Global Warming is still accelerating

LOL, even the IPCC admits it has to address the lack of warming the last 16 years opposing their predictions. Let's see what they come out with.

 

There has been no "lack of warming the last 16 years". The Earth continues to warm up because it is still receiving more heat from the sun than it is able to radiate away into space. Due to multiple La Niñas and the negative phase of the PDO, more of the extra thermal energy the Earth has been retaining due to the increased CO2 levels has gone into the oceans than has gone into raising the surface air temperatures. A few years and a positive PDO or a major El Niño event will reverse this and produce new record high surface temperatures.

 

That is the true belief as opposed to actual observations!

 

I see. So, the negative phase of the PDO since 1998 has reduced temperatures, but when the PDO phase was positive, from 1970-1998, all the warming was due to CO2...?

Somehow, I kinda figured it'd be something like that....

 

And???

Lets take a look at what it means when water hits 100C. Up until 100C the water is able to serve as a heat sink. Its stores the energy from the stove. Once it hits 100C the water starts to boil. Instead of being stored the energy entering the water goes into a state change of the water from liquid to steam. This steam convects up and leaves the pot. This is energy leaving the system. We have reached the thermal equilibrium. Between the water radiating energy, very small conductive losses, and convecting energy away in the form of steam we have reached the temperature where energy in equals energy out. The water is no longer able to store further energy and we have reached thermal equilibrium.

 

And that is why many warmmongers at the IPCC are arguing that the IPCC shouldn't even try to explain the stop in the warming. The Germans are pushing very hard for that because they know that if you argue that negative ocean currents have retarded the warming to a stop and then cooling then you open the bag to the question of what effect the positive ocean currents had during the warming.

 

Why do you make up crap that nobody else said or believes and then argue with yourself? Seems pretty silly.

Of course the El Niños and positive PDOs cause increased warming, adding to the longterm upward temperature trend created by the increased CO2 levels, as the scientists have been saying all along.

Here what NOAA was saying back in 1998.

EL NIÑO AND CLIMATE CHANGE: Record Temperature and Precipitation
NOAA
June 8, 1998

NOAA scientists announced today that The 1997/98 El Niño, one of the most significant climatic events of the century, produced extreme weather worldwide. El Niños have become more frequent and progressively warmer over the past century, and new data and analysis suggest that global warming is exacerbating the effects of El Niño. Global temperatures for January-May 1998 substantially exceed previous records. During this latest El Niño, temperature and precipitation records were broken across the United States. Many areas suffered heavy flooding, and a series of severe tornadoes has killed 122 people so far this year, already matching the annual record set in 1984. Elsewhere around the world, El Niño contributed to major droughts and wildfire in Mexico, Indonesia and Brazil; devastating floods in South America; and massive coral bleaching from Panama to Africa to Australia's Great Barrier Reef. Globally, 1997 was the warmest year on record. Average temperatures for January-May 1998 have since set new all-time highs. Combined land and ocean temperatures for the five-month period exceed the previous record by 0.25 C (0.45 F).

 

Actually our article doesn't say that at all. Your article is a pathetic attempt by NOAA to try and scare people into thinking that global warming is making El Nino's worse.

I dont know how old you are but I remember the warmmongers trying to ride El Nino for all it was worth trying to connect it to AGW on the flimsiest of evidence.

 

Complete rubbish. The lies about this that your denier cult puppet-masters tell you have no connection to reality. Climate scientists have been saying for many decades that El Niños add to surface temperature warming and La Niñas reduce surface temperature warming by transferring atmospheric heat to the oceans.

El Nino, La Nina and Global Warming
Scientific American
Bill Chameides
March 21, 2013
(excerpts)
Lots of processes affect the climate. Certainly greenhouse gases have an effect and it's clear that rising atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing a long-term rise in global temperatures. Another process that affects the climate is the El Nino-Southern Oscillation. During an El Nino, the tropical Pacific fills up with warm water, which enhances the transfer of heat from the ocean to the atmosphere. This tends to raise global temperatures. Conversely, during La Nina, the tropical Pacific fills up with cool water, which tends to depress heat transfer and therefore global temperatures. Now think about what happens when we superimpose a long-term rise in global temperature from greenhouse gases with the ENSO sloshing. We should find year-to-year variations in the global temperature rise with upward spikes in temperature during El Nino years and flatter or even modest short-term decreases during La Ninas. And this is exactly what we find when we examine the global temperature record.

