08 317.65 53.8833
1962 14.04 318.46 37.6
1963 14.08 318.99 27.8917
1964 13.79 319.20 10.2
1965 13.89 320.03 15.0583
1966 13.97 321.37 46.875
1967 14.00 322.18 93.6667
1968 13.96 323.05 105.8917
1969 14.08 324.62 105.5583
1970 14.03 325.68 104.6917
1971 13.90 326.32 66.65
1972 14.00 327.46 68.9333
1973 14.14 329.68 38.15
1974 13.92 330.17 34.4083
1975 13.95 331.14 15.4583
1976 13.84 332.06 12.55
1977 14.13 333.78 27.4833
1978 14.02 335.40 92.6583
1979 14.09 336.78 155.275
1980 14.18 338.70 154.65
1981 14.27 340.11 140.45
1982 14.05 340.98 116.2917
1983 14.26 342.84 66.6333
1984 14.09 344.20 45.85
1985 14.06 345.87 17.9417
1986 14.13 347.19 13.4
1987 14.27 348.98 29.225
1988 14.31 351.45 100
1989 14.19 352.89 157.7917
1990 14.38 354.16 142.2917
1991 14.35 355.48 145.775
1992 14.12 356.27 94.4833
1993 14.14 356.96 54.7333
1994 14.24 358.63 29.8667
1995 14.38 360.63 17.5
1996 14.30 362.37 8.625
1997 14.40 363.47 21.4833
1998 14.57 366.50 64.2083
1999 14.33 368.14 93.175
2000 14.33 369.41 119.5333
2001 14.48 371.07 110.925
2002 14.56 373.16 104.0917
2003 14.55 375.80 63.5667
2004 14.49 377.55 40.4417
2005 14.62 379.75 29.7833
2006 14.54 381.85 15.1833
2007 14.57 383.72 7.5417
=-=-=-=-=-=-= "R" Program Outputs =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The following are outputs of the "R" statistical program:
For information on "R," please see:
http://www.r-project.org/
--------
Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ CO2, data = aframe)
Residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-0.2316612 -0.0805322 0.0185249 0.0763159 0.1798386
Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept) 1.10008e+01 2.41721e-01 45.5103 < 2.22e-16 ***
CO2 9.24797e-03 7.01018e-04 13.1922 < 2.22e-16 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
Residual standard error: 0.101321 on 48 degrees of freedom
Multiple R-Squared: 0.783817, Adjusted R-squared: 0.779313
F-statistic: 174.034 on 1 and 48 DF, p-value: < 2.220e-16
--------
Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ Sunspots, data = aframe)
Residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-0.3909495 -0.1523184 -0.0514594 0.1445919 0.4380756
Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept) 1.41804e+01 5.39054e-02 263.06149 < 2e-16 ***
Sunspots 4.97803e-05 6.18766e-04 0.08045 0.93621
---
Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
Residual standard error: 0.217902 on 48 degrees of freedom
Multiple R-Squared: 0.000134823, Adjusted R-squared: -0.0206957
F-statistic: 0.00647235 on 1 and 48 DF, p-value: 0.936213
[/quote]
WARNING - This correlation is being used for propaganda purposes.
WARNING - This correlation is being used for propaganda purposes.
WARNING - This correlation is being used for propaganda purposes.
This correlation is being used by Roger to push his personal view that
CO2 levels cause the change in temperature.
Wow... The exact same view as every reputable scientist, scientific
organization, and national goverment on earth. lol |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:58 am Post subject: Re: Is There Global Warming? |
|
|
"chemist" <tom-bolger@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:f9748373-4729-4d64-a6aa-fea256b4d44c@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
[quote]On Mar 4, 10:02 am, Roger Coppock <rcopp...@adnc.com> wrote:
Today>s barely detectable effect is tomorrow>s major phenomena.
