Is Global Warming Real? Evidence: Global Temperature Records
68
In the wake of the Climategate scandal, the skeptics keep repeating that "the data is fudged."
But is it? Is there a grand conspiracy? Is the earth really warming? Take a look at the evidence and decide for yourself.
Global Temperature Records
2009 is set to be 5th warmest year on record according to a new report from the World Meteorological Organization.
"The
data [in the report] are continuously collected and disseminated by the National
Meteorological and Hydrological Services of the 189 members of the
World Meteorological Organization and several collaborating research
institutions....
The WMO global temperature analysis is thus based on three
complementary datasets. One is the combined dataset maintained by both
the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the Climatic Research Unit,
University of East Anglia, United Kingdom. Another dataset is
maintained by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and
the third one is from the Goddard Institute of Space Studies operated
by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. "
If temperature data was "fudged", Hadley Center, CRU, NASA, and Goddard would all have to be in on the fraud. So would the WMO.
More information about the data used to create the charts above is available at the NOAAPaleoclimatology Website. As you can see, the temperature records that are maintained by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climate Data Center (NOAA and NCDC) match with the data from the Hadley Centre Climate Research Unit. If the data at CRU was tampered with, it must have been tampered with at NOAA as well.
That's a lot of tampering! This must be a pretty big conspiracy.
But let's just throw out the temperature data. Let's assume that it's tampered with and completely worthless. What other information do we have?
Plenty. I'm working on a series of hubs detailing the evidence. The next hub in the series deals with snow cover: Is Global Warming Real? Here's the Evidence, Part II: Snow Cover.
vote upvote downsharePrintflag
- Useful (3)
- Funny
- Awesome (2)
- Beautiful
- Interesting (1)
CommentsLoading...
Thanks Ralph!
James Hansen does have a pretty bad reputation, and that was last year. http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/11/global
Anyone connected to Prince Philip's WWF is suspicious. His goal is population reduction by 2/3
Thank you for dropping in Vraj, and for posting a link.
Some reading on the incident you refer to:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008
and
http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/11/the-hottest-
Also - there was another small flap the year before that:
http://atmoz.org/blog/2007/08/12/more-gisstemp-and
http://climateprogress.org/2007/08/16/must-read-fr
Both of these situations were errors. In both cases, NASA admitted the error and changed the data - and in both cases, the correction resulted in negligible changes. The trend remains: the earth is getting hotter.
Thanks for posting good solid information on this and staying above the silliness and muck. I don't know that we'll be able to turn it around. It won't be very satisfying to live to say "I told you so." In fact, that will be pretty horrible.
Thanks Pam - I have to say, I hope the skeptics are right. But I don't think they are.
Yes, there sure is a lot of "Moonbat science" floating around on the Internet. Man's effect on climate in the recent years of the modern industrial age appear to me to be pretty well documented. I wonder why that's so hard for so many to accept? Nobody is denying the effect of solar events or other factors beyond our control and understanding. Both components which determine climate are compatible.
I don't understand it either Ralph. All I can do is present the facts. Many of the most ardent denialists don't even seem to have a grasp of the basic facts about climate science.
I think it's because climate change and all kinds of things have gotten tied up into this silly evil liberals versus real American conservatives thing the media is forever pushing. A lot of people buy into it because it makes things seem simple, but I don't think our situation in this country is simple at all, and most of us don't fit neatly into 'liberal' or 'conservative' camps.
It's easier for the reactionaries to act like there's no problem. Great post.
I heard a comment from a 'scientist' the other day that our washed out school camp was proof that there is no climate change. ?????
We keep trying to rationalise with the sceptics but most are not very rational. Good hub keep it up
Keep up the good work, William! The deniers will be denying when we are all living in arks!
Thank you Carolina Muscle, Cally, Pam, and Kartika.
Excellent work William.
It really doesn't take much more than simple common sense to understand what we've done to our home.
