On Jan 25, 5:49*pm, "sshea" wrote:
[ . . . ]
Jumping on short term coolings to deny AGW shows a large degree of
ignorance. It's a little bit like saying the day's not so hot everytime the
sun goes behind a cloud.

Truer words are seldom written on this newsgroup.

On 1/25/09 7:20 PM, in article
,
"Frogwatch" wrote:

On Jan 25, 6:48 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
8th warmest December in 129 years of the NASA global ground record

In the real world,
outside the fossil fuel industry's spin and lies,
global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.

** The Copcock knows about spin and lies~~~
that is all he posts



Neither Roger nor NASA types must get outside much. They actually
think it has been warm. Rog, any chance they screwed up this data
too? They have made it a habit.

There is no question that Hansen cooks the record books

On Jan 26, 1:38*pm, "Buerste" wrote:
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message

... 8th warmest December in 129 years of the NASA global ground record

snip

NASA

N(ever) A S(traight) A(nswer)

My mother worked for NASA for 30 years,

Really?

she had stories about what they
announced and why. *

Wow! Did she report it to Congress? Write to the relevant oversight
bodies?

They WILL do anything for funding!

Wow! Did she report it to Congress? Write to the relevant oversight
bodies?

No? But she told it to you eh? And now you're telling us.

Just as well we have the internet or we'd never have found out.

Fran

"Fran" wrote in message
...
On Jan 26, 1:38 pm, "Buerste" wrote:
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message

...
8th warmest December in 129 years of the NASA global ground record

snip

NASA

N(ever) A S(traight) A(nswer)

My mother worked for NASA for 30 years,

Really?

she had stories about what they
announced and why.

Wow! Did she report it to Congress? Write to the relevant oversight
bodies?

They WILL do anything for funding!

Wow! Did she report it to Congress? Write to the relevant oversight
bodies?

No? But she told it to you eh? And now you're telling us.

Just as well we have the internet or we'd never have found out.

Fran
***********************************************

No, she reported nothing, she wanted to keep her job. Probably like a LOT
of people! I don't much care what you think of that. I can't prove her
stories but I can prove her career at NASA Glenn. But, you can believe
anything that you would like to, don't let anything interfere with what you
want to believe!

On Jan 25, 10:27*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Jan 25, 10:05 pm, "GeekBoy" wrote:





"sshea" wrote in message

...

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
....
On Jan 25, 6:48 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
8th warmest December in 129 years of the NASA global ground record

In the real world,
outside the fossil fuel industry's spin and lies,
global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.
Please see:

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporat...20080923c.html

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

The most recent 193 continuous months, or 16 years and 1 months,
on this GLB.Ts.txt data set are all above the 1951-1980
data set norm of 14 C.
There are 1548 months of data on this data set:
* -- 755 of them are at or above the norm.
* -- 793 of them are below the norm.
This run of 193 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.

Neither Roger nor NASA types must get outside much. *They actually
think it has been warm. *Rog, any chance they screwed up this data
too? *They have made it a habit.

Why do such inane snipes remind me of a frog in a pot.

Take a good look at the link that was provided above, specifically the
graph showing the global average temperature anomaly from 1975 to 2007,
relative to the 1961-1990 average. . Where is the cooling?
Quote: In La Niña years - when cold water rises to the surface of the
Pacific Ocean - temperatures can be considerably colder than normal.
Volcanic eruptions can also cause temporary drops in global temperatures
because of huge amounts of dust thrown high into the atmosphere that
reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the surface. A La Nina was
present throughout 2007 and much of 2008; despite this temporary cooling,
2008 is currently the tenth warmest in the global record.

Quote: As a result of such fluctuations, global average temperature trends
calculated over ten-year periods have varied since the mid-1970s, from a
modest cooling to a warming rate of more than 0.3 °C per decade. Similar
behaviour is also seen in individual model predictions of future climate
change where the long-term warming trend is forecast to exceed 2 °C per
century. Even then, due to the natural variations in climate, we expect to
see ten-year periods both globally and regionally with little or no
warming and other ten-year periods with very rapid warming. This complex
behaviour of the climate system shows why we need to examine much longer
periods than ten years if we are to fully understand and quantify how the
climate is changing.

Jumping on short term coolings to deny AGW shows a large degree of
ignorance. It's a little bit like saying the day's not so hot everytime
the sun goes behind a cloud.

My air conditioner thermostat does not lie.
Useage prior to the fall has decreased by a month for the 3 years.
Hmmm,,,go figure..
You can deny global cooling all you want, but my A/C tells the truth.

I happen to live in FL where it was a seriously cold Dec. *My in-laws
live in N. IL where it was a seriously cold Dec, they say the coldest
since 1979. *In AK is was a very cold Dec.. *So we seem to have a very
large geographical distribution to very cold weather.
NASA also, *has had a few problems with their data set, like having it
be off by over a month in the Fall. *NASA can not be considered a
reliable source anymore. *Real life experience trumps theory and real
life says Dec was cold over most of the world.
AGW is nonsense concocted by people who think it'll get them more
funding for studies.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm starting to get a laugh out of the Global Warming Alarmists.
Their tired old mantras never end. The world warms a bit coming out of
the Little Ice Age, and the last major ice age, and they get all in
knots and blame it on manki.. oops.. personkind.
For some reason, they think all the other warmings and coolings
were natural, but this time it is ALL OUR FAULT. That is, except for
some Alarmists who try to deny past warmings and coolings.. (Think...
"We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period")
Get it through your heads Alamists. Climate always changes.
Climate history is much larger in time then your puny short lives. You
must think much of yourselves to believe climate should stay the way
is was when you were younger.

But of course.... your using climate change as a tool to obtain
political power for social engineering to build socialism.
The green environmental movement, with the AGW Alarmists. The new
hiding place for atheistic Marxists, their far right fascist cousins,
pagan Gaia worshippers, socialist busy bodies, and the Liberal
chattering class and all others who wish to use AGW Alarmism to gain
political power over society and put an end to individual freedom in
the world. People should serve almighty government. Government should
not be the servant of the people.

On Jan 26, 5:30*pm, "Buerste" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message

...
On Jan 26, 1:38 pm, "Buerste" wrote:

"Roger Coppock" wrote in message

....
8th warmest December in 129 years of the NASA global ground record

snip

NASA

N(ever) A S(traight) A(nswer)

My mother worked for NASA for 30 years,

Really?

she had stories about what they
announced and why.

Wow! Did she report it to Congress? Write to the relevant oversight
bodies?

They WILL do anything for funding!

Wow! Did she report it to Congress? Write to the relevant oversight
bodies?

No? But she told it to you eh? And now you're telling us.

Just as well we have the internet or we'd never have found out.

Fran
***********************************************

No, she reported nothing, she wanted to keep her job. *Probably like a LOT
of people! *I don't much care what you think of that. *I can't prove her
stories but I can prove her career at NASA Glenn. *But, you can believe
anything that you would like to, don't let anything interfere with what you
want to believe!

Your irony meter is on the fritz.

Fran

If you were correct, what would be the cause of this non-phenomenon.


"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
...
8th warmest December in 129 years of the NASA global ground record

In the real world,
outside the fossil fuel industry's spin and lies,
global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.
Please see:

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporat...20080923c.html

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

The Mean December temperature over the last 129 years is 14.012 C.
The Variance is 0.10268.
The Standard Deviation is 0.3204.

Rxy 0.62095 Rxy^2 0.38558
TEMP = 13.664771 + (0.005343 * (YEAR-1879))
Degrees of Freedom = 127 F = 79.699722
Confidence of nonzero correlation = approximately
0.99999999999999 (14 nines)
The month of December in the year 2008,
is linearly projected to be 14.354,
yet it was 14.57. -- Above the trend.
The sum of the absolute errors is 26.239346

Equal weight exponential least squares fit:
TEMP = 13.670899 * e^(.0003802 * (YEAR-1879))
The sum of the absolute errors is 26.163591

