On Jan 14, 3:47*am, Alan LeHun wrote:
In article eb5146ea-5049-4cae-8a27-fd00d75e7793
@g18g2000vbr.googlegroups.com, says...



which fails to mention that 1998 was the hottest year on
record,.

Wow, and you figured that out on your own! *That was kinda the point
oh wise one. *1998 was a peak that has yet to be surpassed after more
than ten years. *That would be an indication that the predicted
warming trend was wrong.

I think what he was saying oh master of not bothering to see *
points that contradict your position, is that the year has
obviously been cherry picked in order to produce that result.

It is easy to say, in each year that doesn't happen to be the
warmest, that warming has stopped since it is now "cooler" than
insert record breaking year here. It is also wrong and
disingenuous.

Has warming stopped since 1997? Has it stopped since 1999?

--
Alan LeHun

How long does that record have to go unbroken before we can conclude
that the warming trend might have ended?

In article ca453613-d006-4bb1-8a46-ad215c9319d8
@p24g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, says...

It is easy to say, in each year that doesn't happen to be the
warmest, that warming has stopped since it is now "cooler" than
insert record breaking year here. It is also wrong and
disingenuous.

Has warming stopped since 1997? Has it stopped since 1999?

--
Alan LeHun

How long does that record have to go unbroken before we can conclude
that the warming trend might have ended?

The record can still be broken even if we did go into a cooling
phase. It is irrelevant. As for what it takes before one does
say that a cooling phase has begun depends on many things. Here
it seems, it primarily depends on your opinion. I would say
that any cooling must go well beyond the natural variation that
is evident by whatever means you are using to measure.

Take
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sa...mperatures.png

Nobody could use that data, and then claim that a cooling trend
has begun. If they did, then they would also have to concede
that warming ended in 1983, 1987, 1992, 1996 and 1998.

If the records are important, then we were in a cooling phase
from 1987-1998. Anyone who actually makes these claims can not
be relied upon wrt their interpretation of data.

--
Alan LeHun

On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:28:54 +0000, Alan LeHun wrote:

In article ca453613-d006-4bb1-8a46-ad215c9319d8
@p24g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, says...

It is easy to say, in each year that doesn't happen to be the
warmest, that warming has stopped since it is now "cooler" than
insert record breaking year here. It is also wrong and
disingenuous.

Has warming stopped since 1997? Has it stopped since 1999?

--
Alan LeHun

How long does that record have to go unbroken before we can conclude
that the warming trend might have ended?

The record can still be broken even if we did go into a cooling phase.
It is irrelevant. As for what it takes before one does say that a
cooling phase has begun depends on many things. Here it seems, it
primarily depends on your opinion. I would say that any cooling must go
well beyond the natural variation that is evident by whatever means you
are using to measure.

Take
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sa...mperatures.png

That graph isn't temperature, it's "temperature anomaly", which means
that the raw temperature data didn't fit the AGW conclusion so they had
to "process" it to get the "right answer" that coincidentally got them
more funding.

Nobody could use that data, and then claim that a cooling trend has
begun. If they did, then they would also have to concede that warming
ended in 1983, 1987, 1992, 1996 and 1998.

If the records are important, then we were in a cooling phase from
1987-1998. Anyone who actually makes these claims can not be relied upon
wrt their interpretation of data.

On Jan 16, 4:28*pm, Alan LeHun wrote:
In article ca453613-d006-4bb1-8a46-ad215c9319d8
@p24g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, says...

It is easy to say, in each year that doesn't happen to be the
warmest, that warming has stopped since it is now "cooler" than
insert record breaking year here. It is also wrong and
disingenuous.

Has warming stopped since 1997? Has it stopped since 1999?

--
Alan LeHun

How long does that record have to go unbroken before we can conclude
that the warming trend might have ended?

The record can still be broken even if we did go into a cooling
phase. It is irrelevant.

Sure it can be broken even if we are going into a cooling phase. But
it impossible to claim we are in a warming phase yet never break that
record. If you extend the straight lines another 20 years the average
temp would be pretty close to the peak in 1998. If the record hasn't
been broken by then don't you think it would be safe to say the line
is wrong?

As for what it takes before one does
say that a cooling phase has begun depends on many things. Here
it seems, it primarily depends on your opinion. I would say
that any cooling must go well beyond the natural variation that
is evident by whatever means you are using to measure.

Takehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_Temperatures.png

Nobody could use that data, and then claim that a cooling trend
has begun. If they did, then they would also have to concede
that warming ended in 1983, 1987, 1992, 1996 and 1998.

Right, you have picked out cycles that last 4 or 5 years. It has now
been 12 years since 1998. So what is your opinion? How long must it
go without breaking the record before you can accept that the warming
trend has leveled off?

If the records are important, then we were in a cooling phase
from 1987-1998. Anyone who actually makes these claims can not
be relied upon wrt their interpretation of data.

--
Alan LeHun

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:22:17 -0800 (PST), Bruce Richmond
wrote:

On Jan 16, 4:28Â*pm, Alan LeHun wrote:
In article ca453613-d006-4bb1-8a46-ad215c9319d8
@p24g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, says...

