Odd that you should talk of maturity, locutus, while stamping your feet and claiming that nothing will convince you of scientific fact evidenced by massive amounts of research and decades of observational confirmation. The laws of physics obey your infantile wishes?
The world does not warm up and coll down as it always has. There are vastly different states in the Earth's history. It never takes less than several thousand years to warm up and, usually, longer to cool down again. In the PETM, the warming took tens of thousands of years and it was 200,000 years before the excess CO2 was removed from the atmosphere. Millions of years before the climate fully responded to what might be considered the norm for the era.
"There are many issues with this presentation. It seems to be a big Cherry Picking exercise.
1. Note all of the missing southern hemisphere data. There are operating weather stations during his time, but they are excluded from the analysis. Why?"
Why not. Most of the Earth's land surface is in the Northern Hemisphere and there are many measurements of the Southern Hemisphere that show the same warming.
"2. The period chosen, 1955-1999 leaves out the warmer 1930′s and the cooler 2000′s. Why?"
The 1930s were not warmer and the 1990s were not cooler. Look at the Charts.
"3. The period from 2000-present has no statistically significant warming. Leaving that period out biases the presentation."
As you have been shown many times, the period from 2000 to the present is the warmest period in the last 125,000 million years and is just a little off the highest since half a million before manlike creatures first appeared. It warmed at almost exactly the same rate as each decade from the mid 1970s has done. One decade has no scientific significance but the total for several decades is highly significant. Each decade from the 1970s has been warmer than the previous one. The 13 warmest years in the record have occurred in the last fifteen.
"4. The period chosen exhibits significant postwar growth, urbanization is not considered."
This is, of course, simply idiotic. The urban effects have been calculated by dozens of scientific studies. All confirm the warming trend.
"5. As for severe weather, Hansen ignores the fact that neither tornadoes nor hurricanes have shown any increase recently. Only smaller tornadoes show an increase, due to reporting bias thanks to easily affordable and accessible technology. NOAA’s SPC reports that July 2012 seems to be at a record low for tornadoes."
Hansen ignores nothing. Hurricanes and Tornadoes were not expected to show any increase in frequency. They are exhibiting a great increase in force and intensity. For tornadoes, they were predicted to be fewer in number because of the altitude where the warmer air masses are now - and more complications that is beyond the maturity you show.
"6. My latest results in Watts et al 2012 suggest surface station data may be biased warmer over the last 30 years."
As you have been exposed to in these threads, this is pure bunkum and Watts has made himself a laughing stock in rushing this to press when several studies have already proved his claim to be false. That makes this a fraud.
Do yourself a favour and quit reading for comfort. Mystery stories may be good bedtime reading. Your fraudulent sources are not a mystery to any but the deniers: the frightened little minds that cannot face a truth that will hurt.
Watts is a fraud and a liar. He is one of the vilest creatures on this Planet since he has been rebutted by every genuine scientist that has ever responded or commented on his mischief. He has no excuse but vanity for the immense harm he is doing in persuading so many little minds to support the business interests that put their personal wealth before the lives of hundreds of millions - including their own offspring.
The world does not warm up and coll down as it always has. There are vastly different states in the Earth's history. It never takes less than several thousand years to warm up and, usually, longer to cool down again. In the PETM, the warming took tens of thousands of years and it was 200,000 years before the excess CO2 was removed from the atmosphere. Millions of years before the climate fully responded to what might be considered the norm for the era.
"There are many issues with this presentation. It seems to be a big Cherry Picking exercise.
1. Note all of the missing southern hemisphere data. There are operating weather stations during his time, but they are excluded from the analysis. Why?"
Why not. Most of the Earth's land surface is in the Northern Hemisphere and there are many measurements of the Southern Hemisphere that show the same warming.
"2. The period chosen, 1955-1999 leaves out the warmer 1930′s and the cooler 2000′s. Why?"
The 1930s were not warmer and the 1990s were not cooler. Look at the Charts.
"3. The period from 2000-present has no statistically significant warming. Leaving that period out biases the presentation."
As you have been shown many times, the period from 2000 to the present is the warmest period in the last 125,000 million years and is just a little off the highest since half a million before manlike creatures first appeared. It warmed at almost exactly the same rate as each decade from the mid 1970s has done. One decade has no scientific significance but the total for several decades is highly significant. Each decade from the 1970s has been warmer than the previous one. The 13 warmest years in the record have occurred in the last fifteen.
"4. The period chosen exhibits significant postwar growth, urbanization is not considered."
This is, of course, simply idiotic. The urban effects have been calculated by dozens of scientific studies. All confirm the warming trend.
"5. As for severe weather, Hansen ignores the fact that neither tornadoes nor hurricanes have shown any increase recently. Only smaller tornadoes show an increase, due to reporting bias thanks to easily affordable and accessible technology. NOAA’s SPC reports that July 2012 seems to be at a record low for tornadoes."
Hansen ignores nothing. Hurricanes and Tornadoes were not expected to show any increase in frequency. They are exhibiting a great increase in force and intensity. For tornadoes, they were predicted to be fewer in number because of the altitude where the warmer air masses are now - and more complications that is beyond the maturity you show.
"6. My latest results in Watts et al 2012 suggest surface station data may be biased warmer over the last 30 years."
As you have been exposed to in these threads, this is pure bunkum and Watts has made himself a laughing stock in rushing this to press when several studies have already proved his claim to be false. That makes this a fraud.
Do yourself a favour and quit reading for comfort. Mystery stories may be good bedtime reading. Your fraudulent sources are not a mystery to any but the deniers: the frightened little minds that cannot face a truth that will hurt.
Watts is a fraud and a liar. He is one of the vilest creatures on this Planet since he has been rebutted by every genuine scientist that has ever responded or commented on his mischief. He has no excuse but vanity for the immense harm he is doing in persuading so many little minds to support the business interests that put their personal wealth before the lives of hundreds of millions - including their own offspring.
Last edited:
