Last edited:
Republican NASA chief appointed by Trump fully accepts dominant human role in global warming
- Thread starter exGOPer
- Start date
This is the real record of global temperatures using proxies. (Which oddly aligns with instrumental temperature records which have not been "adjusted".)
These charts look different because the instrument record is not replacing the proxy records over the last 50 years or so. These are the proxy charts being allowed to speak until the present.
http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/...rd-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/
A global-scale instrumental temperature record that has not been contaminated by (a) artificial urban heat (asphalt, machines, industrial waste heat, etc.), (b) ocean-air affected biases (detailed herein), or (c) artificial adjustments to past data that uniformly serve to cool the past and warm the present ....
These charts look different because the instrument record is not replacing the proxy records over the last 50 years or so. These are the proxy charts being allowed to speak until the present.
http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/...rd-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/
A global-scale instrumental temperature record that has not been contaminated by (a) artificial urban heat (asphalt, machines, industrial waste heat, etc.), (b) ocean-air affected biases (detailed herein), or (c) artificial adjustments to past data that uniformly serve to cool the past and warm the present ....
Last edited:
TJustice..........You are a misinformer. Those charts are ,to put it simply, irrelevant bullshit from the denier machine. The first chart is the wrong time scale and irrelevant and the last chart is not world temps. You are spreading lies. You obviously don't know the first thing about climate science.
notrickzone? please
notrickzone? please
Last edited:
Not everything is propaganda.
These are real scientists with real studies of the proxies.
2. Proxies are generally the same set of trees or ice cores or whatever thing your are studying from the same region over many years. You have to put proxy studies together to give us an idea of world temperatures.
When your team shows us the hockey stick going back a few hundred years or more it must include the proxy records.
3. I also note zero warming would be zero warming regardless of any useful scale.
4. It may be uncomfortable for you but many proxies do not show warming.
Here is a cut and past from the link.
Read the studies. Give us an informed comment.
Christiansen and Lungqvist (2012) utilize proxies from 91 locations across the extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere to reveal no net warming since the 1940s.
Image Source: Christiansen and Lungqvist (2012)
Schneider et al., 2015 use proxy evidence from 15 IPCC-referenced locationsin the Northern Hemisphere to document no net warming since the 1940s.
Image Source: Schneider et al., 2015
Stoffel et al., 2015 used proxy data from 22 Northern Hemisphere locationsto illustrate there has been no net warming since the 1940s.
Image Source: Stoffel et al., 2015
These are real scientists with real studies of the proxies.
2. Proxies are generally the same set of trees or ice cores or whatever thing your are studying from the same region over many years. You have to put proxy studies together to give us an idea of world temperatures.
When your team shows us the hockey stick going back a few hundred years or more it must include the proxy records.
3. I also note zero warming would be zero warming regardless of any useful scale.
4. It may be uncomfortable for you but many proxies do not show warming.
Here is a cut and past from the link.
Read the studies. Give us an informed comment.
Christiansen and Lungqvist (2012) utilize proxies from 91 locations across the extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere to reveal no net warming since the 1940s.
Image Source: Christiansen and Lungqvist (2012)
Schneider et al., 2015 use proxy evidence from 15 IPCC-referenced locationsin the Northern Hemisphere to document no net warming since the 1940s.
Image Source: Schneider et al., 2015
Stoffel et al., 2015 used proxy data from 22 Northern Hemisphere locationsto illustrate there has been no net warming since the 1940s.
Image Source: Stoffel et al., 2015
TJustice..........You are a misinformer. Those charts are ,to put it simply, irrelevant bullshit from the denier machine. The first chart is the wrong time scale and irrelevant and the last chart is not world temps. You are spreading lies. You obviously don't know the first thing about climate science.
Last edited:
Yeah the chart I posted above from NASA NOAA and the world's authoritative sources is the correct istrumental record. Your's is not. Yours are intended to decieve. They are not relevant or complete. Essentially, you are spreading lies. Is that what you want to do?
Proxy records are not relevant to determining if the earth is warming outside natural cycles?
How old do you thing the instrument record is? When do you think the global instrument record began?
How old do you thing the instrument record is? When do you think the global instrument record began?
Of course proxy records are important. They are the only way we have of determining temps before widespread instrumentation. We can see the proxy and instrumental together in this chart. The black line is instrumental. The others are proxy records. This chart is the best current science on this issue.
another
Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperature reconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).
Last edited:
- 66 proxies in this chart below... do you see the divergence from the instrument data?
http://notrickszone.com/2017/08/31/...the-post-1940s-hockey-stick-temperature-myth/
Ah, once again, alltrickszone. Neither of those charts are correct. You obviously know nothing about climate science.
What's wrong with authoritative sources like NASA and NOAA?
Why are you going to a known bullshit denier website paid for by the fossil fuel interests?
Hate to break it to you, but the hockey stick is proven science and correct. No publishing climate denies it.
What's wrong with authoritative sources like NASA and NOAA?
Why are you going to a known bullshit denier website paid for by the fossil fuel interests?
Hate to break it to you, but the hockey stick is proven science and correct. No publishing climate denies it.
Last edited:
Your lies are not even interesting. They are just blatant lies.
The instrument record and many of the proxies are not in agreement.
Every scientist and half educated person in the field is aware of this issue.
Did you get your degree from Trump University. Majoring in deception with a minor in misrepresentation of climate issues.
How could you lie about this well know issue in a field in which you claim to have a degree?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divergence_problem
The divergence problem is an anomaly from the field of dendroclimatology, the study of past climate through observations of old trees, primarily the properties of their annual growth rings. It is the disagreement between the temperatures measured by the thermometers (instrumental temperatures) and the temperatures reconstructed from the latewood densities or, in some cases, widths of tree rings in the far northern forests.
While the thermometer records indicate a substantial late 20th century warming trend, many tree rings from such sites do not display a corresponding change in their maximum latewood density. In some studies this issue has also been found with tree ring width.[2] A temperature trend extracted from tree rings alone would not show any substantial warming since the 1950s. The temperature graphs calculated in these two ways thus "diverge" from one another, which is the origin of the term.
The instrument record and many of the proxies are not in agreement.
Every scientist and half educated person in the field is aware of this issue.
Did you get your degree from Trump University. Majoring in deception with a minor in misrepresentation of climate issues.
How could you lie about this well know issue in a field in which you claim to have a degree?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divergence_problem
The divergence problem is an anomaly from the field of dendroclimatology, the study of past climate through observations of old trees, primarily the properties of their annual growth rings. It is the disagreement between the temperatures measured by the thermometers (instrumental temperatures) and the temperatures reconstructed from the latewood densities or, in some cases, widths of tree rings in the far northern forests.
While the thermometer records indicate a substantial late 20th century warming trend, many tree rings from such sites do not display a corresponding change in their maximum latewood density. In some studies this issue has also been found with tree ring width.[2] A temperature trend extracted from tree rings alone would not show any substantial warming since the 1950s. The temperature graphs calculated in these two ways thus "diverge" from one another, which is the origin of the term.