As far as breaking through to those living in denial, it's an exercise in futility. Willful ignorance is an impenetrable fortress of illusion for the committed ideologue.
”Absolute certainty is a privilege of uneducated minds and fanatics”
C.J. Keyser
Right on CWB!
One thing most people do not take into account is that volcanic activity can have the temporary effect of cooling down portions of the globe. There have been times when huge volcanic explosions have actually altered the climate of North American and Europe for several years, and even that of the world for up to a decade.
It is well proven in science that volcanic ash, chemicals given off by volcanoes, and other factors resulting from volcanic eruptions have indeed cause temporary climate change over large areas of the Earth.
Another volcano is erupting in the Philipines right now, which is having a regional effect on climate. When collecting all the data for climate change, some areas may seem to be cooling down because of these temporary local conditions, while in fact other areas are indeed warming up.
Another factor many of those who deny global climate change miss is that as the glacial and polar ice melts, it cools down the ocean waters where it runs off. It also enters as unsalinated water, which any 1st year physical science student can tell you will (a) cool off the ocean, and (b) remain separated for a time from the salt-water of the larger oceanic body. Since salinated water has a different density than unsalinated water, they tend to layer within the lower regions of the ocean, thus having some effect on things like the Gulf Stream and other currents we know of in the oceans.
All these thing taken together may confuse the talented amateur "scientists" quoting blogs and biased anti-global climate change sites, but in the greater world of science, and especially when the various disciplines of science begin to work together, the consensus and agreement is that something is going on with the climate. Whether it is man-made or not, to me really seems not to matter as much as, what can we do to survive this?
Personally it is my understanding that much of the change has indeed been caused by the addition of formerly dormant carbon molecules into the atmosphere by using coal, natural gas and oil products. Giga-tonnes of carbon emissions, coming from carbon deposits that have not been seen above their deep reservoirs where they have been sitting unused for millions of years, have once again been introduced back into the atmosphere of our times. These deposits were laid down in a time when CO2 and other carbon molecules were in much greater abundance than they have been in the past few millions of years.
Some people say it is the epitome of arrogance to believe that we 6 billion human beings are having no effect whatsoever on the atmosphere and globe. I say just the opposite: It is the largest piece of self-delusion that we think we can muck up the planet and nothing at all will come from it.
I agree 100% Jeff. I've enjoyed your hubs on the subject as well!
More than 40 years ago Lake Michigan froze across. Then in the sixes the lake started to open up and we got lake snow by the foot. Now the lake doesn't freeze over. That should be a clue.
But it was really cold at my house last year! Have you heard that one as an argument against global warming? I can't figure it really - it's almost as if "denial" of global warming has somehow taken on some religious significance with conservatives. You think it may have something to do with the oil and coal industry-spurned propoganda? lolll Reminds me of the healthcare reform challenge - socialism, anti-American, etc.
Ignorance reigns supreme on you DTR0005!
I am one that believes in global warming. It entails both cooling in some areas of the planet and warming in other parts. Global warming is a misnomer. It is one of extreme weather. As our planet warms up ( the average global temperature is increasing), it sets up unusual weather patterns never experienced before. Over the prairies in Canada the winter was unusually cool but the rest of the country had experienced unusually warm weather. This also applies to precipitation. One part of the country could experienced unbelievable rainfall while another part will experience hot, drought conditions.
Another unusual change is the jet stream. It is usually cyclical in nature, like a sine wave as it moves across the globe. The jet stream is no longer a basic sine wave pattern. It is showing unusual curves including going up (or down) and reversing its direction. The jet stream separates high and low pressures areas. The jet stream usually forms a border between calm weather and stormy weather. The jet stream change in its pattern results in sudden and unexpected storms. Winds can come out of nowhere. It also can set up a very large high (or low pressure) areas which can lead to destructive storms staying days on end or a heatwave lasting for weeks.
Ralph Deeds Level 6 Commenter 2 years ago
Good information. Well done. I'm looking forward to more hubs on the evidence.