Just wondering on the subject header when looking at the two sites below as
the 2003 data is correlated. It is now 5 years since the warmest year of
all - 1998 with 2003 coming in at third behind 2002. 2000 and 2001 are even
lower.

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate...jan-dec_pg.gif

According to the data contained above, more years (5) have passed since the
record was last broken than at any time since the rapid warming started in
the 1980's apart from the period 1990 to 1995 when one may conclude a forced
temporary cooling occurred as a result of major volcanic eruptions in 1991.
AFAIIA, such events have not occurred in the post 1998 period, at least to
anything like the major 1991 volcanic event which is well documented.

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/...nn/global.html

Regardless of overall temperature, some interesting data in this report such
as:

"As shown in the time series to the right, mean Northern Hemisphere snow
cover extent during the winter season (December-February) was the second
highest since records began in 1967."

A very simplistic overall analysis which may miss many points but I will be
looking forward with interest to the trend as it develops for 2004 and where
the individual months come out compared to the long term average.

Happy New Year, whatever the weather - either locally or globally

--
Pete

Please take my dog out twice to e-mail

---------------------------------------------------------------
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer and
do not represent the views, policy or understanding of any
other person or official body.
---------------------------------------------------------------

"Pete B" wrote in message
...
Just wondering on the subject header when looking at the two sites below
as
the 2003 data is correlated. It is now 5 years since the warmest year of
all - 1998 with 2003 coming in at third behind 2002. 2000 and 2001 are
even
lower.

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate...jan-dec_pg.gif

According to the data contained above, more years (5) have passed since
the
record was last broken than at any time since the rapid warming started in
the 1980's apart from the period 1990 to 1995 when one may conclude a
forced
temporary cooling occurred as a result of major volcanic eruptions in
1991.
AFAIIA, such events have not occurred in the post 1998 period, at least to
anything like the major 1991 volcanic event which is well documented.

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/...nn/global.html

Regardless of overall temperature, some interesting data in this report
such
as:

"As shown in the time series to the right, mean Northern Hemisphere snow
cover extent during the winter season (December-February) was the second
highest since records began in 1967."

A very simplistic overall analysis which may miss many points but I will
be
looking forward with interest to the trend as it develops for 2004 and
where
the individual months come out compared to the long term average.

Happy New Year, whatever the weather - either locally or globally

--
Pete

Please take my dog out twice to e-mail

---------------------------------------------------------------
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer and
do not represent the views, policy or understanding of any
other person or official body.
---------------------------------------------------------------


Pete. I like it.
A new year and a new way of thinking.

Global Cooling!

Pete B wrote:
Just wondering on the subject header when looking at the two sites below as
the 2003 data is correlated. It is now 5 years since the warmest year of
all - 1998 with 2003 coming in at third behind 2002. 2000 and 2001 are even
lower.

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate...jan-dec_pg.gif

According to the data contained above, more years (5) have passed since the
record was last broken than at any time since the rapid warming started in
the 1980's apart from the period 1990 to 1995 when one may conclude a forced
temporary cooling occurred as a result of major volcanic eruptions in 1991.
AFAIIA, such events have not occurred in the post 1998 period, at least to
anything like the major 1991 volcanic event which is well documented.

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/...nn/global.html

Regardless of overall temperature, some interesting data in this report such
as:

"As shown in the time series to the right, mean Northern Hemisphere snow
cover extent during the winter season (December-February) was the second
highest since records began in 1967."

A very simplistic overall analysis which may miss many points but I will be
looking forward with interest to the trend as it develops for 2004 and where
the individual months come out compared to the long term average.

Happy New Year, whatever the weather - either locally or globally

--
Pete

Please take my dog out twice to e-mail

---------------------------------------------------------------
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer and
do not represent the views, policy or understanding of any
other person or official body.
---------------------------------------------------------------
in your dreams!suggest you go and take stats101 paying special

attention to the parts concerning signifinance

"nimbus" wrote in message
...


snipped.

in your dreams!suggest you go and take stats101 paying special

attention to the parts concerning signifinance

Meaningless and irrelevant!!

Statistics mean nothing other than what the future MIGHT be based on what
the past has been.

The weather and even more so, the financial worlds, are littered with total
failed forecasts based on statistical predictions from the recent past. What
statistics forecast the Stockmarket crashes just as the markets were,
unbeknown to even experts, peaking back in the late '90's? In the mid
1970's, climate statistics suggested a trend heading back downwards in
global temperature and the media hype was all about new ice ages. That all
looks very silly now doesn't it? I have little faith in statistics as a
future forecasting tool, the climate will do what nature dictates whatever
statistics may indicate about it.

