Ocean News

The figures on air warming will always be hard to pin down due to lots of localised effects. I tend to look for the average water temps, as they are a lot more uniform. The other thing is that much of the air temperature is lowered by the effects to oceans. The news is not looking good there.

Australian climate variability & change - Time series graphs http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=sst&area=aus&season=0112&ave_yr=0

 

There may be a whole complexity of reasons why temperature recording stations give a less than accurate picture, one that comes readily to mind is the placement of the recording instruments, especially in built-up areas, where pavement and masonry holds heat overnight, is greater than ever. But I don't doubt warming, though the data ought not to be presented selectively to support it.

 

That graph has not legends to show what the different lines represent. It doesn't show where it comes from, when it was done and by whom. In other words, it does not pass the test of scientific rigor for data. If you want to use science to prove your point, you will have to follow the scientific method. Repeatedly claiming something does not qualify.

 

I see a trend in this thread. There are "cut and paste" posts, usually with very large images. I think they are trying to prove their point by the size of the post. There are also arguments addressing specific points that can be discussed intelligently.

 

I am inclined to agree with NoEyeDeer that "This is either pure willful ignorance, or a very good imitation of it." I'm also growing increasingly skeptical that you are a scientist, or at least that you haven't practiced science since the dawn of the Internet age, since you seem to be unable to conduct even the most elementary Internet search.

Had you looked at the URL for the graph I posted you would have noticed that I got it from the Wikipedia. Then had you found any of a number of Wikipedia articles which use that graph you could have traced the graph's origins to this page. Since I am uncertain you even know what a hyperlink is or how to use it I will copy the notes pertaining to the data sources for each of the graph lines.

However, I'm sure you'll find some reason to quibble about something, and decide you couldn't possibly accept the data as being scientifically valid.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Data Sources
The following data sources were used in constructing the main plot:

1. (dark blue) Sediment core ODP 658, interpreted sea surface temperature, Eastern Tropical Atlantic: M. Zhao, N. A. S. Beveridge, N. J. Shackleton, M. Sarnthein, and G. Eglinton. "Molecular stratigraphy of cores off northwest Africa: Sea surface temperature history over the last 80 ka". Paleoceanography 10 (3): 661-675. doi:10.1029/94PA03354
2. (blue) Vostok ice core, interpreted paleotemperature, Central Antarctica: Petit J. R., Jouzel J., Raynaud D., Barkov N. I., Barnola J. M., Basile I., Bender M., Chappellaz J., Davis J., Delaygue G., Delmotte M., Kotlyakov V. M., Legrand M., Lipenkov V., Lorius C., Pépin L., Ritz C., Saltzman E., Stievenard M.. "Climate and Atmospheric History of the Past 420,000 years from the Vostok Ice Core, Antarctica". Nature 399: 429-436. doi:10.1038/20859
3. (light blue) GISP2 ice core, interpreted paleotemperature, Greenland: Alley, R. B.. Quaternary Science Reviews. doi:10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00062-1
4. (green) Kilimanjaro ice core, δ18O, Eastern Central Africa: Thompson, L. G., E. Mosley-Thompson, M. E. Davis, K. A. Henderson, H. H. Brecher, V. S. Zagorodnov, T. A. Mashiotta, P.-N. Lin, V. N. Mikhalenko, D. R. Hardy, and J. Beer. "Kilimanjaro Ice Core Records: Evidence of Holocene Climate Change in Tropical Africa". Science 298 (5593): 589-593. doi:10.1126/science.1073198
5. (yellow) Sediment core PL07-39PC, interpreted sea surface temperature, North Atlantic: Lea, D. W., D. K. Pak, L. C. Peterson, and K. A. Hughen (2003). "Synchroneity of tropical and high-latitude Atlantic temperatures over the last glacial termination". Science 301 (5638): 1361-1364. doi:10.1126/science.1088470
6. (orange) Pollen distributions, interpreted temperature, Europe: B. A. S. Davis, S. Brewer, A. C. Stevenson, J. Guiot (2003). Quaternary Science Reviews 22: 1701-1716. doi:10.1016/S0277-3791(03)00173-2
7. (red) EPICA ice core, δDeuterium, Central Antarctica: EPICA community members (2004). "Eight glacial cycles from an Antarctic ice core". Nature 429 (6992): 623-628. doi:10.1038/nature02599
8. (dark red) Composite sediment cores, interpreted sea surface temperature, Western Tropical Pacific: L. D. Stott, K. G. Cannariato, R. Thunell, G. H. Haug, A. Koutavas, and S. Lund (2004). "Decline of surface temperature and salinity in the western tropical Pacific Ocean in the Holocene epoch". Nature 431: 56-59. doi:10.1038/nature02903

