On 4/04/09 4:52, in article , "oonbz"
wrote:

Dr Roy Spencer checks March's data from NASA's Aqua satellite - and, nope,
still not sign
of any warming since 2002.



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a...n/comments/the
_march_of_cool_facts/


not a recognized scientific sources.

Warming peaked most recently in 2005

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.txt

1998 .57
1999 .33
2000 .33
2001 .48
2002 .56
2003 .55
2004 .48
2005 .62
2006 .55
2007 .57
2008 .44

*****

Note the drop from 1998 to 2001, the deniers of that
period could have said global cooling was occurring.

Next, pay NO attention to yearly figures but ao
5 year means. This rose from 0.38 in 1996 to 0.53
in 2006. In 1986 it was 0.17. So the over
all trend, 0.17 = 0.38 = 0,53 in 10 year
chucks it up up up.

So any statement like "no sign of any warming since 2002."
is misleading, false.

Earl Evleth wrote:
On 4/04/09 4:52, in article , "oonbz"
wrote:

Dr Roy Spencer checks March's data from NASA's Aqua satellite - and, nope,
still not sign
of any warming since 2002.



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a...n/comments/the
_march_of_cool_facts/


not a recognized scientific sources.

Warming peaked most recently in 2005

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.txt

1998 .57
1999 .33
2000 .33
2001 .48
2002 .56
2003 .55
2004 .48
2005 .62
2006 .55
2007 .57
2008 .44

*****

Note the drop from 1998 to 2001, the deniers of that
period could have said global cooling was occurring.

Next, pay NO attention to yearly figures but ao
5 year means. This rose from 0.38 in 1996 to 0.53
in 2006. In 1986 it was 0.17. So the over
all trend, 0.17 = 0.38 = 0,53 in 10 year
chucks it up up up.

So any statement like "no sign of any warming since 2002."
is misleading, false.

AGW deniers hate 5 year running means, it destroys all their evidence.

Q


--
The only thing to fear is invisible stupidity.

On Apr 4, 10:37*am, qqq_qqq wrote:
Earl Evleth wrote:
On 4/04/09 4:52, in article , "oonbz"
wrote:

Dr Roy Spencer checks March's data from NASA's Aqua satellite - and, nope,
still not sign
of any warming since 2002.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a.../heraldsun/com....
_march_of_cool_facts/

not a recognized scientific sources.

Warming peaked most recently in 2005

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.txt

*1998 * * * .57 * *
*1999 * * * .33 * *
*2000 * * * .33 * *
*2001 * * * .48 * *
*2002 * * * .56 * *
*2003 * * * .55 * *
*2004 * * * .48 * *
*2005 * * * .62 * *
*2006 * * * .55 * *
*2007 * * * .57 * *
*2008 * * * .44 *

*****

Note the drop from 1998 to 2001, the deniers of that
period could have said global cooling was occurring.

Next, pay NO attention to yearly figures but ao
5 year means. This rose from 0.38 in 1996 to 0.53
in 2006. In 1986 it was 0.17. So the over
all trend, 0.17 = 0.38 = 0,53 in 10 year
chucks it up up up.

So any statement like "no sign of any warming since 2002."
is misleading, false.

AGW deniers hate 5 year running means, it destroys all their evidence.

They hate statistical significance for the same reasons.

qqq_qqq wrote:
Earl Evleth wrote:
On 4/04/09 4:52, in article , "oonbz"
wrote:

Dr Roy Spencer checks March's data from NASA's Aqua satellite - and, nope,
still not sign
of any warming since 2002.



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a...n/comments/the
_march_of_cool_facts/

not a recognized scientific sources.

Warming peaked most recently in 2005

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.txt

1998 .57
1999 .33
2000 .33
2001 .48
2002 .56
2003 .55
2004 .48
2005 .62
2006 .55
2007 .57
2008 .44

*****

Note the drop from 1998 to 2001, the deniers of that
period could have said global cooling was occurring.

Next, pay NO attention to yearly figures but ao
5 year means. This rose from 0.38 in 1996 to 0.53
in 2006. In 1986 it was 0.17. So the over
all trend, 0.17 = 0.38 = 0,53 in 10 year
chucks it up up up.

So any statement like "no sign of any warming since 2002."
is misleading, false.

AGW deniers hate 5 year running means, it destroys all their evidence.

Q


Unless they get first choice which 5 years to pick.