Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again) Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
1 view
Skip to first unread message
g w con@agwcon AGWCon
Feb 16, 2012, 6:54:20 PM2/16/12
to
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if
NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an
inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data
showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.
The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age
to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the
Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data
was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the
University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the
rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.
A painting, dated 1684, by Abraham Hondius depicts one of many frost
fairs on the River Thames during the mini ice age
A painting, dated 1684, by Abraham Hondius depicts one of many frost
fairs on the River Thames during the mini ice age
Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on
Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout
the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in
its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening
of the season available for growing food.
Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of
sunspots seen at their peak.
We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle
24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of
the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are
running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th
Century.
Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona – derived
from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s
surface – suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a
great deal weaker still.
According to a paper issued last week by the Met Office, there is a
92 per cent chance that both Cycle 25 and those taking place in the
following decades will be as weak as, or weaker than, the ‘Dalton
minimum’ of 1790 to 1830. In this period, named after the
meteorologist John Dalton, average temperatures in parts of Europe
fell by 2C.
However, it is also possible that the new solar energy slump could be
as deep as the ‘Maunder minimum’ (after astronomer Edward Maunder),
between 1645 and 1715 in the coldest part of the ‘Little Ice Age’
when, as well as the Thames frost fairs, the canals of Holland froze
solid.
The world average temperature from 1997 to 2012
Yet, in its paper, the Met Office claimed that the consequences now
would be negligible – because the impact of the sun on climate is far
less than man-made carbon dioxide. Although the sun’s output is likely
to decrease until 2100, ‘This would only cause a reduction in global
temperatures of 0.08C.’ Peter Stott, one of the authors, said: ‘Our
findings suggest a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in
hundreds of years would be insufficient to offset the dominant
influence of greenhouse gases.’
These findings are fiercely disputed by other solar experts.
‘World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or
more,’ said Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate
Research at Denmark’s National Space Institute. ‘It will take a long
battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important.
It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own,
without the need for their help.’
He pointed out that, in claiming the effect of the solar minimum would
be small, the Met Office was relying on the same computer models that
are being undermined by the current pause in global-warming.
CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption and, in 2007,
the Met Office claimed that global warming was about to ‘come roaring
back’. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an overall
increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the
years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in
1998.
World solar activity cycles from 1749 to 2040
So far there is no sign of any of this happening. But yesterday a Met
Office spokesman insisted its models were still valid.
‘The ten-year projection remains groundbreaking science. The period
for the original projection is not over yet,’ he said.
Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the
author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show
there should have been ‘steady warming from 2000 until now’.
‘If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the
divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become
so great that the whole scientific community will question the current
theories,’ he said.
He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater
significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that
there would not be cooling. ‘The real issue is whether the model
itself is accurate,’ Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America’s
most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia
Institute of Technology, said she found the Met Office’s confident
prediction of a ‘negligible’ impact difficult to understand.
‘The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the
models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of
the sun,’ said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said
that many scientists ‘are not surprised’.
Four hundred years of sunspot observations
She argued it is becoming evident that factors other than CO2 play an
important role in rising or falling warmth, such as the 60-year water
temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.
‘They have insufficiently been appreciated in terms of global
climate,’ said Prof Curry. When both oceans were cold in the past,
such as from 1940 to 1970, the climate cooled. The Pacific cycle
‘flipped’ back from warm to cold mode in 2008 and the Atlantic is also
thought likely to flip in the next few years .
Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some
scientists found the importance of water cycles difficult to accept,
because doing so means admitting that the oceans – not CO2 – caused
much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997.
The same goes for the impact of the sun – which was highly active for
much of the 20th Century.
‘Nature is about to carry out a very interesting experiment,’ he said.
‘Ten or 15 years from now, we will be able to determine much better
whether the warming of the late 20th Century really was caused by man-
made CO2, or by natural variability.’
Meanwhile, since the end of last year, world temperatures have fallen
by more than half a degree, as the cold ‘La Nina’ effect has re-
emerged in the South Pacific.
‘We’re now well into the second decade of the pause,’ said Benny
Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. ‘If we don’t
see convincing evidence of global warming by 2015, it will start to
become clear whether the models are bunk. And, if they are, the
implications for some scientists could be very serious.’
Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html#ixzz1mYgObFSC
Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if
NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an
inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data
showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.
The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age
to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the
Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data
was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the
University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the
rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.
A painting, dated 1684, by Abraham Hondius depicts one of many frost
fairs on the River Thames during the mini ice age
A painting, dated 1684, by Abraham Hondius depicts one of many frost
fairs on the River Thames during the mini ice age
Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on
Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout
the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in
its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening
of the season available for growing food.
Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of
sunspots seen at their peak.
