"Desertphile" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 12:07:08 +1100, "Gordhill" wrote:


"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
...
Latest Hadley Global Temperature Data Show Accelerated Warming!


Please see:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3gl.jpg

Looking at your graph ...

The "accelerated warming" from 1970 to 1998 EXACTLY matches that from
1910
to 1940.

Idiot. Were you home schooled?



Please be explicit.
What exactly are you trying to say, aside from calling me an idiot?



Warmest Regards

B0nz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."
Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"If climate has not "tipped" in over 4 billion years it's not going to tip
now due to mankind. The planet has a natural thermostat"
Richard S. Lindzen, Atmospheric Physicist, Professor of Meteorology MIT,
Former IPCC Lead Author

"It does not matter who you are, or how smart you are, or what title you
have, or how many of you there are, and certainly not how many papers your
side has published, if your prediction is wrong then your hypothesis is
wrong. Period."
Professor Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."
"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"
"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"
http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog...ly-exaggerated

Before attacking hypothetical problems, let us first solve the real problems
that threaten humanity. One single water pump at an equivalent cost of a
couple of solar panels can indeed spare hundreds of Sahel women the daily
journey to the spring and spare many infections and lives.
Martin De Vlieghere, philosopher

"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that
it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of
mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible."
Bertrand Russell

On Feb 9, 1:42*pm, Dawlish wrote:
On Feb 9, 11:16*am, matt_sykes wrote:





On Feb 9, 1:32*am, Roger Coppock wrote:

Latest Hadley Global Temperature Data Show Accelerated Warming!

Please see:http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3gl.jpg

and

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3glSLOPE.jpg

The Land and Sea Surface Temperature data record an
accelerated temperature increase. *Here, from Hadley
Centre, are the global surface temperatures from 1850
to 2010. *Note that data for the last 17 years are all
above the linear trend. *This is the result of an
accelerated warming.

Please see:

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

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/te...hadcrut3gl.txt

The yearly means of these data are graphed he

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3gl.jpg

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

Coefficients:
* * * * * * *Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) -8.797803 * 0.526408 * -16.7 * 2e-16
Year * * * * 0.004474 * 0.000273 * *16.4 * 4.95e-36

Residual standard error: 0.161 on 159 degrees of freedom
Multiple R-squared: 0.63
F-statistic: *269 on 1 and 159 DF, *p-value: 4.95e-36

The 30-year rolling slopes for these data are graphed at
the URL given below:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3glSLOPE.jpg

Please note the rapid, 3.8 +- 0.2 K per century acceleration
of global warming rates starting in 1952.

So they have adjusted old data to show an increase in warming eh?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Amazing. After all you've been told. Some people just have not got the
intelligence to learn.

Give an example of adjustment to show an increase in warming". The
data is adjusted on a monthly basis, necessarily and the adjustments
are public and explained by GISS and NASA. Show me where it has been
done deliberately to show warming.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Show me where it hasnt shown warming!

On Feb 11, 9:25*am, matt_sykes wrote:
On Feb 9, 1:42*pm, Dawlish wrote:





On Feb 9, 11:16*am, matt_sykes wrote:

On Feb 9, 1:32*am, Roger Coppock wrote:

Latest Hadley Global Temperature Data Show Accelerated Warming!

Please see:http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3gl.jpg

and

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3glSLOPE.jpg

The Land and Sea Surface Temperature data record an
accelerated temperature increase. *Here, from Hadley
Centre, are the global surface temperatures from 1850
to 2010. *Note that data for the last 17 years are all
above the linear trend. *This is the result of an
accelerated warming.

Please see:

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

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/te...hadcrut3gl.txt

The yearly means of these data are graphed he

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3gl.jpg

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

Coefficients:
* * * * * * *Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) -8.797803 * 0.526408 * -16.7 * 2e-16
Year * * * * 0.004474 * 0.000273 * *16.4 * 4.95e-36

Residual standard error: 0.161 on 159 degrees of freedom
Multiple R-squared: 0.63
F-statistic: *269 on 1 and 159 DF, *p-value: 4.95e-36

The 30-year rolling slopes for these data are graphed at
the URL given below:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3glSLOPE.jpg

Please note the rapid, 3.8 +- 0.2 K per century acceleration
of global warming rates starting in 1952.

So they have adjusted old data to show an increase in warming eh?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Amazing. After all you've been told. Some people just have not got the
intelligence to learn.

Give an example of adjustment to show an increase in warming". The
data is adjusted on a monthly basis, necessarily and the adjustments
are public and explained by GISS and NASA. Show me where it has been
done deliberately to show warming.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Show me where it hasnt shown warming!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Where what hasn't shown warming? I've got to show you something??
Isn't it you and yours that are questioning the data and saying that
it is wrong. "Show me where (adjustments have been made) deliberately
to show warming" was what I asked. It's a reasonable question, as you
are saying this is exactly what has happened.

