Weather Banter - View Single Post - June is tied for 10th warmest on NASA's 129-year Northern landrecord.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

On Jul 21, 6:27*am, Roger Coppock wrote:
June is tied for 10th warmest on NASA's 129-year Northern land record.

Lately, fossil fools on this newsgroup have invented their
own fantasy physics. *The following references are helpful
for those who want to know how things behave in the real
world.

An overview of Greenhouse gas theory from the
University of Chicago.http://forecast.uchicago.edu/archer....ouse_gases.pdf

Basic global greenhouse gas physics from MIT.http://www-paoc.mit.edu/labweb/notes/chap2.pdf

I wonder if misters Chemist, Bedo, and Dunderbar are
not too full of themselves to read a basic textbook?
The first reference, Archer's textbook, is for people
who aren't science students, which includes you three.

Despite fossil fool lies,
global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.

These hemispherically averaged temperature data come from NASA,http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/NH.Ts.txt
They represent the results of tens of millions of readings
taken at thousands of stations covering the lands of the Northern
Hemisphere over the last 129 years. *Yes, the data are corrected
for the urban heat island effect.

The Mean June temperature over the last 129 years is 14.033 C.
The Variance is 0.10958.
The Standard Deviation is 0.3310.

Rxy 0.763655 * Rxy^2 0.583169
TEMP = 13.592083 + (0.006788 * (YEAR-1879))
Degrees of Freedom = 127 * * * * F = 177.679765
Confidence of nonzero correlation = approximately
0.9999999999999999999999999 (25 nines), which is darn close to 100%!

The month of June in the year 2008,
is linearly projected to be 14.468,
* * * * * * * * *yet it was 14.61. - above projected
The sum of the residuals is 22.201923

Equal weight exponential least squares fit:
TEMP = 13.597633 * e^(.0004845 * (YEAR-1879))
The sum of the residuals is 22.13287

* Rank of the months of June
Year * Temp C * Anomaly * Z score
2005 * 14.96 * * 0.927 * * 2.80
2006 * 14.93 * * 0.897 * * 2.71
1998 * 14.85 * * 0.817 * * 2.47
2007 * 14.79 * * 0.757 * * 2.29
2002 * 14.76 * * 0.727 * * 2.20
1995 * 14.65 * * 0.617 * * 1.86
2001 * 14.64 * * 0.607 * * 1.83
2003 * 14.63 * * 0.597 * * 1.80
1990 * 14.63 * * 0.597 * * 1.80
2008 * 14.61 * * 0.577 * * 1.74 --
2004 * 14.61 * * 0.577 * * 1.74
1991 * 14.55 * * 0.517 * * 1.56
2000 * 14.53 * * 0.497 * * 1.50
MEAN * 14.033 * *0.000 * * 0.00
1917 * 13.65 * *-0.383 * *-1.16
1886 * 13.65 * *-0.383 * *-1.16
1902 * 13.63 * *-0.403 * *-1.22
1894 * 13.62 * *-0.413 * *-1.25
1918 * 13.60 * *-0.433 * *-1.31
1882 * 13.59 * *-0.443 * *-1.34
1888 * 13.57 * *-0.463 * *-1.40
1913 * 13.53 * *-0.503 * *-1.52
1903 * 13.49 * *-0.543 * *-1.64
1907 * 13.48 * *-0.553 * *-1.67
1904 * 13.47 * *-0.563 * *-1.70
1885 * 13.43 * *-0.603 * *-1.82
1881 * 13.32 * *-0.713 * *-2.15
1884 * 13.28 * *-0.753 * *-2.28

The most recent 175 continuous months, or 14 years and 7 months,
on this NH.Ts.txt data set are all above the 1951-1980
data set norm of 14 C.
There are 1542 months of data on this data set:
* -- 792 of them are at or above the norm.
* -- 750 of them are below the norm.
This run of 175 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.

thanks for the post roger