Additional data used in inset plot and for matching temperature scale to modern values. Colors match those used in Image:2000 Year Temperature Comparison.png.

1. (orange 200-1995): P. D. Jones and M. E. Mann (2004). "Climate Over Past Millennia". Reviews of Geophysics 42. doi:10.1029/2003RG000143
2. (red-orange 1500-1980): S. Huang (2004). "Merging Information from Different Resources for New Insights into Climate Change in the Past and Future". Geophys. Res Lett. 31: L13205. doi:10.1029/2004GL019781
3. (red 1-1979): A. Moberg, D. M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N. M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). "Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data". Nature 443: 613-617. doi:10.1038/nature03265
4. (thin black line 1856-2004): Instrumental global annual data set TaveGL2v [2]: P. D. Jones and A. Moberg (2003). "Hemispheric and large-scale surface air temperature variations: An extensive revision and an update to 2001". Journal of Climate 16: 206-223.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

In the U.S. there has been extensive discussion and research on this topic, the most recent (that I'm aware of) being the Berkeley Earth project. Bottom line: all the concerns you mentioned have been properly accounted for by the data set compilers.

Berkeley Earth -- Summary of Findings

Berkeley Earth -- Wikipedia

 

Smart people really annoy me.

 

Parts of Australia have experienced record heat for September, in the past week, incidentally. I am certainly not a AGW denier, but dramatizing such weather events, and quietly ignoring others where record lows might have occurred recently, is using weather to demonstrate climate.

 

The typical psychology of humans is to react vigorously to immediate threats, but discount slow-moving long-term threats, even if those long-term threats have the potential to be very serious. I think the scientific community has slowly come to the conclusion that they need to highlight whatever current warming-related events they can to nudge people to take seriously the long-term threats.

As it turns out, where I live in the north-east of the US, we too have had a number of days of record heat the past few weeks. The heat, perhaps coupled with low rainfall, is causing our maple tree leaves just to turn brown and fall off, rather than become orange, red and purple. That is disappointing, as autumn is typically a fantastically beautiful riot of color.

 

Trees get it, they're already on the move.
And we're supposed to be the smart ones.
Fed up with climate change, trees are moving north and west https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/sciencefair/2017/05/18/trees-moving-west-and-north/101836832/
American Trees Are Moving West, and No One Knows Why https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/05/go-west-my-sap/526899/

Tropical forests have flipped, they're no longer carbon sinks, they are carbon producers.
https://phys.org/news/2017-09-widespread-forest-loss-reversed-role.html#nRlv

 

The article says something completely different. They are trying to measure areas where the tropical forests have been removed or seriously damaged. For someone calling himself a champion of science you post a lost of falsehoods with nothing to back them up. In fact, you post articles that contradict your statements. It is an old political trick: expecting that most people won't check out the quoted sources.

 

What article are you reading? Here's the first sentence....

They are not "trying" to measure areas, they DID measure areas and came up with the stated conclusion. The rest of the article is in the same vein. What are you talking about?

As you go on about a post that's backed up and does not contradict what I said. Cripes, you do realize we can see what you post, right? You know how the internet works?

I still think you're ok and have knowledgeable areas, but as for this thread, there's nothing to learn from you. I don't think you know what you are talking about.

 

It may be an old political trick to expect people to not read your sources, but I post the sources wanting people to read and understand them. While some politicians count on people being stupid, I'm hoping that they are only ignorant.

 

You say that "Tropical forests have flipped, they're no longer carbon sinks, they are carbon producers." Which is not true. The forest continues to be a carbon sink; nothing changed on that.

 

Speaking of yourself?