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Slope1952-2007.jpg
On Mar 3, 9:53 pm, "ZNB00" <ZN...@doodooo.com.au> wrote:
[ . . . ]> As a general rule in science, if an effect is barely
detectable,
[ . . . ]
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
"CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet>s climate on
long, medium and even short time scales." R. Timothy Patterson,
Professor Of Geology, Director Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center,
Carleton University, Canada
Sorry, Dr. Patterson, but
R^2=0.78, p-value < 2.220e-16 is a major correlation.
CO2 or Sunspots: Statistical Correlation Chooses
Statistical correlation is a powerful technique with
very many uses. It produces "R squared" a measure of
whether two series of measures trend together.
(Those who are new to statistical correlation and
"R squared" will find a tutorial on the subject here:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correlation.html
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CorrelationCoefficient.html
Item 20 in the above shows R squared for several graphed
relationships.)
When applied to a time series of global mean surface
temperatures and data from prospective global warming
causes covering the same time period, correlation can
help locate the cause of the observed global warming.
Low "R squared" values, those near zero, can, by
themselves, totally rule out a prospective cause.
High "R squared" values indicate that a prospective
cause is very likely, but do not, by themselves,
'prove' something caused the warming. (Experimental
science rarely 'proves' something like a mathematical
proof does.)
Below are directly observed data for global mean surface
temperature, CO2 concentration, and sunspots for the last
50 years. This is as long as the longest directly
observed record of atmospheric CO2 concentration.
The R^2 value for the correlation of CO2 and planetary
surface temperature is 0.78. The simple rising
line showing heating for increasing CO2 explains a
lot of the variance in the global mean temperature.
The relationship between CO2 and global temperature
is very strong and the anthropogenic greenhouse gas
radiative forcing theory is well supported by these
data.
The R^2 value for sunspots and and planetary
surface temperature is very near zero. These data
clearly do not support any relationship between
sunspot numbers and global mean surface temperature
over the last 50 years. It is very unlikely that
sunspots have anything to do with the current
global warming.
This test applies very easily to all other claims for
global warming causes. It will quickly separate the
wheat from the chaff.
-.-. --.- Roger Coppock
=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Data =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The global mean surface "Temp"erature data are the GISS
adjusted J-D yearly land and sea average, available from
NASA at:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
The "CO2" data are the yearly averages of the monthly data
from the Keeling curve measured at Mauna Loa, available at:
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
"Sunspots" are the yearly averages of the monthly means
in the NOAA NGDC "MONTHLY" file. They are available at
the FTP site accessed through this web page:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/SSN/ssn.html
Year Temp CO2 Sunspots
1958 14.08 315.33 184.5917
1959 14.06 315.98 158.75
1960 13.99 316.91 112.275
1961 14.08 317.65 53.8833
1962 14.04 318.46 37.6
1963 14.08 318.99 27.8917
1964 13.79 319.20 10.2
1965 13.89 320.03 15.0583
1966 13.97 321.37 46.875
1967 14.00 322.18 93.6667
1968 13.96 323.05 105.8917
1969 14.08 324.62 105.5583
1970 14.03 325.68 104.6917
1971 13.90 326.32 66.65
1972 14.00 327.46 68.9333
1973 14.14 329.68 38.15
1974 13.92 330.17 34.4083
1975 13.95 331.14 15.4583
1976 13.84 332.06 12.55
1977 14.13 333.78 27.4833
1978 14.02 335.40 92.6583
1979 14.09 336.78 155.275
1980 14.18 338.70 154.65
1981 14.27 340.11 140.45
1982 14.05 340.98 116.2917
1983 14.26 342.84 66.6333