We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle
24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of
the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are
running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th
Century.
Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona – derived
from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s
surface – suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a
great deal weaker still.
According to a paper issued last week by the Met Office, there is a
92 per cent chance that both Cycle 25 and those taking place in the
following decades will be as weak as, or weaker than, the ‘Dalton
minimum’ of 1790 to 1830. In this period, named after the
meteorologist John Dalton, average temperatures in parts of Europe
fell by 2C.
However, it is also possible that the new solar energy slump could be
as deep as the ‘Maunder minimum’ (after astronomer Edward Maunder),
between 1645 and 1715 in the coldest part of the ‘Little Ice Age’
when, as well as the Thames frost fairs, the canals of Holland froze
solid.
The world average temperature from 1997 to 2012
Yet, in its paper, the Met Office claimed that the consequences now
would be negligible – because the impact of the sun on climate is far
less than man-made carbon dioxide. Although the sun’s output is likely
to decrease until 2100, ‘This would only cause a reduction in global
temperatures of 0.08C.’ Peter Stott, one of the authors, said: ‘Our
findings suggest a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in
hundreds of years would be insufficient to offset the dominant
influence of greenhouse gases.’
These findings are fiercely disputed by other solar experts.
‘World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or
more,’ said Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate
Research at Denmark’s National Space Institute. ‘It will take a long
battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important.
It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own,
without the need for their help.’
He pointed out that, in claiming the effect of the solar minimum would
be small, the Met Office was relying on the same computer models that
are being undermined by the current pause in global-warming.
CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption and, in 2007,
the Met Office claimed that global warming was about to ‘come roaring
back’. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an overall
increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the
years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in
1998.
World solar activity cycles from 1749 to 2040
So far there is no sign of any of this happening. But yesterday a Met
Office spokesman insisted its models were still valid.
‘The ten-year projection remains groundbreaking science. The period
for the original projection is not over yet,’ he said.
Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the
author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show
there should have been ‘steady warming from 2000 until now’.
‘If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the
divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become
so great that the whole scientific community will question the current
theories,’ he said.
He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater
significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that
there would not be cooling. ‘The real issue is whether the model
itself is accurate,’ Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America’s
most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia
Institute of Technology, said she found the Met Office’s confident
prediction of a ‘negligible’ impact difficult to understand.
‘The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the
models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of
the sun,’ said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said
that many scientists ‘are not surprised’.
Four hundred years of sunspot observations
She argued it is becoming evident that factors other than CO2 play an
important role in rising or falling warmth, such as the 60-year water
temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.
‘They have insufficiently been appreciated in terms of global
climate,’ said Prof Curry. When both oceans were cold in the past,
such as from 1940 to 1970, the climate cooled. The Pacific cycle
‘flipped’ back from warm to cold mode in 2008 and the Atlantic is also
thought likely to flip in the next few years .
Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some
scientists found the importance of water cycles difficult to accept,
because doing so means admitting that the oceans – not CO2 – caused
much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997.
The same goes for the impact of the sun – which was highly active for
much of the 20th Century.
‘Nature is about to carry out a very interesting experiment,’ he said.
‘Ten or 15 years from now, we will be able to determine much better
whether the warming of the late 20th Century really was caused by man-
made CO2, or by natural variability.’
Meanwhile, since the end of last year, world temperatures have fallen
by more than half a degree, as the cold ‘La Nina’ effect has re-
emerged in the South Pacific.
‘We’re now well into the second decade of the pause,’ said Benny
Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. ‘If we don’t
see convincing evidence of global warming by 2015, it will start to
become clear whether the models are bunk. And, if they are, the
implications for some scientists could be very serious.’
Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html#ixzz1mYgObFSC
Surfer
Feb 18, 2012, 11:29:03 PM2/18/12
to
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:54:20 +1100, "AGWCon" <a g w con@a g w con>
wrote:
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
>
>
>Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if
>NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
>
> Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
>
That is nonsense as the Met Office explains here.
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
<Start extract>
Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose
entitled “Forget global warming – it’s Cycle 25 we need to worry
about”.
This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published
peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and
for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available
show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.
Despite the Met Office having spoken to David Rose ahead of the
publication of the story, he has chosen to not fully include the
answers we gave him to questions around decadal projections produced
by the Met Office or his belief that we have seen no warming since
1997.
For clarity I have included our full response to David Rose below:A
spokesman for the Met Office said: “The ten year projection remains
groundbreaking science. The complete period for the original
projection is not over yet and these projections are regularly updated
to take account of the most recent data.
“The projections are probabilistic in nature, and no individual
forecast should be taken in isolation. Instead, several decades of
data will be needed to assess the robustness of the projections.
