2012-01-03 09:01:11A Big Picture Look at Global Temperature
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.110.252

Rebuttal to the WUWT 'big picture' post without specifically referencing it (though I did link to it with a rel=nofollow).

A Big Picture Look at Global Temperature

2012-01-03 09:28:24
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

Dana...  I think this is a perfect strategy for addressing any and all of the absurd posts that pop up on denier sites.  Let's not even acknowledge them.  Just set the record straight.  

2012-01-03 09:42:45One suggestion
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Since you address more than temperature, change the ttitle to: "A Big Picture Look at Global Warming". 

Great article.

2012-01-03 10:04:52
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.110.252

Thanks guys.

That's probably a good idea John, I just used 'temperature' because that's what WUWT used in their title.  But global warming would probably make more sense.

2012-01-03 10:21:15
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.248.2

Might be prudent to also point out that over 90% of global warming goes into the oceans, and therefore from that perspective there's barely been a let-up. Sure global surface temperature is what we notice, but those oceans are building up an awful lot of heat. Don't bet on it staying there for too much longer. 

2012-01-03 10:32:33
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Dana,

Best you check out:"Tisdale takes on Tamino’s Foster & Rahmstorf 2011" posted on WUWT.

2012-01-03 11:01:28
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

I've got a nickle that says 95% of WUWT readers never get all the way through a Tisdale post.  I bet most don't get through the first 2 paragraphs.  My great-grandmother had a phrase that applies to Tisdale... "Eh, he's just talking to hear his own head rattle."

2012-01-03 11:05:00
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.248.2

John H - seriously, how many people are going to make it through reading all that twaddle? The best thing we can do is make the 'big picture' explicitly well-known. Which Dana's post does very nicely.

The WUWT post on the other hand is aimed at sycophants. I can guarantee most have no idea what was written in that post. The last thing we want to do is get tied up in technical discussions unless we can make it clear to the uninformed bystander what is being discussed. And we can't get bogged down into replying to every single fake-skeptic brainfart.     

2012-01-03 11:05:24
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.248.2

Rob H - snap!!!!!!!!

2012-01-03 11:15:52
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.110.252

Tamino is going to tear that Tisdale post apart.  There is a linear man-made warming signal in the data, so why exclude it from the multiple regression analysis (as Tisdale seems to suggest would be correct)?  Just compare Tisdale's Fig 6 with his Fig 7 (tamino's analysis) - tamino's shows far less residual noise, meaning the regression was more effective.  Then Tisdale follows up with this gem:

"The second problem with their assumption is that the global oceans, which cover about 70% of the surface area of the globe, show no signs of the influence of anthropogenic global warming during the satellite era."

The hell you say?  I don't know how far up your butt you need to stick your head to believe that's true, but it's pretty darn far.  I look forward to tamino's response, but suffice it to say that Tisdale is full of crap.

Also, is Tisdale capable of writing a post less than 5,000 words?  I've said it before and I'll say it again, he's a horrible communicator.  As the Robs say, nobody is going to read that whole post.  Even I got sick of it about halfway through.

2012-01-03 11:31:14revised
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.110.252

I added a bit of a jab at Tisdale's post (speicifically his propensity for making the physically ignorant 'step change' argument), added a bit more about rising heat content at the beginning (per Rob P's suggestion), changed the title (per John H's suggestion), and added section headings for organization.

2012-01-03 17:30:53
Ari Jokimäki

arijmaki@yahoo...
192.100.112.210

As climate is often determined as 30 year mean of weather, I like to plot global temperature as running 30 year mean. I think it shows the big picture of global (surface) warming.

2012-01-03 17:40:52
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.153.247

Yes Ari, but note where your trend finishes using such a running mean. I can just imagine the amount of fake-skeptic squawking - "Ha, they left out the last ten years because it's actually cooled since 1998!!!!" No point in giving them rope to yank the thread off-topic. 

