On 04/16/2011 01:37 AM, Bill Ward wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2011 00:10:50 +0200, Tom P wrote:

On 04/12/2011 01:39 AM, Roger Coppock wrote:
The satellite record, in all its current interpretations, shows that
the air near the surface is warming. For background on the satellite
temperature proxy please see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satelli...e_measurements

The URL below is one of the more conservative records from the
University of Alabama at Huntsville.
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/public/m.../tltglhmam_5.4 The global
data are graphed he
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/UAH-MSU.jpg

The Remote Sensing Systems Lower Troposphere (TLT) analysis also shows
a temperature rise above the surface of the land and sea.
http://www.remss.com/data/msu/monthly_time_series/
RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_an d_Ocean_v03_3.txt
The data from 82.5N to 70S are graphed he
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/RSS-MSU.jpg


Roger,
I observe that after 3 days of exposure of this data to the skeptic
community, the primary reaction from skeptical quarters has been a
critical note that the data do not "show" continued warming.
This of course does invite a rally call to the false dichotomy.

As a consequence, I have taken the liberty of altering the subject line.
Your obdt. srvt.

Oops, I think you screwed the pooch there, Tom, by using the word
"abrupt". The data as shown does indeed show abrupt cooling several
times, as well as abrupt warming. Roger insists on using only a 30yr low
pass filter, and it's very hard to see any abrupt changes that way.

I suspect if you apply a 5yr lowpass zerophase filter, you'll see an
initial warming ramp until around 2000, then a plateau to the present.

It seems hard to explain how CO2 could cause that, since it's been rising
steadily since 1958.



Certainly the cyclic variations with a period of 3-4 years are not
caused by CO2, and reflect phenomena such as La Nina. The key word is
"cyclic".