“However, what is absolutely clear is that we have continued to see a
trend of warming, with the decade of 2000-2009 being clearly the
warmest in the instrumental record going back to 1850. Depending on
which temperature records you use, 2010 was the warmest year on record
for NOAA NCDC and NASA GISS, and the second warmest on record in
HadCRUT3.”
<Continued here>
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
wrote:
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
>
>
>Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if
>NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
>
> Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
>
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
<Start extract>
Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose
entitled “Forget global warming – it’s Cycle 25 we need to worry
about”.
This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published
peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and
for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available
show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.
Despite the Met Office having spoken to David Rose ahead of the
publication of the story, he has chosen to not fully include the
answers we gave him to questions around decadal projections produced
by the Met Office or his belief that we have seen no warming since
1997.
For clarity I have included our full response to David Rose below:A
spokesman for the Met Office said: “The ten year projection remains
groundbreaking science. The complete period for the original
projection is not over yet and these projections are regularly updated
to take account of the most recent data.
“The projections are probabilistic in nature, and no individual
forecast should be taken in isolation. Instead, several decades of
data will be needed to assess the robustness of the projections.
“However, what is absolutely clear is that we have continued to see a
trend of warming, with the decade of 2000-2009 being clearly the
warmest in the instrumental record going back to 1850. Depending on
which temperature records you use, 2010 was the warmest year on record
for NOAA NCDC and NASA GISS, and the second warmest on record in
HadCRUT3.”
<Continued here>
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
SwindledByFakeAGW
Feb 19, 2012, 9:47:25 PM2/19/12
to
"Surfer" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:56u0k7lc464kmpf5g...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:54:20 +1100, "AGWCon" <a g w con@a g w con>
> wrote:
>
>>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
>>
>>
>>Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if
>>NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
>>
>> Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
>>
> That is nonsense as the Met Office explains here.
> http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
>
> <Start extract>
>
> Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose
> entitled "Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry
> wrote:
>
>>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
>>
>>
>>Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if
>>NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
>>
>> Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
>>
> That is nonsense as the Met Office explains here.
> http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
>
> <Start extract>
>
> Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose
> about".
>
> This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published
> peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and
> for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available
> show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.
>
> Despite the Met Office having spoken to David Rose ahead of the
> publication of the story, he has chosen to not fully include the
> answers we gave him to questions around decadal projections produced
> by the Met Office or his belief that we have seen no warming since
> 1997.
>
> For clarity I have included our full response to David Rose below:A
> spokesman for the Met Office said: "The ten year projection remains
> groundbreaking science. The complete period for the original
> projection is not over yet and these projections are regularly updated
> to take account of the most recent data.
>
> "The projections are probabilistic in nature, and no individual
> forecast should be taken in isolation. Instead, several decades of
> data will be needed to assess the robustness of the projections.
>
> "However, what is absolutely clear is that we have continued to see a
> trend of warming, with the decade of 2000-2009 being clearly the
> warmest in the instrumental record going back to 1850.
Please be so kind as to show a graph of a warming trend from 2000 to 2009!
> This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published
> peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and
> for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available
> show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.
>
> Despite the Met Office having spoken to David Rose ahead of the
> publication of the story, he has chosen to not fully include the
> answers we gave him to questions around decadal projections produced
> by the Met Office or his belief that we have seen no warming since
> 1997.
>
> For clarity I have included our full response to David Rose below:A
> spokesman for the Met Office said: "The ten year projection remains
> groundbreaking science. The complete period for the original
> projection is not over yet and these projections are regularly updated
> to take account of the most recent data.
>
> "The projections are probabilistic in nature, and no individual
> forecast should be taken in isolation. Instead, several decades of
> data will be needed to assess the robustness of the projections.
>
> "However, what is absolutely clear is that we have continued to see a
> trend of warming, with the decade of 2000-2009 being clearly the
> warmest in the instrumental record going back to 1850.
I dare you!
Warmest Regards
B O N Z O
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."
Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
"A major problem has been the co-option of climate science by politics,
ambition, greed, and what seems to be a hereditary human need for a
righteous cause."
"What better cause than "saving" the planet, especially if one can get
ample, secure funding at the same time?"
William Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Princeton
University.
"The claim is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8ºK in
about 150 years, which, if true, means to me that the temperature has been
amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely
improved in this 'warming' period,".
Nobel Laureate Dr. Ivar Giaever:
"If climate has not "tipped" in over 4 billion years it's not going to tip
now due to mankind. The planet has a natural thermostat"
Richard S. Lindzen, Atmospheric Physicist, Professor of Meteorology MIT,
Former IPCC Lead Author
"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."