As I said, I look forward to the real results of the coming year regarding
temperature levels to see whether the 5 years since the record was last
broken are a temporary blip on an otherwise continuing global temperature
rise or a real indication of a slowing of the rises over the last few years.

There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

"Pete B" wrote in message
...

The weather and even more so, the financial worlds, are littered with
total
failed forecasts based on statistical predictions from the recent past.
What
statistics forecast the Stockmarket crashes just as the markets were,
unbeknown to even experts, peaking back in the late '90's? In the mid
1970's, climate statistics suggested a trend heading back downwards in
global temperature and the media hype was all about new ice ages. That all
looks very silly now doesn't it? I have little faith in statistics as a
future forecasting tool, the climate will do what nature dictates whatever
statistics may indicate about it.


Yes, I must confess that every so often, when someone lectures me on future
trends, I look at the foreword to my AA Atlas of Great Britain (1967) which
talks of the coming ice age

After reading that one adopts a properly detached view :-))

Jim Webster

"Jim Webster" wrote in message
...

"Pete B" wrote in message
...

The weather and even more so, the financial worlds, are littered with
total
failed forecasts based on statistical predictions from the recent past.
What
statistics forecast the Stockmarket crashes just as the markets were,
unbeknown to even experts, peaking back in the late '90's? In the mid
1970's, climate statistics suggested a trend heading back downwards in
global temperature and the media hype was all about new ice ages. That
all
looks very silly now doesn't it? I have little faith in statistics as a
future forecasting tool, the climate will do what nature dictates
whatever
statistics may indicate about it.


Yes, I must confess that every so often, when someone lectures me on
future
trends, I look at the foreword to my AA Atlas of Great Britain (1967)
which
talks of the coming ice age

After reading that one adopts a properly detached view :-))


AIUI, the predictions of a forthcoming ice age were based not just on a
short-term temperature drop, but on the changing nature of the earth's orbit
around the sun. I was at school in the 1960s and early 1970s and remember
such things as writing a speculative essay on continental drift (not
confirmed until well into the 1970s) and also the "Ice Age" scare when the
Milankovitch theory was still being explored. During the same period we
were also speculating on whether Venus was an ocean planet or a desert
because there was no information - these were the days largely before robot
exploration of other planets.

Those less than a certain age (about 40 or so) may find it hard to
understand how little was known before the late 1960s compared to what is
known today.

There are some fairly obvious comments on the observations which started
this thread:

1) The CO2 level in the atmosphere is now getting on for twice the
undisturbed level. As temperature changes in the past have been correlated
with CO2 levels for periods of millions of years, it seems hard to believe
that our modification of the atmosphere is having no effect, much as certain
vested interests who do not wish to see their wasteful and profitable (but
only to themselves) lifestyles disturbed would like to believe so.

2) I believe the record warm year was associated with a large "El Nino"
event. These warm the whole globe by an amount larger than the currently
observed trend. In other words, 1998 may have been a "spike" sticking out
above the noise. It may need another large El Nino or a decade or two of
steady temperature rise before this record is broken.

3) There are other factors which may cause natural variations of a few
degrees on various timescales. Should one of these be now causing
temperatures to drop, this might mask a steady warming for some period of
time until there is a renewed, and possibly quite sharp, temperature rise.


But as has so rightly been said, you have to be so careful with statistics,
especially short period ones. 24 years of local weather records appear to
show a warming trend of about 0.25C since 1980. But superimposed on this is
annual variability of the order of 1.5C. Also, my records started (1980)
around the end of one of the coldest spells of recent times, so the apparent
"warming" trend could be due to irregular bunching of cold and warm years.

The blunt fact of the matter is that we currently have insufficient
information to say exactly what is happening with the climate beyond all
reasonable doubt. So we have conflicting stories about heat and drought or
about arctic Britain, depending on whose article you read. This gives
ammunition to the vested interests (on both sides) and allows the
politicians an excuse to do little but make token gestures.

The bad news is that by the time we *do* know beyond all reasonable doubt
what is happening, it may be too late...
--
- Yokel -
oo oo
OOO OOO
OO 0 OO
) ( I ) (
) ( /\ ) (
Yokel @ Ashurst New Forest
SU 336 107 17m a.s.l.

"Yokel" now posts via a spam-trap account.
Replace my alias with stevejudd to reply.

"Jim Webster" wrote in message
...

"Pete B" wrote in message
...

