Global Cooling

[Gray-Wolf]

I think this shows how warm the seas are. We keep hearing of nil rises and yet the ice keeps on melting (and thinning over winter if we adhere to the NASA ICEsat survey over 04' to 08').

I need to be advised as to how ,in a cooling world, we keep on loosing ice in the form of perennial,glacial and ice sheet/shelf. To me warm water would do the job. With the strengthening Nino' across the equatorial pacific and huge anom's around (and under?) the northern ice pack where do I find enough cold to drop the average to nil anom?

Edited July 26, 2009 by Gray-Wolf

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Where do I start with that article, although the satelite belongs to NASA the global temperature dataset refered to as UAH certainly isn't, it's the pet project of Spencer and his changes over the last 2 years, certainly haven't been reviewed or accepted by anyone at NASA.

If you want to compare SST's to datasets, which is what I suggested BFTP previously then have a look at the plainly wrong UAH tropics data.

The UNISYS map is not a very good one to use however as it distorts how the earth actually looks.

Like I say NOAA are clearly warmist biased. The Unisys is higher res and would suggest it is more accurate. To suggest they are second warmest on record is a rather far stretched recording, just like the landbased temp records that show higher and higher recordings. Funny how we see Canada was omitted...clearly because it was cold.

BFTP

[Iceberg]

BFTP, unisys is probably the worst of the SST products behind the modis/ECM etc. Nor is it high res compared to others.

Yes NOAA Hadley etc are clearly warmest based....

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Whatever you say Iceberg.....though some don't believe. G'day

BFTP

[Gray-Wolf]

Whatever you say Iceberg.....though some don't believe. G'day

BFTP

What we choose to believe is our own personal business, though some may measure a person by their beliefs.

Here we are again quibbling over minimal effects whilst the pole melts out.

Were it southern Europe under discussion would we choose Fiddles?

[Iceberg]

Whatever you say Iceberg.....though some don't believe. G'day

BFTP

Sorry BFTP I am really not trying to be difficult, I've attached a copy of a real high rest SST picture from yesterday, which is rather different to the unisys one.

http://ghrsst-pp.metoffice.com/data/OSTIA/latest_full.png

Here's NOAA's own one.

http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/sst/oper/global_anomaly_oper0.png

another one from NOAA this time using the AMRSE data.

http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/oisst/amsr-anom-bb.gif

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Sorry BFTP I am really not trying to be difficult, I've attached a copy of a real high rest SST picture from yesterday, which is rather different to the unisys one.

http://ghrsst-pp.metoffice.com/data/OSTIA/latest_full.png

Here's NOAA's own one.

http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/sst/oper/global_anomaly_oper0.png

another one from NOAA this time using the AMRSE data.

http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/oisst/amsr-anom-bb.gif

The first one looks odd. The second one looks on face value pretty well and as clear as Unisys and seems similar to Unisys? But we do differ in whom we look towards for data.

BFTP

Edited July 26, 2009 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[Iceberg]

Does Anybody want to guess as to the UAH July global temperature figure ?.

Remember last month came in a 0.01C.

Below is the temperature according to UAH so far upto July, which to my eyes would indicate an increase of around .3 or .4C compared to July last year.

July 2008 came in as 0.06 so this would make it 0.36 to 0.46 going on the UAH figures ?.

Any other takers ?

The highest figure recorded for July by UAH was 0.52 in 1998.

Anything above 0.36 would make it the warmest July since 1998 (for whatever reasons the UAH data always has July as cooler than other months.....

Anyway assuming there isn't some big unknown fault/or change in the calculation in the daily data it looks like a increase on last year seems a dead cert....or does it ?.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Clearly AGW spiralling out of control.

BFTP

[jethro]

Or a new organic diet for cattle derived from legumes?

[mt-leinster-snow-drifts]

Soory I know this is off topic , but I just noticed BFTP's tagline about the southerly jetstream's effect on this winter. What effect will it have? Sorry again for going off topic , lol.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Soory I know this is off topic , but I just noticed BFTP's tagline about the southerly jetstream's effect on this winter. What effect will it have? Sorry again for going off topic , lol.

The jetstream is the boundary where cold dry air from the Arctic is mixing into warm wet air from the equator and creating a lot of wind.