"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips
"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"
"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips
"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"
http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-greatly-exaggerated
Before attacking hypothetical problems, let us first solve the real problems
that threaten humanity. One single water pump at an equivalent cost of a
couple of solar panels can indeed spare hundreds of Sahel women the daily
journey to the spring and spare many infections and lives.
Martin De Vlieghere, philosopher
"All it takes to find oneself called a 'denier' is to seek a sense of
proportion about environmental problems"
Mark Lynas, The God Species
Surfer
Feb 20, 2012, 8:53:33 AM2/20/12
to
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 11:09:17 +1100, "SwindledByFakeAGW"
<SwindledByFakeAGW@SwindledByFakeAGW> wrote:
>
>"Surfer" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:56u0k7lc464kmpf5g...@4ax.com...
>>
<SwindledByFakeAGW@SwindledByFakeAGW> wrote:
>
>"Surfer" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:56u0k7lc464kmpf5g...@4ax.com...
>>
>> http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
>>
>> <Start extract>
>>
>> Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose
>> entitled "Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry
>>
>> <Start extract>
>>
>> Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose
>> about".
>>
>> This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published
>> peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and
>> for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available
>> show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.
>>
>
>Please explain exactly how it is misleading with a graph?
>> This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published
>> peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and
>> for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available
>> show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.
>>
>
>
The Met Office provides a graph on this page:
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
Notice that 2010 and 2011 were each warmer than 1996, 1997, 1999 and
2000.
Surfer
Feb 20, 2012, 8:57:50 AM2/20/12
to
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:47:25 +1100, "SwindledByFakeAGW"
<SwindledByFakeAGW@SwindledByFakeAGW> wrote:
>
>"Surfer" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>>
>>
<SwindledByFakeAGW@SwindledByFakeAGW> wrote:
>
>"Surfer" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>>
>>
to 2009, it wrote:
"...the decade of 2000-2009 being clearly the warmest in the instrumental
record going back to 1850..."
By Fake AGW@hoodwinkedbyfakeagw Hoodwinked By Fake AGW
Feb 20, 2012, 9:31:17 PM2/20/12
to
"Surfer" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
Even you graph shows that 1998 was the hottest year!
Look at the plateau on the RHS of your graph.
By Fake AGW@hoodwinkedbyfakeagw Hoodwinked By Fake AGW
Feb 20, 2012, 9:32:13 PM2/20/12
to
"Surfer" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
Trevor Wilson
Feb 20, 2012, 11:33:29 PM2/20/12
to
On 2/17/2012 10:54 AM, AGWCon wrote:
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
>
> Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if
> NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
>
> Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
**Bollocks, liar. Promulgating a lie is just lying. Try to read some
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
>
> Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if
> NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
>
> Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
facts, before you promulgate more lies:
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Trevor Wilson
Feb 21, 2012, 2:27:55 AM2/21/12
to
On 2/21/2012 1:31 PM, Hoodwinked By Fake AGW wrote:
> "Surfer"<n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:2tj4k79vcgsg97q16...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 11:09:17 +1100, "SwindledByFakeAGW"
>> <SwindledByFakeAGW@SwindledByFakeAGW> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Surfer"<n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:56u0k7lc464kmpf5g...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>
>>>> http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
>>>>
>>>> <Start extract>
>>>>
>>>> Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose
>>>> entitled "Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry
>>>> about".
>>>>
>>>> This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published
>>>> peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and
>>>> for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available
>>>> show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Please explain exactly how it is misleading with a graph?
>>>
>>
>> The Met Office provides a graph on this page:
>> http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
>>
>> Notice that 2010 and 2011 were each warmer than 1996, 1997, 1999 and
>> 2000.
>
>
>
>
> Huh?
>
> Even you graph shows that 1998 was the hottest year!
>
> Look at the plateau on the RHS of your graph.
>
**We all understand that you have no concept of the term: "trend".
> "Surfer"<n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:2tj4k79vcgsg97q16...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 11:09:17 +1100, "SwindledByFakeAGW"
>> <SwindledByFakeAGW@SwindledByFakeAGW> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Surfer"<n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:56u0k7lc464kmpf5g...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>
>>>> http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
>>>>
>>>> <Start extract>
>>>>
>>>> Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose
>>>> entitled "Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry
>>>> about".
>>>>
>>>> This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published
>>>> peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and
>>>> for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available
>>>> show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Please explain exactly how it is misleading with a graph?
>>>
>>
>> The Met Office provides a graph on this page:
>> http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/
>>
>> Notice that 2010 and 2011 were each warmer than 1996, 1997, 1999 and
>> 2000.
>
>
>
>
> Huh?
>
> Even you graph shows that 1998 was the hottest year!
>
> Look at the plateau on the RHS of your graph.
>
Investing in the share market should be something you would avoid.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
0 new messages