The weather and even more so, the financial worlds, are littered with
total
failed forecasts based on statistical predictions from the recent past.
What
statistics forecast the Stockmarket crashes just as the markets were,
unbeknown to even experts, peaking back in the late '90's? In the mid
1970's, climate statistics suggested a trend heading back downwards in
global temperature and the media hype was all about new ice ages. That
all
looks very silly now doesn't it? I have little faith in statistics as a
future forecasting tool, the climate will do what nature dictates
whatever
statistics may indicate about it.


Yes, I must confess that every so often, when someone lectures me on
future
trends, I look at the foreword to my AA Atlas of Great Britain (1967)
which
talks of the coming ice age

After reading that one adopts a properly detached view :-))


AIUI, the predictions of a forthcoming ice age were based not just on a
short-term temperature drop, but on the changing nature of the earth's orbit
around the sun. I was at school in the 1960s and early 1970s and remember
such things as writing a speculative essay on continental drift (not
confirmed until well into the 1970s) and also the "Ice Age" scare when the
Milankovitch theory was still being explored. During the same period we
were also speculating on whether Venus was an ocean planet or a desert
because there was no information - these were the days largely before robot
exploration of other planets.

Those less than a certain age (about 40 or so) may find it hard to
understand how little was known before the late 1960s compared to what is
known today.

There are some fairly obvious comments on the observations which started
this thread:

1) The CO2 level in the atmosphere is now getting on for twice the
undisturbed level. As temperature changes in the past have been correlated
with CO2 levels for periods of millions of years, it seems hard to believe
that our modification of the atmosphere is having no effect.

2) I believe the record warm year was associated with a large "El Nino"
event. These warm the whole globe by an amount larger than the currently
observed trend. In other words, 1998 may have been a "spike" sticking out
above the noise. It may need another large El Nino or a decade or two of
steady temperature rise before this record is broken.

3) There are other factors which may cause natural variations of a few
degrees on various timescales. Should one of these be now causing
temperatures to drop, this might mask a steady warming for some period of
time until there is a renewed, and possibly quite sharp, temperature rise.


But as has so rightly been said, you have to be so careful with statistics,
especially short period ones. 24 years of local weather records appear to
show a warming trend of about 0.25C since 1980. But superimposed on this is
annual variability of the order of 1.5C. Also, my records started (1980)
around the end of one of the coldest spells of recent times, so the apparent
"warming" trend could be due to irregular bunching of cold and warm years.

The blunt fact of the matter is that we currently have insufficient
information to say exactly what is happening with the climate beyond all
reasonable doubt. So we have conflicting stories about heat and drought or
about arctic Britain, depending on whose article you read. This gives
ammunition to the vested interests (on both sides) and allows the
politicians an excuse to do little but make token gestures.

The bad news is that by the time we *do* know beyond all reasonable doubt
what is happening, it may be too late...
--
- Yokel -
oo oo
OOO OOO
OO 0 OO
) ( I ) (
) ( /\ ) (
Yokel @ Ashurst New Forest
SU 336 107 17m a.s.l.

"Yokel" now posts via a spam-trap account.
Replace my alias with stevejudd to reply.

Pete B wrote:

"nimbus" wrote in message
...


snipped.


in your dreams!suggest you go and take stats101 paying special

attention to the parts concerning signifinance


Meaningless and irrelevant!!

Statistics mean nothing other than what the future MIGHT be based on what
the past has been.

The weather and even more so, the financial worlds, are littered with total
failed forecasts based on statistical predictions from the recent past. What
statistics forecast the Stockmarket crashes just as the markets were,
unbeknown to even experts, peaking back in the late '90's? In the mid
1970's, climate statistics suggested a trend heading back downwards in
global temperature and the media hype was all about new ice ages. That all
looks very silly now doesn't it? I have little faith in statistics as a
future forecasting tool, the climate will do what nature dictates whatever
statistics may indicate about it.

As I said, I look forward to the real results of the coming year regarding
temperature levels to see whether the 5 years since the record was last
broken are a temporary blip on an otherwise continuing global temperature
rise or a real indication of a slowing of the rises over the last few years.

There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

yoke1 has already replied adequately, but I would like to add that I am
utterly mystified by your comments about statistics.The numbers are all
we have - like astronomers, we can't experiment, so we must use the numbers.
There is a great difference between statistical forecasting in the
worlds of economics and finance on the one hand, where there is no
meaningful theoretical basis for the forecasts, and that of geophysics
on the other hand, with a strong body of knowledge about the physical
behaviour of the atmosphere/ocean system.
What you don't seem to realise is that your original message in this
thread constitutes a statistical forecast itself, albeit a very bad one,
because it takes no account of significance. It is attempting to draw
inferences from the numbers and hence it qualifies as ststistics.

BTW, there is some evidence that strong ENSO swings (in the short term)
are themselves associated with warm episodes in the medium term.