On Feb 11, 10:51*am, Dawlish wrote:
On Feb 11, 9:25*am, matt_sykes wrote:





On Feb 9, 1:42*pm, Dawlish wrote:

On Feb 9, 11:16*am, matt_sykes wrote:

On Feb 9, 1:32*am, Roger Coppock wrote:

Latest Hadley Global Temperature Data Show Accelerated Warming!

Please see:http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3gl.jpg

and

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3glSLOPE.jpg

The Land and Sea Surface Temperature data record an
accelerated temperature increase. *Here, from Hadley
Centre, are the global surface temperatures from 1850
to 2010. *Note that data for the last 17 years are all
above the linear trend. *This is the result of an
accelerated warming.

Please see:

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

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/te...hadcrut3gl.txt

The yearly means of these data are graphed he

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3gl.jpg

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

Coefficients:
* * * * * * *Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) -8.797803 * 0.526408 * -16.7 * 2e-16
Year * * * * 0.004474 * 0.000273 * *16.4 * 4.95e-36

Residual standard error: 0.161 on 159 degrees of freedom
Multiple R-squared: 0.63
F-statistic: *269 on 1 and 159 DF, *p-value: 4.95e-36

The 30-year rolling slopes for these data are graphed at
the URL given below:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3glSLOPE.jpg

Please note the rapid, 3.8 +- 0.2 K per century acceleration
of global warming rates starting in 1952.

So they have adjusted old data to show an increase in warming eh?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Amazing. After all you've been told. Some people just have not got the
intelligence to learn.

Give an example of adjustment to show an increase in warming". The
data is adjusted on a monthly basis, necessarily and the adjustments
are public and explained by GISS and NASA. Show me where it has been
done deliberately to show warming.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Show me where it hasnt shown warming!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Where what hasn't shown warming? I've got to show you something??

The coconuts clearly.

Isn't it you and yours that are questioning the data and saying that
it is wrong. "Show me where (adjustments have been made) deliberately
to show warming" was what I asked. It's a reasonable question, as you
are saying this is exactly what has happened.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In sci.skeptic matt_sykes wrote:
....
Yes, however allthe adjustments taken together always show a warming
trend, even though some individual stations might show cooling.

As you might expect just based on the number of locations with
a +ve, -ve and no trend.


mysql select count(*) from regr ;
+----------+
| count(*) |
+----------+
| 6039 |
+----------+
mysql select count(*)/6039 from regr where beta -.01;
+---------------+
| count(*)/6039 |
+---------------+
| 0.0977 |
+---------------+
mysql select count(*)/6039 from regr where beta .01;
+---------------+
| count(*)/6039 |
+---------------+
| 0.3886 |
+---------------+
mysql select count(*)/6039 from regr where abs(beta).01;
+---------------+
| count(*)/6039 |
+---------------+
| 0.5137 |
+---------------+
mysql

--
$This seems to be saying "in logic or philosphy an inverted if or circular
$argument are no good -- but in science we have different standards".
$You're right. That's exactly what I'm saying.
-- Mike Franklin , 20 Nov 2010

On Feb 12, 2:08*am, matt_sykes wrote:

Yes, however allthe adjustments taken together always show a warming
trend, even though some individual stations might show cooling.

And guess which ones won't be in the next 'global temperature' figures

On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 11:25:35 -0800 (PST), George
wrote:

On Feb 12, 2:08*am, matt_sykes wrote:

Yes, however allthe adjustments taken together always show a warming
trend, even though some individual stations might show cooling.

And guess which ones won't be in the next 'global temperature' figures

All of the data is included, you silly goose.


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz

In sci.skeptic Desertphile wrote:
On 11 Feb 2011 10:29:30 GMT, wrote:
....
mysql
Cool! Maybe I will put the various climatology-related databases
on my Remote MySQL server and offer the data as a free service.

I hope it's a secure version. I see so many attempts to
run exploits on Wintox-based mysql I've decided to block mine off
even though it's OpenBSD-based. There's even the occassional
distributed attack from 50 zombies.

--
[Stage 1 denial:]
There have been floods before and there will be floods again. The
Austrailian floods weren't even record breaking.
[Later turns out Monkey judges all Australian floods by height of Brisbane R].
-- Monkey Clumps , 30 Jan 2011 15:13 -0800

when the UNIPCC finally gets a handle on urban heat-
islanding, and the associated, city-swamped weather-
stations, then, they'll have some data.

On Sat, 12 Feb 2011 17:00:08 -0800 (PST), rasterspace
wrote:

when the UNIPCC finally gets a handle on urban heat-
islanding, and the associated, city-swamped weather-
stations, then, they'll have some data.

Idiot.


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz