0
brenthutch

Try to spot the trend

Recommended Posts

We are well over a half a decade from “record” territory, but let’s set that aside for a moment.  Tell me if anyone can detect the trend in the last three months of NOAA data.

December 2021, fifth warmest December 

January 2022, sixth warmest January 

February 2022 seventh warmest February (north American was BELOW average!)

https://goldrushcam.com/sierrasuntimes/index.php/news/local-news/37298-noaa-reports-february-2022-was-earth-s-7th-warmest-on-record-antarctic-sea-ice-coverage-shrank-to-a-record-low

All of this while CO2 levels continue to set records month after month.  
 

Oh and before you get all breathless over Antarctic sea ice, be mindful of the fact that it is more a function of wind and ocean currents than temperatures and it comes on the heals of record Antarctic cold.

 

Edited by brenthutch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Yep,

February 1998 1.55 above 20th century average 

February 2022 1.46 above 20th century average 

Last month was colder than it was nearly a quarter of a century ago.  (According to NOAA)

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/199813

 

Nothing from the NOAA stating there's a cooling climate. In fact they say quite the opposite.

You'll post lots of numbers and data (which you still can't process properly) and not actually provide an NOAA quote, so I won't wait around.

Stop trying to boost your credibility with theirs. It's not going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, olofscience said:

Nothing from the NOAA stating there's a cooling climate. In fact they say quite the opposite.

You'll post lots of numbers and data (which you still can't process properly) and not actually provide an NOAA quote, so I won't wait around.

Stop trying to boost your credibility with theirs. It's not going to happen.

Maybe if we could convince NOAA, instead of Brent because the lifting would be easier, to change their name to the American National Atmosphere League he might reel and move on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mass of ice that was holding back the rest of the Larsen-B glacier just gave way.  There's nothing grounded now between the glacier and the sea.  The reason this is important is because that mass was the last floating ice left in the Larsen-B area (although it was grounded in several places.)  From here on out, any glacier that separates will raise the sea level, rather than just melt without changing the sea level.  In addition, the grounding of the ice was slowing down the glaciers that were moving towards the sea; they will find much less resistance now.

https://phys.org/news/2022-03-sea-ice-antarctic-glaciers-abruptly.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Tell me if anyone can detect the trend in the last three months of NOAA data.

 

 

 

Ignoring the fact that this isn't NOAA data as you originally claimed, (nice edit by the way), you STILL don't get that looking at short term data doesn't tell you anything about long term trends in a complex environmental model. People have told you this again and again and STILL you post stuff that makes you look completely ignorant of high school level statistics. You need to be looking at trends over decades and centuries. Months are well within the normal variability. 

At this point I think you must actually enjoy being laughed at. Certainly any post that you make that talks about 'data' goes into my comedy bucket. It's basically a certainty at this point that when you make a post about climate data that you're fundamentally WRONG about either the source, the math, the conclusions or even the data itself, or any combination of the above. You're batting a thousand on that record.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, yoink said:

Ignoring the fact that this isn't NOAA data as you originally claimed, (nice edit by the way), you STILL don't get that looking at short term data doesn't tell you anything about long term trends in a complex environmental model. People have told you this again and again and STILL you post stuff that makes you look completely ignorant of high school level statistics. You need to be looking at trends over decades and centuries. Months are well within the normal variability

But that doesn’t show what he wants to show. What good is it? He really doesn’t agree that the data has to drive the thought, and not the other way around. Not to mention that theories evolve as data becomes available.

Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, yoink said:

You need to be looking at trends over decades and centuries. Months are well within the normal variability. 

 

On a centennial scale temperatures are within the range of normal variability.  We are warmer now than during the “little ice age” when this warming trend started which is long before any anthropogenic forcing.  We are cooler now than during the Roman and medieval warm period and much cooler than during the Holocene climate optimum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

 Not to mention that theories evolve as data becomes available.

Wendy P. 

Agreed, we are now finding out the climate is not as nearly sensitive to CO2 as we first thought three+ decades ago.  And we are discovering the slight warming we have experienced has not resulted in the cataclysmic outcomes once predicted.

I urge you to rewatch An Inconvenient Truth and see how well that aged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kallend said:

Thread is mistitled.

It should be Try to spot the Troll

You know, John, you've decided to block him.  Good for you.

By the same measure, please stop posting about him incessantly.  If you don't want to engage with him, great!  Awesome!  Good decision on your part.  But please stop with the "I'm not listening to you!  And you're a jerk!" thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kallend said:

I  wasn't responding to the troll anyway, it was just a fair comment on the thread title.

And why don't the mods do anything about blatant and persistent trolling.

Is there anything that is not factual?  Did I not cite my sources?  Did I miss the recent record high global temperatures somewhere?  I’m sorry that it pisses you off that I share the fact that the planet has not been warming for the last 7+ years.  A rational person would be glad that there is no climate crisis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, billvon said:

You know, John, you've decided to block him.  Good for you.

By the same measure, please stop posting about him incessantly.  If you don't want to engage with him, great!  Awesome!  Good decision on your part.  But please stop with the "I'm not listening to you!  And you're a jerk!" thing.

Yup. The fact that people keep engaging is something I also don't understand. But apparently some find it amusing and who am I to judge?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Yup. The fact that people keep engaging is something I also don't understand. But apparently some find it amusing and who am I to judge?

If one can’t engage on the substance of my posts one is reduced to personal attacks or running away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

If one can’t engage on the substance of my posts one is reduced to personal attacks or running away.

I did engage on the substance of your post in the Ukraine thread. You responded with a PA and got warned.

And you wonder why people call you a troll?

Once again I’m done with you. Hopefully this time I’ll learn my lesson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, yoink said:

I did engage on the substance of your post in the Ukraine thread. You responded with a PA and got warned.

And you wonder why people call you a troll?

Once again I’m done with you. Hopefully this time I’ll learn my lesson.

Dude! It was a joke. I apologize if you didn’t get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2022 at 7:18 PM, brenthutch said:

The recent trend is a cooling climate. (According to NOAA)

Again - “Global warming” refers to the rise in global temperatures due mainly to the increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. “Climate change” refers to the increasing changes in the measures of climate over a long period of time – including precipitation, temperature, and wind patterns.

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-difference-between-global-warming-and-climate-change#:~:text=“Global warming” refers to the,%2C temperature%2C and wind patterns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0