On Jan 12, 5:21*pm, chemist wrote:
On Jan 12, 7:29*pm, Roger Coppock wrote:





Latest Hadley Sea Temperature Data Show Accelerated Warming!

Please see:http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadSST2gl.jpg

The Sea Surface Temperature data, or SST, record an
accelerated temperature increase. *Here, from Hadley
Centre, are the global sea surface temperatures from
1850 to 2008. *As there are few urban centers in the
world's seas, these data are free from urban effects.
Note that data for the last 16 years are all above the
linear trend. *This is the result of accelerated warming.

Please see:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/te.../hadsst2gl.txt
--

The yearly means of these data are graphed he

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadSST2gl.jpg

Regression statistics for the line in the graph at
the URL given above a

Coefficients:
* * * * * * *Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) -7.658841 * 0.504840 * -15.2 * 2e-16
Year * * * * 0.003878 * 0.000262 * *14.8 * 2e-16

Residual standard error: 0.151 on 157 degrees of freedom
R-Squared: 0.58
F-statistic: *220 on 1 and 157 DF, *p-value: 2e-16
--

Yearly 30-year rolling slopes of the above data are
graphed he

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/hadS...e1850-2008.jpg

This analysis shows a 0.88K per century per century
acceleration in the sea surface temperature rise
between 1850 and 2008.

They also show that the CO2 rises with as SST rises
with an R^2 of 0.42 .with a 12 month smoothing
I dare say I could improve matters with the usual
5 year smoothing
Try plotting Atmospheric CO2 v *CO2 production
and tell us the R^2 of that if you dare.

BTW I see the Muana loa CO2 data has been
"corrected".
The Change Log says
" We corrected an error in the December 2008 MLO monthly mean value
posted to the web on 10 January 2009. The December 2008 value was
incorrectly computed using an earlier version of the codebase (see
Change Log Notes for 4 August 2008).

We have also changed the monthly web update from the 3rd of each month
to the 10th of each month to give us a few more days to properly
evaluate the measurements for the just-completed month."
Do they need more time to to make sure CO2 keeps rising?
They keep making what appear to be easily avoidable mistakes.-

And why they think their little averaged Muana Loa is an accurate
portrayal. Anartica graphs are linear and about 8 points behind.
These graphs much better show the mixing, since the fact is that the
annual increase in air concentrations is nowhere near that of actual
emissions, so one must refer to the lowest reading. Only the Anartica
data shows the actual mixing and actual increases in the atmopshere.

Where is the valid analysis of ocean temperatures?
They must revoke any study which shows cooling. According to this
study, the instuments are so biased that no valid study can be
conducted. Unless of course it shows warming and a general trend of
warming.

They had to pull out all stops to rescind this study, even sacrificing
the viability of their instruments.

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/people/lyman/Pdf/heat_2006.pdf

KD