Record cold in the Midwest


#121

This is straight up fantasy.

You’ve been reading too many conservative sources who don’t care about the truth. Hide the decline refers to something completely different, specifically the deviation of tree ring data after 1960.

Second, if you think NOAA would ever make a statement anything like yours, then you need to think again. They’ve covered this topic extensively.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/did-global-warming-stop-1998


#122

Not since 2016 which was a huge and unequivocal leap in global temperature.


#123

I don’t get my information from the so-called “deniers.” Most of what I know on the subject comes from the NWS, NOAA and several prominent University Research Groups including the UAF Geophysical Inst. just a mile and a half from my home. The 1998 point was the apex of the rapid warming since the mid '70s, but the metrological scientists discounted that year as part of that trend because of the strong El Nino that year, so they moved it back to 1996 when they began comparing that period to the temperature trend in this century.

And if you go back and look at the context of where I first used that year, you will see it fits quite appropriately with that conversation.

While in the last 3-4 years, there appears to be another steeping of the temperature curve, in the years from 1996 to 2015 there is a clear lessening of the increase (even a slight decrease between '98 to '09) from the mid '70s to '96 (or '98, whichever you prefer.)


#125

I don’t think NASA and NOAA are conservative, but you might be right.


#126

That’s because as more years past, the pause became less prominent. But at the time, it was acknowledged in the data. You can see it clearly in the graph that I just posted.


#127

Yes, and I recall having lengthy conversations on that pause, discussing if it was statistically significant (and thus representative of a new trend) or if it could be considered part of the natural variability of the data.

AGW deniers used it as the final verdict that we were not warming. Perhaps you remember those discussions?

It seems I was correct in that the pause was just part of the noise. We’re still warming.


#128

Well, it did persist for twenty years only to be cut short by the El Niño year of 2016. Thirty years (three previous decades, actually) is what the Weather Bureau uses to describe “normal.” And the three years hence do not constitute a trend.


#129

No it wasn’t. It was like 1998 … an El Niño year, an outlier. Since that time, the temperature has decreased.


#130

Even in your graph there is a clear upward trend since 1976…43 years now.

The max temp anomalies are higher and the mins are also higher.


#131

Yes, but that is not the question I was asked that the graph was posted to respond to.

I sure wish people would read the full contex of a post before they jump in with a criticism. It would make it so much less contentious to discuss the topic. :neutral_face:


#132

Ok, I found the GISS temp data and plotted 1996-2018 in Excel. I then let Excel create a linear trendline of the data. Definitely a positive slope which tells us that over that term, the temperature is trending up.


#133

No matter what the temperatures are that can contradict the myth of “glabal warmn”
the Democrats and their politicians will continue to stand up for it.

It’s one of the biggest money making schemes that they’ve had,
and they wouldn’t want to let it go any time soon.


#134

It’s a simple formula. When it’s abnormally cold it’s weather; when it’s abnormally warm, it’s global warming. :wink:


#135

yup. The Earth goes in cycles.


#136

Your politically motivated, science-free opinion is noted.


#137

your politically motivated opinion is noted as well.
and you’re welcome for my opinion. :grin:


#138

Moving into the age of aquarius


#139

I base my opinion on what the scientists are saying. You seem to prefer talk radio.


#140

Astrology is not a science.


#141

I know