Rank of the months of December
Year Temp C Anomaly Z score
2006 14.84 0.828 2.58
2003 14.76 0.748 2.33
2005 14.72 0.708 2.21
1998 14.70 0.688 2.15
2004 14.65 0.638 1.99
2001 14.63 0.618 1.93
2007 14.61 0.598 1.87
2008 14.57 0.558 1.74 --
1997 14.53 0.518 1.62
1987 14.48 0.468 1.46
1990 14.47 0.458 1.43
1979 14.46 0.448 1.40
2002 14.45 0.438 1.37
MEAN 14.012 0.000 0.00
1908 13.67 -0.342 -1.07
1933 13.59 -0.422 -1.32
1920 13.59 -0.422 -1.32
1903 13.58 -0.432 -1.35
1909 13.55 -0.462 -1.44
1893 13.51 -0.502 -1.57
1929 13.50 -0.512 -1.60
1892 13.47 -0.542 -1.69
1902 13.45 -0.562 -1.75
1910 13.41 -0.602 -1.88
1907 13.39 -0.622 -1.94
1916 13.26 -0.752 -2.35
1884 13.14 -0.872 -2.72
1917 13.13 -0.882 -2.75

The most recent 193 continuous months, or 16 years and 1 months,
on this GLB.Ts.txt data set are all above the 1951-1980
data set norm of 14 C.
There are 1548 months of data on this data set:
-- 755 of them are at or above the norm.
-- 793 of them are below the norm.
This run of 193 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.

On Jan 25, 10:27*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Jan 25, 10:05 pm, "GeekBoy" wrote:



"sshea" wrote in message

...

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
....
On Jan 25, 6:48 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
8th warmest December in 129 years of the NASA global ground record

In the real world,
outside the fossil fuel industry's spin and lies,
global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.
Please see:

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporat...20080923c.html

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

The most recent 193 continuous months, or 16 years and 1 months,
on this GLB.Ts.txt data set are all above the 1951-1980
data set norm of 14 C.
There are 1548 months of data on this data set:
* -- 755 of them are at or above the norm.
* -- 793 of them are below the norm.
This run of 193 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.

Neither Roger nor NASA types must get outside much. *They actually
think it has been warm. *Rog, any chance they screwed up this data
too? *They have made it a habit.

Why do such inane snipes remind me of a frog in a pot.

Take a good look at the link that was provided above, specifically the
graph showing the global average temperature anomaly from 1975 to 2007,
relative to the 1961-1990 average. . Where is the cooling?
Quote: In La Niña years - when cold water rises to the surface of the
Pacific Ocean - temperatures can be considerably colder than normal.
Volcanic eruptions can also cause temporary drops in global temperatures
because of huge amounts of dust thrown high into the atmosphere that
reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the surface. A La Nina was
present throughout 2007 and much of 2008; despite this temporary cooling,
2008 is currently the tenth warmest in the global record.

Quote: As a result of such fluctuations, global average temperature trends
calculated over ten-year periods have varied since the mid-1970s, from a
modest cooling to a warming rate of more than 0.3 °C per decade. Similar
behaviour is also seen in individual model predictions of future climate
change where the long-term warming trend is forecast to exceed 2 °C per
century. Even then, due to the natural variations in climate, we expect to
see ten-year periods both globally and regionally with little or no
warming and other ten-year periods with very rapid warming. This complex
behaviour of the climate system shows why we need to examine much longer
periods than ten years if we are to fully understand and quantify how the
climate is changing.

Jumping on short term coolings to deny AGW shows a large degree of
ignorance. It's a little bit like saying the day's not so hot everytime
the sun goes behind a cloud.

My air conditioner thermostat does not lie.
Useage prior to the fall has decreased by a month for the 3 years.
Hmmm,,,go figure..
You can deny global cooling all you want, but my A/C tells the truth.

I happen to live in FL where it was a seriously cold Dec. *My in-laws
live in N. IL where it was a seriously cold Dec, they say the coldest
since 1979. *In AK is was a very cold Dec.. *So we seem to have a very
large geographical distribution to very cold weather.

And we've been in the 60s and near 70 on and off in north Georgia, in
Jan.

NASA also, *has had a few problems with their data set, like having it
be off by over a month in the Fall. *NASA can not be considered a
reliable source anymore.

Yeah, right-wing blogs are so much more scientific!


*Real life experience trumps theory and real
life says Dec was cold over most of the world.

Don't you just love it when these denialists show their true colors by
not letting facts get in the way of their closed minds?

AGW is nonsense concocted by people who think it'll get them more
funding for studies.

Idiot alert!

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate...msu2008-pg.gif

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate...msu2008-pg.gif