If the jetstream is mixing south of the UK that means we are in the cold dry air zone and Spain is getting hammered by British weather. If it's above us or running over us we get dross or wet and windy weather, the sort of winter we are most familiar with.

Edited July 30, 2009 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[Iceberg]

Does Anybody want to guess as to the UAH July global temperature figure ?.

Remember last month came in a 0.01C.

Below is the temperature according to UAH so far upto July, which to my eyes would indicate an increase of around .3 or .4C compared to July last year.

July 2008 came in as 0.06 so this would make it 0.36 to 0.46 going on the UAH figures ?.

Any other takers ?

The highest figure recorded for July by UAH was 0.52 in 1998.

Anything above 0.36 would make it the warmest July since 1998 (for whatever reasons the UAH data always has July as cooler than other months.....

Anyway assuming there isn't some big unknown fault/or change in the calculation in the daily data it looks like a increase on last year seems a dead cert....or does it ?.

Well MSU using the same satelite data as UAH has come in and is the 3rd warmest on record at 0.39, pretty much bang on forecast and one of the largest monthly increases on record.

It was the second warmest ocean for July recorded, coming in very close behind the 98 El Nino year.

Now where is that UAH data....It was out 36 hrs after the month end last month when the figure was favourably cool...

I might well open a thread on this because I have alot of questions about how this all fits in .

For example given a negative PDO, negative AMO etc (which I've been assured has a lag on global temperature)

Why are the seas the warmest/second warmest ever with what it still only a weak El Nino.?

Remember the PDO and AMO are SST indexes so the very fact that they are negative must mean that they are accouted for..

Anyway that's for another thread.

Edited August 5, 2009 by Iceberg

[edveasey]

Global Cooling is caused by global warming sceptics using 1998 as the year to base subsequent global temperatures on, using the same principles of chooseing a particularly warm year and then basing subsequent years temperatures around it, you'll find a period of cooling in every decade this century.

The past few years have not been as hot as 1998 as we've gone through a solar minima and a strong el nina events that have masked the man made warming effects on temperatures.

[MR EXTREMES]

i watched a program lastnight called climate wars on the eden channel.

it was very alarming and they totally discounted solar minimum although graphs shown there was some sort of link between output of solar activity and earth temps,

but still the earth has warmed now im skeptical about alot of things and agree the earth has warmed but few answers id like to know is has the earth cooled flatlined or warmed.

i remeber also reading a post on el nino from the meto explain infact that el nino can give us colder winters whats the answer here ?

secondly last year we had a strong la nina was this the reason for our colder winter or was it a mixture of la nina and solar minimum?

im getting rather confused because most evidence points to warming only what effect does the pdo amo have are thease good in the sence of a colder winter?

has there also been a shift in the polar jet ?

but the most important factor which was also noted by the met office was the record Statosperic warming for last winter,

is this a rare event is it likely to continue this winter ?

Edited September 4, 2009 by badboy657

[MR EXTREMES]

but global cooling cant be happening what with this :http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8236797.stm

[OldGreggsTundraBoy]

well wasn't so sure about global cooling tilll noww.. but the current net weather forecast for day 9/10 at Lowestoft [where i'm visiting]

is MINUS 273*C [absoloute Zero] !! :o:cold::o:cold:

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Global Cooling is caused by global warming sceptics using 1998 as the year to base subsequent global temperatures on, using the same principles of chooseing a particularly warm year and then basing subsequent years temperatures around it, you'll find a period of cooling in every decade this century.

The past few years have not been as hot as 1998 as we've gone through a solar minima and a strong el nina events that have masked the man made warming effects on temperatures.

AGW sceptics NOT GW sceptics. Remember, the pure and simple fact is that many tens of millions more tons in the atmosphere and temps have flatlined for 11 years not warmed. It is the one single factor that the AGW brigade always try to brush over or make excuses about. If C02 drove the climate then nothing would stop its upward march of warming the planet...it has stopped pure and simple.

BFTP

[edveasey]

AGW sceptics NOT GW sceptics. Remember, the pure and simple fact is that many tens of millions more tons in the atmosphere and temps have flatlined for 11 years not warmed. It is the one single factor that the AGW brigade always try to brush over or make excuses about. If C02 drove the climate then nothing would stop its upward march of warming the planet...it has stopped pure and simple.

