------ THE SKY IS FALLING ------

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by Robert Northup

I've got a deal for you, Paradox!

You suggested that the scientist who dares to expose the truth about the FACT that global temperatures are actually decreasing would be ridiculed, etc. If that scientist has valid data to make the case, I personally know plenty of folks who would be willing to risk the ridicule, myself included. I am well-connected, if you want to see it published in a reputable environmental science journal, although I see your point that physicians and surgeons would be more open minded, free of the biases, political pressures, and corruption that all that climate change money causes in the scientific community.

I, personally, am willing to risk being ridiculed, and I actually have a decent scientific reputation to be ruined by this. SHOW ME THE DATA and I'm there! I'm not afraid to challenge the mainstream paradigm. I've done it before and received a lot more accolades than ridicule. I'm willing to take that chance, and I could pull in some of the world's most highly respected scientists to co-author and ensure its most rapid possible publication. Just one condition. It requires valid data from the real world. I hope that won't be a problem.

Give me some kind of gobbledegook about why it's too scientifically complex to be done that way, or that there is some sinister entity preventing the data from being available to you, or to any honest scientist who might wish to acquire it.. Well, you and I don't live in the same world.

Hi Robert,

I like your style. There is controversy about the precision of global temperature. You do know that, don't you? My recent remarks have been a result of scientific temperature readings from 2007 taken from:

HadCRUT


GISS


UAH


and RSS


If this data is accurate, 2007 resulted in a massive drop in global temperature.

Since you have made a commitment here I would like you to take the time to examine the following link and the links associated with it. It just seems pretty clear that we cooled last year globally and many reputable sources claim we will do so well into the future. If you can explain to me why the data related to the link is bogus, I am all ears.

January 2008 - 4 sources say “globally cooler” in the past 12 months

Honestly, maybe I am missing something.

I could save you some trouble by quoting 'Dr. John Christy' (Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama in Huntsville)

I have been flooded this week with calls and e-mail messages concerning a story that has appeared on various Internet sites, in which the claim is made that cooling global temperatures over the past twelve months in some way negate or eliminate any global warming that might have happened over the past 100 years.

“Here is my perspective on this issue: Twelve months of data does not make a trend, especially in a system as complex and slow moving as global climate, and even more so when the cause for that short-term cooling is as reasonably well understood and well documented as a switch from a minor El Nino Pacific Ocean warming in January 2007 to the La Nina cooling event now taking place.

“The 0.59 C drop we have seen in the past 12 months is unusual, but not unprecedented; April 1998 to April 1999 saw a 0.71 C fall. The long-term climate trend from November 1978 through (and including) January 2008 continues to show a modest warming at the rate of about 0.14 C (0.25 degrees F) per decade.

“One cool year does not erase decades of climate data, nor does it more than minimally change the long-term climate trend. Long-term climate change is just that “long term” and 12 months of data are little more than a blip on the screen.”

Twelve Months of Cooling Doesn’t Make A Climate Trend

He admits that the cooling was 'unusual last year' but goes on to pick and choose reference points which play down this precipitous drop in temperature. Why is it not widely know that we cooled last year, are cooling this year, and many project cooling well into our future?

I feel as though many people here are denying that we are currently cooling. From my perspective a historic shift in temperature, given the current 'consensus', is profound...especially since it supports my theory. Yet instead of headlines reading 'historic global cooling in 2007' we get stories like:

2007 Was Tied As Earth's Second Warmest Year

Why? The graph on the link claims that 2007 is an 11 month anomaly. What does that mean?

If you want detailed information about the controversy related to global temperature reading I would be glad to provide it. For now, I would like your interpretation of this information.

[JustTheFacts]

Originally Posted by Paradox

Date: Monday, October 6, 2008, 8:07 PM

READ BEFORE CLICKING ON THE LINK BELOW

There are two identical pictures that will appear on the screen. Almost 8,000 people were tested to see if they could find the 3 differences in the two pictures and only 19 found all 3.See how observant you are. If you find all 3, you're one of very few people who are able to do this.

That was pretty gay.

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by JustTheFacts

That was pretty gay.

Oh, come on... lighten up.

[JustTheFacts]

Large ground warming in the Canadian Arctic inferred from inversions of temperature logs

J. A. Majorowicz , W. R. Skinner, and J. Afanda

Received 1 July 2003; Revised 5 January 2004; accepted 3 February 2004. Available online 12 March 2004.

