Re: NOVEMBER, 2009, IS THE WARMEST ON THE 130-YEAR NASA RECORD- NOT!
Last Post
> NOVEMBER, 2009, IS THE WARMEST ON THE 130-YEAR RECORD!
>
> In the real world,
> outside the fossil fuel industry's spin and lies,
> global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.
> Please see:
>
> http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2008/pr20080923c.html
>
> These globally averaged temperature data come from NASAhttp://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
> There are 1559 months of data on this data set:
> -- 673 of them are at or above the norm.
> -- 886 of them are below the norm.
• Roger is straining at gnats and it makes him silly.
Assuming half of the 673 were 'at norm', that leaves
only 337 above norm while 886 were below, which
gives you 21.55% above. Not much of a warming
trend at all.
• Roger, you can fool some of the people sometimes
but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
• The Met office is the original home of weather and
this year it forecast picnic weather all summer and
it was cold and rainy all summer. Nevertheless it
and GISS called every month the hottest/warmest.
Your statistical bullshit is too old and your cause is
failing. Give it up. While Jones, Briffa and Mann
coined million$, what are you getting? Headaches!
— —
| In real science the burden of proof is always
| on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
| neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
| iota of valid data for global warming nor have
| they provided data that climate change is being
| effected by commerce and industry, and not by
| natural phenomena
edi...@netpath.net
central North Carolina - where it rarely snows.
Record snowstorm, fortunately, forecast for Washington - up to 20".
http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com - your source for hard-to-find stuff!
Last Post
>
> In the real world,
> outside the fossil fuel industry's spin and lies,
> global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.
> Please see:
>
> http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2008/pr20080923c.html
>
> These globally averaged temperature data come from NASAhttp://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
> taken at thousands of land stations and ships around the globe
> over the last 130 years. Yes, the land data are corrected for
> the urban heat island effect. The sea data do not need to be.
> There are few urban centers in the sea.
• Roger: Did you get allowance for those hundreds of
Russian stations that do not exist any more??
They will take your mean down several degrees <G>
> The last 129 yearly means of these data are graphed athttp://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Global%20Mean%20Temp.jpg
>
> The Mean November temperature over the last 130 years is 13.983 C.
> The Variance is 0.07078.
> The Standard Deviation, or SIGMA, is 0.2660.
>
> Rxy 0.7867 Rxy^2 0.6189
> TEMP = 13.618007 + (0.005577 * (YEAR-1879))
> Degrees of Freedom = 128 F = 207.847186
> Confidence of nonzero correlation = approximately
> 0.999999999999999999999999999 (27 nines), which is darn close to 100%!
Bullshit!!!!
> The month of November in the year 2009,
> is linearly projected to be 14.343,
> yet it was 14.68. <- 1.3 SIGMA above the projection.
> The rate of global warming continues to accelerate.
• Bullshit
> The sum of the absolute errors is 17.455847
>
> Equal weight exponential least squares fit:
> TEMP = 13.621659 * e^(.0003994 * (YEAR-1879))
> The sum of the absolute errors is 17.409998
> (Note that this sum continues to get smaller
> that the sum above it. This
> indicates that the
> two degree of freedom exponential is becoming
> a better fit than the linear function.)
>
> Rank of the months of November
> Year Temp C Anomaly Z score
> 2009 14.68 0.697 2.62 <--
> 2001 14.66 0.677 2.54
> 2004 14.65 0.667 2.51
> 2006 14.64 0.657 2.47
> 2005 14.63 0.647 2.43
> 2008 14.57 0.587 2.21
> 1997 14.55 0.567 2.13
> 2002 14.50 0.517 1.94
> 2003 14.49 0.507 1.90
> 2007 14.46 0.477 1.79
> 1998 14.43 0.447 1.68
> 1990 14.42 0.437 1.64
> 1995 14.37 0.387 1.45
> 1996 14.34 0.357 1.34
> MEAN 13.983 0.000 0.00
> 1881 13.66 -0.323 -1.22
> 1912 13.65 -0.333 -1.25
> 1906 13.64 -0.343 -1.29
> 1898 13.62 -0.363 -1.37
> 1894 13.62 -0.363 -1.37
> 1887 13.62 -0.363 -1.37
> 1916 13.60 -0.383 -1.44
> 1891 13.60 -0.383 -1.44
> 1910 13.59 -0.393 -1.48
> 1892 13.59 -0.393 -1.48
> 1908 13.58 -0.403 -1.52
> 1902 13.58 -0.403 -1.52
> 1907 13.57 -0.413 -1.55
> 1919 13.53 -0.453 -1.70
> 1890 13.49 -0.493 -1.85
>
> The most recent 189 continuous months, or 15 years and 9 months,
> on this GLB.Ts+dSST.txt data set are all above the 1951-1980
> data set norm of 14 C.
> There are 1559 months of data on this data set:
> -- 673 of them are at or above the norm.
> -- 886 of them are below the norm.
> This run of 189 months above the norm is the result of a warming
> world. It is too large to occur by chance at any reasonable level
> of confidence. A major volcano eruption, thermonuclear war, or
> meteor impact could stop this warming trend for a couple of years,
> otherwise expect it to continue.
Bedwetting Right Wing Scum
Meanwhile, where I live, we had the warmest November in 120 years, and
we are about to get the latest first snowfall in nearly 80 years.
Anecdotal evidence is irrelevant to this debate.
leona...@gmail.com
> NOVEMBER, 2009, IS THE WARMEST ON THE 130-YEAR NASA RECORD!
>
> In the real world,
> outside the fossil fuel industry's spin and lies,
> global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.
> Please see:
>
> http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2008/pr20080923c.html
• Coppock— It is time you stopped spamming the net
repeating those fraudulent statistics over and over in
every thread. Anybody that wants them can follow a
link.
There are 3 groups that I would recommend for you
soc.history.what-if
alt.history.what-if
alt.usenet.kooks