Does the 'pause' in global temperatures pose a problem for skeptics?
After all, if the argument is that AGW is a leftist, liberal conspiracy, and scientists are manipulating the data, why wouldn't they change the data to remove the pause to avoid the problem in the first place?
BB, Maxx: Your answer basically seems to be 'when the data showed warming it was lies, but when it showed a pause, it was real'? Hmmmm ...
Zippi: The fact is skeptics have been trumpeting 'the pause' as a blow against AGW. I'm trying to understand the mentality that says 'this data is good' (ie. the pause) and 'this data is bad' (ie. the adjustment of satellite data Maxx discussed, or the warming trend seen in many decades of data).
- 6 years agoFavourite answer
No, because sceptics are interested in the truth. We just want to know what is happening.
However, if you look at the temperature data from various sources from around the world including Australia, New Zealand and the US, there are signs that temperature history is being changed. Always, it seems, this change makes earlier temperatures cooler than they were when they were recorded. This has the effect of making the current temperature look like a high spot because previous high spots are becoming cooler.
I have asked a question about these two time series from the NASA GISS site because I would genuinely like to know why the two curves are so different with respect to slope or trend. There may be a perfectly reasonable explanation but it is not obvious from the graphs. Perhaps there is other data on the site which explains this.
My question seems to be invisible for reasons I do not understand but I include the two temperature curves and a link to the question here: https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20...
- KanoLv 76 years ago
I am not of the opinion that AGW is a leftist, liberal conspiracy, I do believe that some bias and maybe even some manipulation has occurred, but I think that many have totally different reasons for wanting to push AGW, sometimes it is just an effort to get a paper published, grafting "climate change" onto any paper or article is a sure way of achieving more attention.
Others have different reasons, but gone are the days when I used to trust anything that got into print, finding reliable unbiased information is really difficult these days, the same subject will be treated entirely differently by different media, " is that right"
- Anonymous6 years ago
If you really think that a 0.87C increase of the global average temperature anomaly in 350 years is really a cause for concern, then maybe you and your fellow alarmists can cypher out all of the contributors to that number and get a real CO2 warming number. If 60% of the actual readings are reading higher over time because of the UHI Effect, then what effect does that have? Science also can't correct human error from the past when reading thermometers. What if 60% those anomalies were understated?
There are at least 5,000 other variables that contribute to our ground-based temperature anomaly. The "UHI (urban heat island) Effect" plays a much bigger role than CO2 in adding to ground-based temps, simply because there is no way to factor it out of the anomalies.
The UHI has never been properly dealt with within the climate science community. Many peer-reviewed papers have been written about this "temperature forcing" without a definitive answer. Population increases along with landscape changes have a huge effect on a thermometer that remains stationary.
It's not the "pause" that's troubling. It's all of the other "natural" variables that seem to be ignored by "climate clowns".
- ?Lv 66 years ago
Even the most gullible amongst you devout AGW believers would question all this snow and ice in the midst of globull warming...
So every once in a while, the data has to match our lyin eyes...
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- BBLv 76 years ago
There are now too many eyes on the data for the Alarmists/Activists to get away with any more lies.
The Alarmists have lied themselves into a corner. Catastrophic, Man-made, Global Warming has worn out its welcome due to the scandals that have exposed the ugly underbelly of the 'Cause'.
- MaxxLv 76 years ago
You say: "why wouldn't they change the data to remove the pause" --- I'm sure they would like to, but there are those pesky satellites out there that keep showing that the real global temperature is about 200% LESS than what GISS is reporting in their dataset.
TWO-HUNDRED percent is not an exaggeration. This graph shows UAH data verses GISS, have a look for yourself: http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1984...
GISS even 'adjusts' decades old data DOWNWARD in order to make the small amount of recent warming look more dramatic. There are really no lengths to which GISS won't go to propagate this fraud. I really think there will be a reckoning at GISS one day for all of their data tampering, I wouldn't want to be the guy in charge over there when it all comes down.
- Harley DriveLv 76 years ago
they already got caught faking the warming data so now they examine all the evidence the climatology research department at east anglia university near norwich england faked all the research and between 1990 and 1998 they even moved the metering equipment into towns because they were not showing a warming trend
- 6 years ago
This sort of trivial non-issue suggests no one is taking the environment seriously and it has degenerated into an ill-tempered grudge shoving match.
- 5 years ago
@Elizabeth, can you please delete the answer you posted in the mathematics question on the 2nd march 2016? i wish to delete the question and i can't do that until you delete your answer.
- SLv 76 years ago
judging by denier answers,yes