The Forum > Article Comments > Climate change is here despite denial > Comments
Climate change is here despite denial : Comments
By Lyn Bender, published 4/2/2014Seems it never rains in Southern California. But California Dreamin' has become a California Dryin' nightmare and many are praying for the drought to end.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Page 19
- 20
-
- All
Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 5:45:13 PM
| |
Actually steele now that you mention it I think the graphs are EEGs of your brain activity with the red and green representing each hemisphere. My moneys on the green side.
warmair, I should mention in relation to the PDO graph I linked to that it includes both the PDO and AMO which would explain the better correlation then with just the PDO. A good discussion of the combined effect of the PDO and AMO is here by Easterbrook: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/17/cause-of-the-pause-in-global-warming/ Posted by cohenite, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 6:05:52 PM
| |
Witless
how did you GF know a butchers dick was slipperly? Guesswork or a error ridden methodology? The more you say the more you prove your witlessness. Posted by imajulianutter, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 7:19:37 PM
| |
Dear Cohenite,
Now we are talking. Happy to say there is a correlation between global temperatures and the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation (AMO). Why on earth did you trot out the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) when it is obvious to all and sundry bar the fanatics that there is sweet FA correlation between it and global temperatures. Oh. I see, learning on the job. That is fine, happy to be Mr Ockham. But you have a wee problem. It appears separating out the GW factor from the AMO is not a settled exercise. “The AMO signal is usually defined from the patterns of SST variability in the North Atlantic once any linear trend has been removed. This detrending is intended to remove the influence of greenhouse gas-induced global warming from the analysis. However, if the global warming signal is significantly non-linear in time (i.e. not just a smooth linear increase), variations in the forced signal will leak into the AMO definition. Consequently, correlations with the AMO index may alias(?) effects of global warming.” “Several methods have been proposed to remove the global trend and ENSO influence over the North AtlanticSST. Trenberth and Shea, assuming that the effect of global forcing over the North Atlantic is similar to the global ocean, subtracted the global (60°N-60°S) mean SST from the North Atlantic SST to derive a revised AMO index. Ting et al. however argue that the forced SST pattern is not spatially uniform; they separated the forced and internally generated variability using signal to noise maximizing EOF analysis.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_multidecadal_oscillation Since Sea Surface Temperature (SST) readings in the Northern Hemisphere closely align to the HADCRUT4 (as you would expect them to do) the question becomes why does that area of the Mid Atlantic act differently? Here I have graphed all 4 series. You will see a direct correlation between Global temperatures via HADCRUT4 and the Northern Hemisphere SSTs. A lessor but not insignificant correlation with the AMO but nothing with the PDO. http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/mean:120/from:1850/plot/esrl-amo/mean:120/from:1850/plot/jisao-pdo/mean:120/from:1850/plot/hadsst2nh/mean:120/from:1850 Now I'm off to listen to my mate Don sing about a Jester on the Sideline, I told him he was nutty. Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 12 February 2014 10:38:58 PM
| |
The jester is only poking fun at you, your GF and both your witlessness.
Besides you refuse to address the central issues. You swan around pretending greater knowledge of issues of much lesser import thinking that will distract those of us who understand clearly the real substance of the issue. Posted by imajulianutter, Thursday, 13 February 2014 1:03:53 AM
| |
Groan. Steele you haven't offset or scaled your graph properly, nor have you considered that the PDO has both a warming and a cooling phase which have been well documented; try this instead:
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/jisao-pdo/from:1900/to:2012/every:13/plot/jisao-pdo/from:1900/to:1910/trend/plot/jisao-pdo/from:1910/to:1940/trend/plot/jisao-pdo/from:1940/to:1970/trend/plot/jisao-pdo/from:1970/to:2000/trend/plot/jisao-pdo/from:2000/to:2012/trend/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1900/mean:13/scale:4/offset:5/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1900/mean:13/scale:5/offset:5/trend/plot/jisao-pdo/from:1900/trend Nor have you appreciated that PDO is perhaps the SUM of ENSO: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/gilbert.p.compo/Newmanetal2003.pdf http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL040313.pdf Or maybe it's not: http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/ In any event both the PDO and ENSO are correlated with SST [at least you got that bit!]. And what has SST been doing since 2003; graph it and see. Now I don't have any more time to play with you but come over here and give it your best shot: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=16021&page=0 Regardless, you really shouldn't be so arrogant, you haven't earned the right. Posted by cohenite, Thursday, 13 February 2014 8:14:53 AM
|
Are we looking at the same bloody graph?
Hell mate I'm happy to say there is some correlation between the two, ie when the PDO drops dramatically there is a minor pause in the inexorable march upward global temperature figures.
There is nothing like the direct correlation you or your mates are claiming and anyone with eyes in their head and half a brain in their skull would see just as I have.
As to your missing dip running the mean at 168 months is just too much. Pull it back to 60 like this and it starts to manifest itself.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1900/mean:60/plot/jisao-pdo/mean:60