What Do We Think About Climate Change

According to the CNRS web-site.

"Christian Vincent is research engineer at Laboratoire de Glaciologie et Géophysique de l’Environnement, CNRS, Grenoble, France. He is co-responsible of the GLACIOLCLIM observatory which acts as an observatory for French glaciers, Andeans glaciers (Bolivia and Equator) and glaciers in Antarctica. He is the French correspondent of the World Glacier Monitoring Service."

So I guess he is a tenured scientist at the largest fundamental research agency in Europe.

 

Probably none of it. What he said doesn't sound silly to me. Snow is an insulator; bare ground freezes deeper than snow-covered ground for the same reason.

 

Guillermo, you're trying so hard to be insulting to Alan that you've been making little or no sense in your posts. Aren't you the one who complains about others getting personal, instead of dealing with facts?

I think you feel threatened because you're dealing with a genuine scientist who can't be snowed, instead of a fellow internet instant expert. I also think he understands the sources you're blindly cutting and pasting from better than you do.

 

trouble admitting your wrong eh

happens sometimes specially among business owner types cause they are not used to anyone correcting them

no worries I'd still buy you a few rounds and laugh it off

thing is if YOU actually read what your posting
say post 8548 the variance adjusted data is a specifically mentioned as a local phenomenon and since we are talking climate and not weather, then local phenomenon are always averaged

IE
you are trying present data used in working grid boxes (local phenomenon) as data that should be considered in an overall view of global climate.

Allan is merely trying to point out that this is the case
you on the other hand are the one missing the point
not only of what Allan is saying but of what the data you are trying to present is representing

sorry mate
I know its hard for you to admit but you are way wrong on this one

cheers
B

 

I believe you, Guillermo, as do all the rational and reasonable heretics as defined by the ridiculous Warmist cult.

 

What does the leading Luxembourgian climatologist say? Do you have your own or do you borrow the French one? Does Luxembourg have its own glacier? You can have Al Gore as we don't want him anymore. Hide your masseuses, though.

 

Yip, Yip!

 

Oh dear. Who left the doggie door unlocked, and let the attack poodles out?

 

OK, here the analysis done with the HadCRUT3 unadjusted data. Trend is also a descending one, as the differences between HC3 and HC3v are very small and no relevant to our purposes.

I still suspect Alan has been massaging data, as he demonstrated with the half year 2010 inclusion in his full-year-mean-values analysis. Our differences in trends may be due to not choosing exactly the same start and end times or the type of linear regression (linear least-squares in the case of WFT).

 

I have been talking to Paul at Woodfortrees.org and he, as myself, is unable to find significative differences between the two series or their trend which could be relevant to our purposes. Main differences, as I highlighted from the Brohan et al paper, are rather related to the extreme values. See attached graph (Credit: Paul at woodfortrees).

Alan should have known this and he probably knows it, but he is so upset and furious because a humble engineer (who he idiotically supposes knows nothing about statistics) is questioning his Superior Sapience, that he doesn't even take the care of check things and calm down before posting. A very poor scientific attitude, in my opinion. I think your ego is bigger than your knowledge, Alan...

Cheers.

 

Boston, you stubborngly insist in showing the world once and again the kind of perfect idiot you are. Keep prudently silent man, for your own sake!

 

I say again, Guillermo: why don't you stop badmouthing people, and stick to the subject?

Between you and Alan, I'll believe Alan's results. He isn't emotionally and politically committed to proving one side or the other of the question, like you are.

If anyone ever convinced you that you were wrong, you'd be devastated. Alan, on the other hand, would go, "Really? How interesting."

 

me insist
never
my only point is that if you were to actually read the materiel you post then you might find it actually does not support these wild claims typical of the deniers cult
instead the site you quote clearly states

The period 2001-2009 (0.43°C above 1961-90 mean) is 0.19°C warmer than the 1991-2000 decade (0.24°C above 1961-90 mean). The 1990s were the warmest complete decade in the series. The warmest year of the entire series has been 1998, with a temperature of 0.55°C above the 1961-90 mean. Fourteen of the fifteen warmest years in the series have now occurred in the past fourteen years (1995-2009). The only year in the last fourteen not among the warmest fourteen is 1996 (replaced in the warm list by 1990).

 

Troy,
I'm afraid your "god" has feet of clay...

 

OK, here we go again....

So what, scatterbrained idiot? Have I ever negated that? What does it prove?