Here, from Hadley Centre, are the global sea surface
temperatures from 1850 to 2006. Please see:

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

As predicted by Arrhenius over a century ago,
the rate of sea warming is slower than global land
warming. NASA GISS has global land surface
warming at .58K/per century between 1880 and
2006. (Please see:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts.txt)

These data come from:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

There are no urban centers in the sea, but watch
the fossil fools blame this on UHI anyway.

Roger Coppock wrote:
Here, from Hadley Centre, are the global sea surface
temperatures from 1850 to 2006. Please see:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadSST2gl.jpg
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts.txt)

Of course the SSTs warmed at the fastest rate from 1910 through 1945
with very little help from GHGs. The most recent thirty five
years warmed at a lesser rate, even with lots of reputed GHG forcing.

On Aug 20, 1:55 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:

There are no urban centers in the sea, but watch
the fossil fools blame this on UHI anyway.

Uhh, it's called the SUN, Poppycock.

As predicted by Arrhenius over a century ago,
the rate of sea warming is slower than global land
warming.

That's a stupid statement. How much heat can the Oceans absorb?
Apples and oranges.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy/topics

Roger Coppock wrote:
Here, from Hadley Centre, are the global sea surface
temperatures from 1850 to 2006. Please see:

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

As predicted by Arrhenius over a century ago,
the rate of sea warming is slower than global land
warming. NASA GISS has global land surface
warming at .58K/per century between 1880 and
2006. (Please see:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts.txt)

These data come from:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

Why is 1970-ish the baseline for the temperature anomaly?

What was the sensitivity/accuracy of the thermometers used?

Why should I care that sea surface temperatures have risen over the past
150 years?

Peter Franks wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote:
Here, from Hadley Centre, are the global sea surface
temperatures from 1850 to 2006. Please see:

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

As predicted by Arrhenius over a century ago,
the rate of sea warming is slower than global land
warming. NASA GISS has global land surface
warming at .58K/per century between 1880 and
2006. (Please see:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts.txt)

These data come from:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

Why is 1970-ish the baseline for the temperature anomaly?

What was the sensitivity/accuracy of the thermometers used?

Why should I care that sea surface temperatures have risen over the past
150 years?

If one aspirin helps then 30 will really fix me up - huh.
This is a typical way of thinking, which overflows into Global Warming,
people think that if a little Co2 makes it a half degree warmer then a
lot of Co2 will make it really hot.



--
http://OutSourcedNews.com
Our constitution protects criminals, drunks and U.S. Senators. Which at
times are, one and the same...

The problem with the global warming theory, is that a theory is like a
bowl of ice-cream, it only takes a little dab of bull**** to ruin the
whole thing. - Gump That -

On Aug 20, 4:55 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
Here, from Hadley Centre, are the global sea surface
temperatures from 1850 to 2006. Please see:

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

As predicted by Arrhenius over a century ago,
the rate of sea warming is slower than global land
warming. NASA GISS has global land surface
warming at .58K/per century between 1880 and
2006. (Please see:http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts.txt)

These data come from:http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

There are no urban centers in the sea, but watch
the fossil fools blame this on UHI anyway.

You *could* blame it on the assumption that all sea going vessels
simultaneously switched from bucket measurement to water intake
measurement; a false assumption which biases the record.

You *could* blame it on the XBT devices which have been proven to have
a warm bias, see Gouretski et al. 2006, obviously biasing the record.

Or you could just ignore any quality control issues with the data and
scream about the falling sky because the point suits you.

On Aug 20, 5:19 pm, Peter Franks wrote:
[ . . . ]
Why should I care that sea surface temperatures have risen over the past
150 years?
LOL!
Isn't that about what one lobster said to
another as the water in their pot slowly
warmed?

On Aug 20, 6:17 pm, wrote:
[ . . . ]
You *could* blame it on the assumption that all sea going vessels
simultaneously switched from bucket measurement to water intake
measurement; a false assumption which biases the record.

You *could* blame it on the XBT devices which have been proven to have
a warm bias, see Gouretski et al. 2006, obviously biasing the record.

Or you could just ignore any quality control issues with the data and
scream about the falling sky because the point suits you.

If you have better data, you are certainly welcome
to post them here. Until then, science sides with
data over conjecture.

On Aug 20, 4:33 pm, Al Bedo wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote:
Here, from Hadley Centre, are the global sea surface
temperatures from 1850 to 2006. Please see:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadSST2gl.jpg
These data come from:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

Of course the SSTs warmed at the fastest rate from 1910 through 1945

An acceleration of:
5.6 +- .4 K/century^2
with yearly slopes computed on a 30-year rolling average.

with very little help from GHGs. The most recent thirty five

The presented data say the most recent 55 years
that 1952 to 2006 when analyzed with a 30-year
rolling average. This period has an acceleration
of 4.3 +- .1 K/century^2

years warmed at a lesser rate, even with lots of reputed GHG forcing.

What a stupid stupid strawman! No responsable
person claims that greenhouse gases are the only
climate forcing.

There are many other things that cause climate change.
Below, please find a graph of several of them. Note that
the green line, representing man-made greenhouse gas
emissions easily dominates all other potential causes of the
observed warming today and that they are growing the fastest.
Please see:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:C...ttribution.png

http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/figspm-3.htm

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/crowley.html
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/pal...al-4_12_01.txt