1984 14.09 344.20 45.85
1985 14.06 345.87 17.9417
1986 14.13 347.19 13.4
1987 14.27 348.98 29.225
1988 14.31 351.45 100
1989 14.19 352.89 157.7917
1990 14.38 354.16 142.2917
1991 14.35 355.48 145.775
1992 14.12 356.27 94.4833
1993 14.14 356.96 54.7333
1994 14.24 358.63 29.8667
1995 14.38 360.63 17.5
1996 14.30 362.37 8.625
1997 14.40 363.47 21.4833
1998 14.57 366.50 64.2083
1999 14.33 368.14 93.175
2000 14.33 369.41 119.5333
2001 14.48 371.07 110.925
2002 14.56 373.16 104.0917
2003 14.55 375.80 63.5667
2004 14.49 377.55 40.4417
2005 14.62 379.75 29.7833
2006 14.54 381.85 15.1833
2007 14.57 383.72 7.5417
=-=-=-=-=-=-= "R" Program Outputs =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The following are outputs of the "R" statistical program:
For information on "R," please see:
http://www.r-project.org/
--------
Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ CO2, data = aframe)
Residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-0.2316612 -0.0805322 0.0185249 0.0763159 0.1798386
Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept) 1.10008e+01 2.41721e-01 45.5103 < 2.22e-16 ***
CO2 9.24797e-03 7.01018e-04 13.1922 < 2.22e-16 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
Residual standard error: 0.101321 on 48 degrees of freedom
Multiple R-Squared: 0.783817, Adjusted R-squared: 0.779313
F-statistic: 174.034 on 1 and 48 DF, p-value: < 2.220e-16
--------
Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ Sunspots, data = aframe)
Residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-0.3909495 -0.1523184 -0.0514594 0.1445919 0.4380756
Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept) 1.41804e+01 5.39054e-02 263.06149 < 2e-16 ***
Sunspots 4.97803e-05 6.18766e-04 0.08045 0.93621
---
Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
Residual standard error: 0.217902 on 48 degrees of freedom
Multiple R-Squared: 0.000134823, Adjusted R-squared: -0.0206957
F-statistic: 0.00647235 on 1 and 48 DF, p-value: 0.936213
The general trend of the the last 6 months of the MSU LT
temperature indicates that February>s anomaly will be
1 degree C below the long term average.
If it is then Rogers analysis is just a load of doo-doo
[/quote]
ROFL See: La Nina, n.
How come reichwhingers think we>re as illiterate as they are? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marcodbeast
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:04 am Post subject: Re: Global Cooling, The Evidence Mounts |
|
|
"ZBN00" <ZBN00@doodoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:47cca4ef$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
[quote]
"jer0en" <jer0en@freemail.nl> wrote in message
news:10bdb$47cca153$3ec2bd25$1969@news.chello.nl...
ever heard of melting energy?
in order to melt, a solid requires additional energy.
in a greater whole of heating, this would cause temporary, possibly
snappy
fall-backs in temperature rise. no macro process is perfectly fluid, or
continuous if you like.
ROTFLMAO.
The melting getting ahead of itself and pulling energy in?
You bozo, it>s the heat which is causing the melting, not the , melting
pulling in the heat!
You are barking mad baby!
[/quote]
No, you>re just fucking dumb.
http://www.lib.umich.edu/dentlib/Dental_tables/Heatfusion.html |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
V for Vendicar
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:04 am Post subject: Re: Alaska summer Coldest in Decades: gullible Warming to bl |
|
|
Oh ya, I forgot. You are a KKKonservative who maintainsthat NASA is part of
the global KKKomunist KKKonspiracy of Scientist to keep you STUPID.
Looks like it>s working.
On Jul 30, 2:52 pm, "V for Vendicar"
<Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]"ZB00N" <ZB...@z00z00.com> wrote
What cooling trend is that?
This one.
No seriously. What cooling trend?
Here are the global average temperatures since 1958. "o" = trend line.
Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.
And most recently the rate of increase is about 2>C per century.
View with mono spaced font.