2012-01-03 20:49:03
Ari Jokimäki

arijmaki@yahoo...
192.100.112.210

Last ten years is not left out but affects the last ten years of this graph. This is a demonstration that whatever happened last ten years, the climate is still warming.

2012-01-03 20:49:21
jyyh
Otto Lehikoinen
otanle@hotmail...
193.64.22.190

"annual (with a 12-month running average) northern hemisphere snow cover"

not seeing this one. seasonal graphs show up though.

2012-01-03 21:43:02
Kevin C

cowtan@ysbl.york.ac...
144.32.72.165

Figure 3 is really hard work - I think the animations are getting a bit out-of-control. I had to watch it through 5 times and I still can't assimilate all the information.

OTOH, all the images separately would take a huge amount of space.

Maybe we need to add a new presentation style to the repertoire? A simple slideshow viewer, with a line of clickable thumbnails at the bottom? That's actually a better tool for the task than an animation, which dictates the order and speed which we view the graphs.

(I think there is also a case for collapsable sections for extra detail, but perhaps not here.)

2012-01-03 23:08:20Heads up
Tom Curtis

t.r.curtis@gmail...
112.213.145.36

Eli has just blogged about a legitimate climate researcher who has argued that global warming works by step changes.  Based just on the poster presented at the AGU, I think it is garbage.  On the other hand I am neither a mathamatician nor a scientist so my opinion counts for nothing on this issue.  Hence, it would be wise to read his poster, and the paper carefully before we publish anymore criticisms of step changes.  If nothing else, we can expect deniers to seize on this once they get wind of it, so better to be forewarned and for armed.

2012-01-04 00:26:10
jyyh
Otto Lehikoinen
otanle@hotmail...
193.64.22.118

I'm with Kevin C of the image 3., at least lose the random noise and natural cycles images from that. what natural cycle is in question or is it just an artificial sine-wave which is going down when the step-change occurs in the steps-image?

Tom Curtis, I guess the scientist in question has just made the step-change argument for arguments sake, imitating denier methods but doing it more correctly than they. But I can't see the poster nor the article, and my math is what it is, so I'd likely not be capable of judging the article. But it really sounds strange to invoke step-changes in regional AGW when it is not really needed in global context (Foster & Rahmstorf).

the 'sab' in the ref'd thread.

2012-01-04 02:51:05on flagging the Tisdale post
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Rob,

I flagged "Tisdale takes on Tamino’s Foster & Rahmstorf 2011 because Dana relies heavily on FR2001 in his article. I wnated to make sure that he saw what Tisdale had to say before he finalized and posted the article.

Until opening the Tidsale/WUWT can of worms in the General Chat thread, Tisdale takes on Tamino’s Foster & Rahmstorf 2011 -- WUWT, I had no idea who Tisdale was and/or whether his analyses carried any weight outside of Deniersville.

2012-01-04 03:00:50
Tom Curtis

t.r.curtis@gmail...
112.213.145.36

Further to my heads up, the scientist in question has responded to some points at Eli's.  If anybody with enough maths to ask sensible questions wants to ask them, now would be a good time.

2012-01-04 03:04:22on article titles
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Dana,

I discovered by happenstance that we can increase the number of people clicking on SkS articles by including either "climate change" or "global warming" in the title of an article.

If one of these phrases appear in the title of an article, they will likely be included in the listing of articles in the apporpriate daily Google Alerts email.  For example, North American mammal evolution tracks with climate change, was included in yesterday's Google Climate Chage Alert missive. 

Thus, I am doubly pleased to see that you have changed the title of your article per my suggestion.

2012-01-04 03:16:09
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

Well, the step change section is already a rebuttal, so it's not new - something we've already previously covered.  But Jones is arguing something different than the deniers here (who are saying the changes are due to ENSO).  I'll modify the section a bit.

Dang, I don't know what happened to the last frame of my snow cover GIF.  It should show the data for all seasons.  I'm not too thrilled with my new GIF creator - there doesn't appear to be a version of GIFBuilder Carbon that will work on my MacBook.