Toasty!

[lala]

TO be honest, I'm strugggling with the idea of it being hotter than 2010. Visually, it just doesn't make sense:



2010 seems to have been a lot hotter than 2014 for most of the year, and 2014, just edging ahead in the last few months, but not, I'd have thought, by enough to compensate for the earlier coolness. But note, 2010. Rick needs to start counting again from 4 ...

Incidentally, I think 48% likelihood is pretty high when you are talking about virtual statistical dead heats between several contenders. 2014 may be the warmest year on record. Or it may be 2010. Or 2005. Or 1998. With multiple candidates all so close, and acknowledging issues around data sets, you can't more than just a bit sure.

[unclejunior]

.....says the man whose figures are about as reliable as as a chocolate teapot.

[flatandy]

That's "year-to-date" average temps, Lala. Not average temp for each month.

[lala]

Ah. That's bloody obvious and sensible. Explains the wide divergence at the beginning and the gradually closing, culminating in 2014's surge psst in the final months. And even clearly stated at the top. Clearly, two cups of coffee isn't enough to get the brain working.

[flatandy]

Dumbarse. It's a good job at least one person on this thread is borderline numerate.

[lala]

It wasn't the numeracy. It was the literacy. I looked at the pretty colours. I even read the sub title. I just didn't read the big words at the top. Because if they were important, they wouldn't have put them there in big letters, would they?

Should I pretend I was deliberately trying to imiate the scientific illiteracy of the ricks of this world? Or shall we just pretend I never happened (sic)?

[flatandy]

I consider it innumerate to be unable to read a graph - so let's pretend this never happened, and at least try to pretend that the people who are on the right side of this argument aren't complete and utter idiots.

[rick49]

"Climate Jiggery-Pokery"

"The recent hiatus in warming might be significant or it might not. Of greater importance, and a far more immediate peril, is the eagerness of governments to be gulled by temperature 'records' that have been tickled beyond the bounds of credibility"

"While there are others; there are four major temperature series relied upon. There are two land and sea based series: The HadCRUT series produced by the Hadley centre in the UK (dating back to 1850) and the GISTEMP series produced by the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (back to 1880). There are two lower troposphere temperature series, both dating from 1979: The UAH series produced by the University of Alabama in Huntsville and the RSS series sponsored by NOAA."

"Unfortunately, the HadCRUT series are not yet available for the whole of 2014 so I couldn’t check this series to see whether it backed up the GISTEMP series. However, both satellite series are available. Neither shows 2014 as the hottest year. In fact, the UAH series has 2014 sixth behind 2007, 2009, 2005, 2010 and 1998. The RSS series (which recall is sponsored by NOAA) has 2014 fourth behind, 2005, 2010 and 1998."

"Both satellite temperature series – which are almost certainly more reliable that land and sea based measurements – support a different conclusion. Moreover, recorded temperatures using land and sea gauges are so subject to sampling, measurement, adjustment, and compilation errors as to render reliance on small differences extremely moot."

"Where is the jiggery-pokery? It lies this time in NOAA and the compliant media publicising one temperature series while ignoring others, and in the scientifically unwarranted emphasis on something being a record when it was well inside the margin of error. In this case too, one of those other series (RSS), which NOAA chose not (because it doesn't fit The Narrative) to report is sponsored by them."

quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2015/01/climate-jiggery-pokery/

[lala]

If you think land based temperatures get manipulated and tweaked, you should see the 'jiggery-pokery' that goes on with satellite measurements.

[rick49]

"Faulty thermometers exaggerated western U.S. mountain warming"

tinyurl.com/q6ftdsh

The hell, they say! And emperor obama's science guru still believes global warming could kill one billion, not one million people within the next 4 years.

[flatandy]

Blimey. Now Rick is all in favour of the Hadley centre data.

And for some reason he thinks that people should have been hyping the temperature records from 2005 and 2010.

Talk about a change of tune.

[rick49]

Jan 20, 2015 15:04:41 GMT flatandy said:

Blimey. Now Rick is all in favour of the Hadley centre data.

Where am I in favor of Hadley?

[flatandy]

You seem upset that HadCRUT isn't included in the temperature assessment given by NOAA.

[Eric]

Doesn't NOAA predict massive and extensive flooding?

[rick49]

[rick49]

World Meteorological Organisation 2006 - “All temperature values have uncertainties, which arise mainly from gaps in data coverage. The size of the uncertainties is such that the global average temperature for 2006 is statistically indistinguishable from, and could be anywhere between, the first and the eighth warmest year on record.” –Paul Homewood,

"2014: The Most Dishonest Year on Record"

tinyurl.com/nr3k5wo

[flatandy]

Well, your graph 2 posts ago agrees with the assessment that (a) last year was probably the warmest on record; (b) all of the warmest years on record are in the last 2 decades.

And I don't understand the relevance of quote 2. There are uncertainties in the global temperature measurement. That isn't news to anyone.

[lala]

Jan 20, 2015 9:23:56 GMT rick49 said:

"Faulty thermometers exaggerated western U.S. mountain warming"

tinyurl.com/q6ftdsh

The hell, they say! And emperor obama's science guru still believes global warming could kill one billion, not one million people within the next 4 years.

Note the crucial line in the short section available to read: "While not used in global climate research, the flawed data ..."

And Spencer's precious satellites have been shown to exaggerate cooling, and the raw data has to be 'cultivated' to give an accurate picture.

[rick49]

The Average Temperature of 2014 Results from
Berkeley
Earth

tinyurl.com/nlsl3fn

[rick49]

Jan 20, 2015 18:32:26 GMT flatandy said:

Well, your graph 2 posts ago agrees with the assessment that (a) last year was probably the warmest on record; (b) all of the warmest years on record are in the last 2 decades.

And I don't understand the relevance of quote 2. There are uncertainties in the global temperature measurement. That isn't news to anyone.

No, the graph doesn't agree that 2014 was the warmest ever. As for the quote, it's pointing out that the warmthers are being dishonest. Despite mounting evidence that 2014 was not the warmest ever, they are still insisting it was. Wishing 2014 was the warmest ever doesn't make it so.