BFTP

Unfortunately it is not as simple as you state, increased levels of CO2 and other gasses such as Methane in the atmosphere have a warming effect on the planet and that's a fact, it has not stoped it is simply being masked by natural variations in solar output and global oscilations, as we approach the next solar maxima temperatures will rise and the long term trend will be shown to be correctly predicted.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Unfortunately it is not as simple as you state, increased levels of CO2 and other gasses such as Methane in the atmosphere have a warming effect on the planet and that's a fact, it has not stoped it is simply being masked by natural variations in solar output and global oscilations, as we approach the next solar maxima temperatures will rise and the long term trend will be shown to be correctly predicted.

We shall see, it isn't anywhere as simple as you state. Its not masked, CO2 isn't DRIVING the climate. Not long to wait now.

BFTP

[Solar Cycles]

Unfortunately it is not as simple as you state, increased levels of CO2 and other gasses such as Methane in the atmosphere have a warming effect on the planet and that's a fact, it has not stoped it is simply being masked by natural variations in solar output and global oscilations, as we approach the next solar maxima temperatures will rise and the long term trend will be shown to be correctly predicted.

Dear dear, looks like some one has come late to the party!

[Anti-Mild]

The past few years have not been as hot as 1998 as we've gone through a solar minima and a strong el nina events that have masked the man made warming effects on temperatures.

So by that rationale the sun's activity should have peaked in 1998 and then went into a steady decline from then until now? Firstly, for simplicity, we'll ignore any time lag. Next, if you look at a graph showing sunspot numbers, you will see that there was a double peak in June 2000 and then again in October 2001. Surely the period around these peaks should have been warmest. However, if we then bring back the time lag factor we ought to have seen a record breaking year since 2001.

And at no stage since the 1970's could a La Nina be described as strong. An argument could be made for a moderate one in 2000 and last year, but not enough to 'mask' GW.

It is my opinion that GW will be essentially disproved in the next 2 decades, much as the 1970's idea of impending global cooling was by the warming in the 80's and 90's.

It's all swings and roundabouts - not only on the longer time scale of interglacial and glacial periods, but on the more modest time frame of decades.

[Red Raven]

We shall see, it isn't anywhere as simple as you state. Its not masked, CO2 isn't DRIVING the climate. Not long to wait now.

BFTP

You will have to show some very strong evidence to back that statement up.

[jethro]

Unfortunately it is not as simple as you state, increased levels of CO2 and other gasses such as Methane in the atmosphere have a warming effect on the planet and that's a fact, it has not stoped it is simply being masked by natural variations in solar output and global oscilations, as we approach the next solar maxima temperatures will rise and the long term trend will be shown to be correctly predicted.

Yes, CO2 and Methane are GHG's capable of warming the atmosphere but, certainly in the case of CO2, it is wholly dependant upon positive feedback in the form of water vapour, to achieve the predicted level of future warming. The latest studies using data from the NASA Aqua satellite show a net negative feedback.

Natural variation doesn't mask warming, that would imply that the warming is hanging around somewhere waiting to jump out with re-newed vigour; the natural world doesn't work like that.

We currently have a prolonged Solar minimum, the PDO has changed to it's negative phase, the NOA is predicted to do so too. These ocean currents alone will lead to cooler temperatures in the future, Solar forcing is a big unknown. The ocean currents and their phases last on average 20-30 years, that's 20-30 years of cooling taking both atmospheric and ocean temperatures back down to a lower level.

Given that CO2 behaves in a logarithmic fashion (the more you add, the less effective it is) and the fact that there is no secret hiding place for heat to be stored, it is increasingly unlikely that "super renewed warming" will happen in the future.

Warming - yes. Masked, double whammy warming - no. We will simply be back at a lower level temperature wise, for the warming to begin again on the same level we have already experienced. Ebbs and flows.

[osmposm]

Dear dear, looks like some one has come late to the party!

Solar, just because he hasn't been around, and repeating himself, for as long as you or me (though I've now given up) doesn't mean he isn't (i) welcome, and (ii) talking clearly and sensibly in the view of plenty of people here.

This isn't your private party - please don't be so rude.