1958 14.08 *******o***************
1959 14.06 ********o************
1960 13.99 *********o******
1961 14.08 **********o************
1962 14.04 ***********o********
1963 14.08 ************o**********
1964 13.79 **===========o
1965 13.89 *********====o
1966 13.97 **************o
1967 14.00 ***************o*
1968 13.96 **************==o
1969 14.08 *****************o*****
1970 14.03 ******************o
1971 13.90 **********=========o
1972 14.00 *****************===o
1973 14.14 ********************o******
1974 13.92 ***********==========o
1975 13.95 *************=========o
1976 13.84 ******=================o
1977 14.13 ************************o*
1978 14.02 ******************=======o
1979 14.09 ***********************===o
1980 14.18 ***************************o**
1981 14.27 ****************************o*******
1982 14.05 ********************========o
1983 14.26 *****************************o*****
1984 14.09 ***********************=======o
1985 14.06 *********************==========o
1986 14.13 **************************======o
1987 14.27 *********************************o**
1988 14.31 **********************************o****
1989 14.19 ******************************=====o
1990 14.38 ************************************o*******
1991 14.35 ************************************o****
1992 14.12 *************************============o
1993 14.14 ****************************===========o
1994 14.24 **********************************=====o
1995 14.38 ****************************************o***
1996 14.30 **************************************===o
1997 14.40 ******************************************o**
1998 14.57 *******************************************o*************
1999 14.33 ****************************************===o
2000 14.33 ****************************************====o
2001 14.48 *********************************************o*****
2002 14.56 **********************************************o*********
2003 14.55 ***********************************************o*******
2004 14.49 ************************************************o**
2005 14.62 *************************************************o**********
2006 14.54 **************************************************o****
2007 14.57 ***************************************************o*****
-------------------------------------------> Temperature
Correlation Coefficient .8529209
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VMu14mBXAs[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
V for Vendicar
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:17 am Post subject: Re: Is There Global Warming? |
|
|
"marcodbeast" <its@casual> wrote
[quote]Wow... The exact same view as every reputable scientist, scientific
organization, and national goverment on earth. lol
[/quote]
Correlation does after all, imply causation. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
ZB00N
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:29 am Post subject: Re: Global Warming Blog 2008 post #152 - What Congress Can D |
|
|
"marcodbeast" <its@casual> wrote in message
news:gLydnWoBcoHHFw3VnZ2dnUVZ_srinZ2d@comcast.com...
[quote]
"ZB00N" <ZB00N@z00z00.com> wrote in message
news:489015d0$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
"arclein" <arclein@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:650d1e00-7ac5-4596-9305-2a1e59ccd8f0@v8g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
I maintain a blog on global warming, application to agriculture, and
related environmental subjects since mid 2007 and post daily Monday
to Friday.
I welcome new thoughts on the various topics introduced and look
forward to the championing of new topics.
So what are your thoughts on the current global cooling trend?
La Nina.
[/quote]
Just like El Nino for the warming trend.
So you agree with me that it>s all natural cycles then!!!!
--
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
".it should not be surprising to see hordes of former Reds, or of those
who otherwise would have become Reds, turning from Marxism and becoming
the Greens of the ecology movement. It is the same fundamental
philosophy in a different guise, ready as ever to wage war on the
freedom and well-being of the individual." Dr. George Reisman>s book
Capitalism |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poetic Justice
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:02 am Post subject: Re: Is There Global Warming? |
|
|
V for Vendicar wrote:
[quote]"marcodbeast" <its@casual> wrote
Wow... The exact same view as every reputable scientist, scientific
organization, and national goverment on earth. lol
Correlation does after all, imply causation.
It may imply a link, not the cause. But there is NONE.[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
V for Vendicar
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:24 am Post subject: Re: misleading statements by the IPCC |
|
|
"ZB00N" <ZB00N@z00z00.com> wrote
[quote]Using unpublished work to bolster claims of escalating economic costs
while ignoring peer reviewed studies which document otherwise is an
unacceptable and unscientific practice.
[/quote]
Ahahahahahahahahah............
Unpublished work = unreviewed work = Work that could not stand the muster
of peer review.
URAh MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