Note, for example, that two (1998 and 2010) of the five years with the highest recorded temperatures (1998, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2010) occurred during El Ninos. The other three were neutral years; i.e., neither El Nino or La Nina. Also note that since 2000, there has been only one year with an El Nino (2010). Some have argued that this is a major reason why global [surface] temperatures in the 2000s have been flat. In fact, Grant Foster of Tempo Analytics and Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research have shown that when you use statistical techniques to filter out the influence of La Nina and El Nino, one finds that global temperatures have been steadily rising over the last 30 years. (See here and here.) Note, for example, in the graphic that 2006, 2008 and 2012 were the warmest La Nina years on record for this period.

 

Grant Foster is not a scientists or even a mathematician. He is s musician. There is no Tempo Analytics.

Tamino AKA Grant Foster is a total fraud who tried to pretend to be an educated statistician.

As to his method. Its crap. You cant filter out the ENSO using linear regressive analysis because the El Nino does not disappear when the La Nina begins. The warm El Nino waters continue to move around the earth during the La Nina. If you apply Fosters filter you get a residual warm trend from the El Nino waters moving their way around the globe.

Trenberth identified the problem with applying linear regressive filters to the ENSO. Well before Foster tried to claim that the spurious residual was a real signal.

Trenberth et al (2002)

 

Tamino (Grant Foster) debunks denier cult lies, misinformation and pseudo-science, so naturally you hate him and want to denigrate him.

He is actually a published researcher in the field of climate science. And a statistician who does statistical analysis for a living.

For example:

G. Foster, and S. Rahmstorf, "Global temperature evolution 1979–2010", Environmental Research Letters, vol. 6, pp. 044022, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/044022

 

Just about anything that promotes AGW gets published. So is he right or Trenberth right. Personally I think he just decided to sell the residual that Trenberth identified as a real trend because Foster is a known fraud.

No he is a musician. He started blogging as Tamino claiming to be a statistician. When by accident we found out that his real name was Grant Foster we learned that he was a musician with no education in stat what so ever.

As for his employment go find out what Tempo Analytics is. It doens't exist. He is a musician. Tempo Analytics, get it? Tempo ... duh. Its a fake. His title is a fake.

Now I would fully support someone who claims to be self taught so long as they admit that. Once they lie and claim to have an education that they don't they are forever frauds.

Foster is a fraud who lied about his education. That is why he fraudulently tried to sell the residual that Trenberth identified in 2002 as a real trend. Once a fraud always a fraud.

 

An excellent statistical paper suggesting the anthropomorphic affect could be temporary and not a long term phenomenon.

Polynomial cointegration tests of anthropogenic impact on global warming

http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/3/173/2012/esd-3-173-2012.pdf

 

No no no cointegration is crap because there isn't an excel function for it. Please ignore that it won the nobel prize.

 

Bwaaaahahahaha!

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.sott.net/article/255726-AGW-Bombshell-A-new-paper-shows-statistical-tests-for-global-warming-fails-to-find-statistically-significantly-anthropogenic-forcing

 

Oh dont worry Tamino will run around in his little ivory tower where he can delete anyone he wants and pretend that the thoroughly debunked it.

After all grant Froster works for Tempo Analytics, 303 Campbell Road, Garland, ME 04939.

Type that into google and see what you get. Its funny.

 

Well, so far I have found that the estimated value of that property out in the country is $48,600.

http://bayesianstats.wordpress.com/2010/03/24/bad-bayes-still-bad/

 

Many a warmmonger puts much faith into this moron.

 

Telling, isn't it.

 

I forgot to add that 303 Campbell Road, Garland, ME is an empty lot.

 

Actually, I'm pretty sure YOU are one of the people who has claimed the PDO was not a major contributor to the late-20th C warming trend.

Blatant question begging.

A few. Not "the."

 

LOL, warmers caught praising a AGW equivalent to a faith healer, and they go with it anyway.. ROFL, priceless..