Friday, 12 November 2010

160 years of cooling

Over at WUWT, guest blogger David Whitehouse from the Global Warming Policy Foundation research institute has a very insightful post about the recent lack of global warming. However, it is not only the last decade or two that has seen no warming. As a matter of fact, there has been no warming for the last 160 years. On the contrary, there has been a number of cooling episodes. Consider the following graph showing the global temperature according to the unadjusted HadCRUT3 series (from Wood for Trees). You can click on the graph to enlarge it.


This graph shows the global temperaure as a red curve, and a number of trends as straight lines of different lengths. These different trends are for various periods: 1850-1865, 1865-1875, 1875-1915, 1915-1920, 1920-1925, 1925-1930, 1930-1935, 1935-1980, 1980-1988, 1988-1995, 1995-june 1997, july 1997-2003, and 2003-2010. And every single one of them is negative. These trends together cover the entire period from 1850 to 2010, that is 160 years, and each of the trends shows a cooling. In many cases, it is a matter of the very strong cooling, and in a few cases a more modest cooling. This means that this entire period of 160 years it has been cooling.


Looking at the red curve, it might appear to the casual observer that in spite of all these negative trends, the global temperature has actually gone up. However, that is but an illusion created by the coincidence that each trend segment starts at a somewhat higher point than the previous trend segment. Hence, the apparent warming does not really exist. It is just a trick of the eye, which disappears when the data is subject to rigorous statistical analysis.


Some warmists may object and say that we should have computed the trend for the entire period. To that I respond: that is a really big cherry you are trying to pick there, Mister! Anyhow, such a long trend has no scientific meaning - it is but a line drawn by a ruler, a trick to hide the decline. And when I say that, I'm being awfully charitable.


So increasing levels of CO2 don’t cause increasing temperatures. How many negative counterexamples of a theory does it take to falsify it?


Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.

6 comments:

  1. Gentlemen, Great News! Finally somebody with a bit of common sense has spoken out: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/god-global-warming-congressman-energy/
    John Shimkus clearly is a very wise person and I have no reason to doubt him. As a matter of fact, I trust him unconditionally. Clearly John talks to the Lord a lot and the Lord must have given him this insight to share with us so that we, His people, are not worried. So we must believe John's words immediately. It's the "sceintists" with their "sceintific facts" and "theories" and "evidence" that we should be skeptical of, because what do they now about the real world?

    ReplyDelete
  2. End Run Around the Ragged Edge of Reality13 November 2010 at 10:26

    Not that this is something that you yourself are not aware of Baron, but I think it's worth mentioning that when one enlarges that graph, one will note that those declining trend lines are even longer than before. This is likely why IPCC graphs tend to be on the small side. Decline hiding is itself an advanced science for those folks, let's not forget.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Slaw - as this scientific study clearly shows - God is real and present. God do have vacations, but this is simply ignored by the eco-facists.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Gliese 581 g is Warming14 November 2010 at 22:34

    Sir von Monckhofen, I don't know if you have been made aware of this, but the website of the esteemed "Friends of Science" appears to have been hacked. Despite the excellent and incontrovertible analysis you offer here, The Friends of Science are shamefully showing a warming trend for the last 8 years. The page on the Friends of Science site that is dedicated to showing the fact of a cooling earth prominently displays a slight warming trend with their "best fit" line. In fact, though the graph is dedicated to showing the data for a cooling earth, nothing on their graph actually shows cooling! The only rational conclusion is that warmist spies have infiltrated The Friends of Science. See for yourself the evidence of the infiltration. Be careful, Baron. Everyone must be on the lookout for warmist spies now!

    ReplyDelete
  5. These trends together cover the entire period from 1850 to 2010, that is 160 years, and each of the trends shows a cooling. In many cases, it is a matter of the very strong cooling, and in a few cases a more modest cooling. This means that this entire period of 160 years it has been cooling.

    Baron, I did not see that, but now that you mention it, I see the elegant simplicity your intuited geometrical mathematics. You are an example of the great concise reasoning of blog science.

    ReplyDelete
  6.  I would have burned fifa 14 coins the pink candle sculpted like a rose before it melted in storage. I would have sat on the lawn with my children and not worried about grass stains. I would have cried cheap fifa 14 coins and laughed less while watching television - and more while fifa 14 coins watching life.

    ReplyDelete

Welcome to comment on my blog, dear reader.