Global Warming is History.

based on data from the National Climatic Data Center ^ | 2-13-08 | dangus

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH

The Great Global Warming Swindle Video - Back On The Net!!(Mash Here!)

---

[cogitator]

Dueling figures.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Still using erroneous NASA data.

[cogitator]

That means that despite the El Nino, it was still cooler than 1998

Note also that with no El Nino at all, NOAA called 2005 just barely cooler than 1998. Last year's El Nino was very weak; somewhat surprisingly, the subsequent La Nina has turned out to be fairly strong, so since October that cooling influence has been noticeable. Hence your temperature "plunge" in 2008.

The La Nina influence is truly stunning. Here's the anomaly map for February 11:

Here's the sea surface height anomalies for January 20. The central La Nina depression is very strong. Interesting that the Arabian Sea had positive anomalies in January.

It'll be interesting to see when the La Nina dissipates. This is really an important event.

[AndyTheBear]

Hence your temperature "plunge" in 2008.

What exactly do the quotes around "plunge" imply?

[Publius6961]

Even sympathetic ding-dongs who assemble "science" documentaries, contradict anthropogenic global warming (mostly by ignoring the subject), the latest I've seen being Blue Planet, Seas of Life. They contradict themselves blatantly and shamelessly by making statements like "world weather" (and by implication, climate) are driven by the oceans, but neglect to mention that until recently, climate models ignored the oceans totally and currently the ocean's role in these models is not totally understood or effectively modeled, and the models are still wild guesses.

But the obligatory "global warming" warming is there, towards the end of the episode, hoping that the viewer has forgotten the first half of the presentation, where the explicit statement has been made, that "people expect the weather they have experienced during their lifetimes as 'normal', whereas the one constant, forever, with climate has been its cycles and variability".

Why is current "science" held suddenly in such low regard?
Simple. For the last 20 years or so, it has ceased to be science. It is now political hysteria.

[dangus]

Not dueling data sources, though. You’re just using stale data.

[dangus]

>> Last year’s El Nino was very weak; <<

You’re confusing the El Nino with a global temperature surge, and a La Nina with a global temperature plunge The El Nino effect in the equatorial Pacific ocean was far from 1998, but rather strong. Conversely now, what you’re calling La Nina is mostly dead. Look at your own map: The Pacific coast of Latin America isn’t cool at all! There are residual effects in the mid-Pacific equator, but that’s a small portion of the total global cool-weather anomaly: There’s a cold band wrapping the globe at 60 degrees South. There’s a massive cold band in the Pacific northeast (which is contradictory to La Nina’s, incidentally). The Indian ocean, despite the sea height anomaly you point out, is actually cold. It’s cold all over.

[dangus]

>> Note also that with no El Nino at all, NOAA called 2005 just barely cooler than 1998. <<

I think I did: “On the other hand, what had been a phenomenal aberration in 1998 had become commonplace in the new millennium.”

>> It’ll be interesting to see when the La Nina dissipates. This is really an important event. <<

It is dissipating; that’s why this new data is so surprising.

[xzins]

1. McCain will pick Romney because of his money, if Romney’s willing to use his money.

2. McCain will pick Romney because both have extremely liberal parts of their record.

[cogitator]

Not dueling data sources, though. You’re just using stale data.

I'm pointing out that finding significance in an eight-year trend is an exercise in futility.

[RightWhale]

GW is the law.

[bert]

My yard is a wildlife preserve and the wild cats from all my neighbors houses come to kill my chipmunks and stalk the towhees

[r9etb]

Good stuff ... but it’s still only one year — not nearly enough to indicate a trend of any sort.

[dangus]

>> I’m pointing out that finding significance in an eight-year trend is an exercise in futility. <<

We agree. Im not saying that this cooling is going to become a disastrous cooling trend. I’m only pointing out that a brief warm spell does not a global calamity make. But it’s truly astounding cherry picking of data to use 8-year trends, when the last surge in warming happened exactly eight years ago. Why not use a five year trend? Oh, that’s right... the trend tips the wrong way.

[dangus]

>> Good stuff ... but it’s still only one year — not nearly enough to indicate a trend of any sort. <<

Check out post #34.

[cogitator]

You’re confusing the El Nino with a global temperature surge, and a La Nina with a global temperature plunge The El Nino effect in the equatorial Pacific ocean was far from 1998, but rather strong. Conversely now, what you’re calling La Nina is mostly dead. Look at your own map: The Pacific coast of Latin America isn’t cool at all!

I don't think I'm confusing anything. El Nino years are generally warm years (globally), and La Nina years are generally cool years (globally). That's because the Pacific is a big area of water, exerting an influence on the global averages.

Based on the indices, this La Nina is not "mostly dead". The Pacific Coast of Latin America is a special case; there are winter mountain-pass wind events that cause localized cooling. The warm anomalies there mean that there has been less of these events this winter, so where it usually frequently cold, it has not been as cold as often. The two indices below show the current status of this La Nina. They are acquired from this site: ENSO Quick Look

You can see that this La Nina is comparable in intensity (perhaps not duration yet) to the 1999 La Nina. The next graph shows the time history of this one:

And finally, here's the prediction for the next months:

Now, I don't you to think I'm trying to "snow" you with figures. Based on all of this information, it appears to me that the La Nina is still going, and it's a fairly strong one. I'd expect this to have an influence over much of the world. The figure below shows where La Nina cold events are supposed to have an influence:

Note in particular the east coast of Africa. Certainly this is a statistical compilation; if this teleconnection is happening, it may be displaced northward a bit this time, partially explaining the cool Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean temperatures.

So let's put it this way; the central Pacific Ocean is still much colder than average. Only when that condition subsides will it be possible to get a more complete sense of what global temperatures are doing.

[William Tell]

JDLinn said: I got my back yard to be a wildlife "registered" habitat ...

Just out of curiosity, what does it take to remove such a designation? Do you have to file an environmental impact report to justify denying all these threatened creatures the habitat upon which they are now dependent? Perhaps you are no longer the real owner of what you thought was your property.

[Old Professer]

cog has his wife’s inheritance invested in carbon credits.

[justa-hairyape]

Good article. One correction perhaps ?

A La Nina event (which causes cool temperatures in the Pacific) developed, as was no surprise. (I'd almost say these could be thought of as rebounding events after a La Nina, except earth scientists of all stripes would clobber me with ways in which this analogy was misleading... it's not actually known why La Nina events follow El Nino events.)

Should Read.

A La Nina event (which causes cool temperatures in the Pacific) developed, as was no surprise. (I'd almost say these could be thought of as rebounding events after a El Nino, except earth scientists of all stripes would clobber me with ways in which this analogy was misleading... it's not actually known why La Nina events follow El Nino events.)