References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Abstract
The simultaneous functional space inversion applied for the first time to the set of precise temperature logs from 61 wells located between 60° and 82°N in northern Canada shows evidence of large ground surface temperature (GST) warming. These results include highest latitude locations of the well temperature profiles known in the Northern Hemisphere. There is strong evidence that GST warming started in the late-18th century and lasted until the 20th century. Simultaneous inversion of all well temperature data suggests that the cumulative ground surface temperature change over the past five centuries amounts to about 2°C significantly exceeding recent estimates from conventional climate proxies. This large GST warming is also present in other circumpolar locations in the Northern Hemisphere.

Translation for Spot: The ground under the artic is being heated from below.

[JustTheFacts]

Originally Posted by Paradox

Oh, come on... lighten up.

I keep thinking about photo-shopping a picture of Al Gore with a flame thrower heating up one of the world temperature gauges while it's snowing outside, but alas, I just do not have the time.

[spot1234]

Originally Posted by JustTheFacts

Large ground warming in the Canadian Arctic inferred from inversions of temperature logs

J. A. Majorowicz , W. R. Skinner, and J. Afanda

Received 1 July 2003; Revised 5 January 2004; accepted 3 February 2004. Available online 12 March 2004.

References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Abstract
The simultaneous functional space inversion applied for the first time to the set of precise temperature logs from 61 wells located between 60° and 82°N in northern Canada shows evidence of large ground surface temperature (GST) warming. These results include highest latitude locations of the well temperature profiles known in the Northern Hemisphere. There is strong evidence that GST warming started in the late-18th century and lasted until the 20th century. Simultaneous inversion of all well temperature data suggests that the cumulative ground surface temperature change over the past five centuries amounts to about 2°C significantly exceeding recent estimates from conventional climate proxies. This large GST warming is also present in other circumpolar locations in the Northern Hemisphere.

Translation for Spot: The ground under the artic is being heated from below.

No the extract does not say that. If they thought that a geothermal process was involved they would have said so. Its possible that it might actually say that in the article but we don't know from the extract you posted.

I think it is more likely that they might be raising concerns about permafrost. BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Earth's permafrost starts to squelch

Also it is extremely unlikely that a geothermal process could warm the margins of an entire continent in the south and the northern extremes of two continents plus an ocean at the opposite end of the world at the same time. It is also extremely unlikely that a geothermal process would be so widespread yet only ever affect the surface by a few degrees. It is also odd that this upsurge in geothermal activity melting 800,000 year old permafrost should happen to occur now. coincidently when an increase in CO2 concentrations proven to come from fossil sources extracted by man also occurs. As you can see I have thought about it. Again the skeptic position has no merit

Permafrost is melting, another verifiable real-world indicator that the world is warming, not cooling.

[spot1234]

And Paradox the link posted had the desired effect. Good thing I cycle to work so my hearts in good shape.

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by Bored Wombat

Advances?

Antarctica had the largest sea-ice extent in recorded history last year...this year the Arctic reversed course and had a larger extent than last year.

But if you're confident, I've got $5000 that says this year's temperature will be warmer than the median temperature in the 1970s.

Weren't the 70's when scientists were ringing the alarm-bells about an imminent ice-age (which I agree with - they were just a few decades off). If we were warming as your theory suggested.. uh, wouldn't increased global heat each year be a given?

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by spot1234

And Paradox the link posted had the desired effect. Good thing I cycle to work so my hearts in good shape.

Ok, we're even now...

I should probably put up a disclaimer.

[spot1234]

Originally Posted by Paradox

Antarctica had the largest sea-ice extent in recorded history last year...this year the Arctic reversed course and had a larger extent than last year.



Weren't the 70's when scientists were ringing the alarm-bells about an imminent ice-age (which I agree with - they were just a few decades off). If we were warming as your theory suggested.. uh, wouldn't increased global heat each year be a given?

I think that the 70s iceage thing has been discussed before. This has been done to death. Also nobody is saying that every single year has to be warmer then the year before. it would be like saying you don't believe in winter because October the 10th was cooler then October the 11th.

Before you respond what I really want to see is you put your money where your mouth is. seriously you could make a bet like the next 5 years will show a year on year cooling trend and you would get good odds or something that we all agree is fair. Just like if I walked into a bookies and wanted to bet that Stoke City would win the premiership. Scan the betting slip and post it up here.