It is easy to say, in each year that doesn't happen to be the
warmest, that warming has stopped since it is now "cooler" than
insert record breaking year here. It is also wrong and
disingenuous.

Has warming stopped since 1997? Has it stopped since 1999?

--
Alan LeHun

How long does that record have to go unbroken before we can conclude
that the warming trend might have ended?

The record can still be broken even if we did go into a cooling
phase. It is irrelevant.

Sure it can be broken even if we are going into a cooling phase. But
it impossible to claim we are in a warming phase yet never break that
record. If you extend the straight lines another 20 years the average
temp would be pretty close to the peak in 1998. If the record hasn't
been broken by then don't you think it would be safe to say the line
is wrong?


Even if the line _WAS_ right during the 1990s,
the "warming" may not have been due to CO2
concentration increase, it could have been either
UHI that itself leveled off when the sensors were
eventually totally surrounded by dry areas and
possibly some heat sources, or the changes made
in methods, equipment and station lists beginning
around 1990, or some of both.


As for what it takes before one does
say that a cooling phase has begun depends on many things. Here
it seems, it primarily depends on your opinion. I would say
that any cooling must go well beyond the natural variation that
is evident by whatever means you are using to measure.

Takehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_Temperatures.png

Nobody could use that data, and then claim that a cooling trend
has begun. If they did, then they would also have to concede
that warming ended in 1983, 1987, 1992, 1996 and 1998.

Right, you have picked out cycles that last 4 or 5 years. It has now
been 12 years since 1998. So what is your opinion? How long must it
go without breaking the record before you can accept that the warming
trend has leveled off?


Maybe an ophthalmologist could prescribe
prism eyeglasses so the AGW hold-outs could
see a line slanted upward even if it is level.


If the records are important, then we were in a cooling phase
from 1987-1998. Anyone who actually makes these claims can not
be relied upon wrt their interpretation of data.

--
Alan LeHun


Right, only the faithful can be relied on,
everybody else is ....................

In article faf978c3-9587-4d13-b4a5-1595ce147f99
@e37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com, says...
How long does that record have to go unbroken before we can conclude
that the warming trend might have ended?

The record can still be broken even if we did go into a cooling
phase. It is irrelevant.

Sure it can be broken even if we are going into a cooling phase. But
it impossible to claim we are in a warming phase yet never break that
record. If you extend the straight lines another 20 years the average
temp would be pretty close to the peak in 1998. If the record hasn't
been broken by then don't you think it would be safe to say the line
is wrong?

That is another loaded question because the trend can change
whilst continuing to be positive. Using a quick ruler against
the monitor extrapolation, it looked to me as though an
extrapolation of that line would reach the 1998 level in
2037/8.

Of course, it could never reach that if there weren't some
years that were above the line so one would expect the record
to be broken before then. Another look at that graph (and
extrapolating an imaginary join-the-peaks line) suggest that
the record would be broken around 2020/+-5.

All this assuming of course, that the trend is relatively
linear.

[...]

Nobody could use that data, and then claim that a cooling trend
has begun. If they did, then they would also have to concede
that warming ended in 1983, 1987, 1992, 1996 and 1998.

Right, you have picked out cycles that last 4 or 5 years. It has now
been 12 years since 1998. So what is your opinion? How long must it
go without breaking the record before you can accept that the warming
trend has leveled off?


Oh lordy. Erm, at most it might take 60 or 70 years if the
trend shallows (but remains positive). It's also possible that
that graph would show a leveling or negative trend in as little
as 6. (Or even 3, if there was a large negative trend). In the
end, it all depends on what time-frame you want to use.

Personally, I would ignore 1998 and read the graph with a
nominal 0.5 for that year. It would provide an easier look at
what the data is showing but unfortunately, would also be seen
by some as 'manipulating' the data.



--
Alan LeHun

In article ,
says...

Takehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_Temperatures.png


If the records are important, then we were in a cooling
phase
from 1987-1998. Anyone who actually makes these claims can not
be relied upon wrt their interpretation of data.

--
Alan LeHun


Right, only the faithful can be relied on,
everybody else is ....................



How do you interpret that graph? Don't read too much into that
question, just answer it as it is.



--
Alan LeHun

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:40:14 -0000, Alan LeHun wrote:

In article ,
says...

Takehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_Temperatures.png


If the records are important, then we were in a cooling
phase
from 1987-1998. Anyone who actually makes these claims can not
be relied upon wrt their interpretation of data.

--
Alan LeHun


Right, only the faithful can be relied on,
everybody else is ....................



How do you interpret that graph? Don't read too much into that
question, just answer it as it is.


I don't see a cooling on any global graph,
I do see a real plateau, too straight to be natural.

I am feeling good about the climate at the
moment, it is supposed to be 10 degrees above
normal for the next 7 days, only today, it failed
to reach the predicted maxT by 14 degrees, just
150 miles south where the sun was shining it
was 20 degrees warmer.