Global Warming/Climate Change/Global Weirding?

[Gaspar]

Good grief.  Not again.  This time it's NOAA perpetrating the fraud.\
http://www.examiner.com/x-50809-Boston-Environmental-Policy-Examiner~y2010m8d9-US-Government-in-Massive-New-Global-Warming-Scandal--NOAA-Disgraced

Global warming data apparently cooked by U.S. government-funded body shows astounding temperature fraud with increases averaging 10 to 15 degrees Fahrenheit.

My favorite:
Together the two institutions show temperature maps for northern Lake Michigan registering an absurd 430 degrees Fahrenheit -yes, you read it right –that's four hundred and thirty degrees-and this is by no means the highest temperature recorded on the charts.

[nathanm]

You probably think the reports on the lack of any kind of wrongdoing with regards to the veracity of the data at the University of East Anglia are just a bunch of lies, too.

Even if it turns out that satellite was providing faulty readings, we have these fine ground stations, some of which have been collecting data for over a century which provide an equally compelling case for global warming.

http://ams.confex.com/ams/90annual/techprogram/paper_159905.htm

And in 2005, noaa warned that "users of climate monitoring and application should exert caution in using the NOAA-16 OLR data."

http://www.weather.gov/ost/climate/STIP/NOAA16_olrdeg_080305.htm

Edited to add: And this is why they shouldn't provide unfiltered data sets to the public. People who can't bother to read about the limitations of the system presume all sorts of things that aren't true. Apparently the wild readings have to do with cloud cover.

[Hoss]

You probably think the reports on the lack of any kind of wrongdoing with regards to the veracity of the data at the University of East Anglia are just a bunch of lies, too.

Even if it turns out that satellite was providing faulty readings, we have these fine ground stations, some of which have been collecting data for over a century which provide an equally compelling case for global warming.

http://ams.confex.com/ams/90annual/techprogram/paper_159905.htm

And in 2005, noaa warned that "users of climate monitoring and application should exert caution in using the NOAA-16 OLR data."

http://www.weather.gov/ost/climate/STIP/NOAA16_olrdeg_080305.htm

Edited to add: And this is why they shouldn't provide unfiltered data sets to the public. People who can't bother to read about the limitations of the system presume all sorts of things that aren't true. Apparently the wild readings have to do with cloud cover.

Dem damned ol' fax!

[Gaspar]

I can't keep up.  According to HuffPo, and RealClimate.org,  Global Warming Climate Change Global Climate Disturbance is now called “Global Weirding”.  Apparently due to the fact that none of the other nomenclature applies.

The increase in polar bear population, combined with the fact that Manhattan has not sunk 20+ feet under sea level, children do obviously still know what snow is, and the combined global temps seem to be flatter than predicted have really caused quite a stir in the movement.

I wonder if they will have to reprint T-shirts?

[nathanm]

Braaaaains!

[Red Arrow]

The recent example of Global (word of your choice) will probably spur snowblower and SUV sales.  SUVs to get the ground clearance.

[patric]

Weren't more sever winters in North America one of the earliest predictions of Global Warming?

[nathanm]

Weren't more sever winters in North America one of the earliest predictions of Global Warming?

Yes. More moisture in the atmosphere means more snowfall in the places where it's cold enough to support snow. Warmer temperatures generally mean higher jet stream amplitude, leading to arctic temperatures farther south on occasion. (and unusually warm weather farther north)

It's all part of why weather is not climate and why one ought not listen to meteorologists when trying to learn about climatology and why one ought not listen to climatologists if you want to know what the weather is going to be like.

That said, blaming this weather on global warming is as silly as blaming a given record high temperature or given hurricane on global warming.

Weather patterns are governed far more by sea surface temperatures in various locations around the globe than any other factor. Sometimes that means the overall warming trend can be masked, which is why headlines about what the average temperature has been like this year or last year or even for the past 5 years are also silly. You have to look at the trend over 30 years or more to see the broader pattern that is being masked by the various SST anomalies.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Good grief, not again, Gaspar!

It takes about 30 seconds to check this crap out.  But even that small effort would entail too much effort and would again leave the RWRE agenda with nothing to spew about.  And what fun would that be?

Here is the notice posted about a month after the satellite problems developed.  And it was posted when the misleading starting post of this thread was made.

NOTICE (8/11/2010): Due to degradation of a satellite sensor used by this mapping product, some images have exhibited extreme high and low surface temperatures. Please disregard these images as anomalies. Future images will not include data from the degraded satellite and images caused by the faulty satellite sensor will be/have been removed from the image archive.

And the website;
http://www.coastwatch.msu.edu/

[nathanm]

Apparently nobody noticed my zombie callout.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Braaiinns??  I saw it and it slipped right by - I didn't catch it.  Sorry!

[we vs us]

Gassy, was this the article you cribbed the "weirding" reference from?

In actuality, it stems from an op-ed by Thomas Friedman written around this time last year.  As he says in the article,

"I prefer the term "global weirding," because that is what actually happens as global temperatures rise and the climate changes. The weather gets weird. The hots are expected to get hotter, the wets wetter, the dries drier and the most violent storms more numerous."

It ain't really part of the super-secret climato-pinko-Muslim Brotherhood-liberal democrat Star Chamber Commission on World Domination, and it's not a scientific term.  But it is a useful description of what's happening.

In any event, Friedman, who's generally a practical centrist has become a frothing climate change supporter because, as he says at the end of the article:

" . . . . I suspect China is quietly laughing at us right now. And Iran, Russia, Venezuela and the whole OPEC gang are high-fiving each other. Nothing better serves their interests than to see Americans becoming confused about climate change, and, therefore, less inclined to move toward clean-tech and, therefore, more certain to remain addicted to oil. Yes, sir, it is morning in Saudi Arabia."

As Friedman says, as we dither and argue and over-parse, our competition has reached consensus and is moving ahead.  

[guido911]

I want some damned global/climate/weirding or whatever right now!!!

[heironymouspasparagus]

You got about 14" of right outside your door.  And more on the way.

[guido911]

You got about 14" of right outside your door.  And more on the way.

Ah yes, the more it snows, the more we blame global whatever. Didn't we hear that having less snow was caused by global whatever? Why, yes we did...