Excellent work - to answer your question as to how it is possible to witness cooling in the most intense period of industrialisation the alarmist types seem to have invented the term 'global weirding' to explain why cooling is part of warming. Just as Orwell predicted 'War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength'
Yes indeed! Gone are the classical constructs of hypothesis and experiment. Hypothesis testing and critical thought are no more and in their place we have a form of religious belief. You'll often find me stating that I'm wearing the wrong colour socks, this being a nod to the ludicrous nature of the situation. If the world became an ice ball tomorrow they'd still be arguing that human emissions are to blame.
Incidentally, you can blow the global weirding excuse out of the water by a return to the basic physics. CO2, being photo-reactive, absorbs IR, which affects Earth's energy balance by retaining this energy in the atmosphere instead of it being lost to space. Regardless of what the polar vortex and other jet streams do to create wacky weather on the ground (weirding), the lower troposphere *must* be warming if CO2 is increasing (assuming the theory is correct). However, satellite and high altitude balloon data reveals the lower troposphere is not warming in line with expectation despite a near exponential increase in CO2, this being due to saturation of the absorption spectra. At some point I'll pull down the latest UAH NSST6 sat data and take folk through this
A solid question! Although it looks like an exponential rise to our eyeballs it is certainly not exponential in the pure mathematical sense, being far more aggressive in its growth. However, I often use the phrase 'near exponential' so that folk get the general idea of something explosive.
I may well pen an article on the dynamics of CO2, for which a non-linear function is needed of the form: β0 + β1.t + β2.t^β3. They key coefficient here is β3, which defines the acceleration, but I won't spoil the forthcoming article by revealing what value this takes!
Yes an interesting topic to pursue.... so after 25-odd years of preaching about reducing "emissions" the effect has been - what? Has your β3 factor been impacted? And what other sources of CO2 measurement across the globe are there and do they agree? Does seem odd having a measuring station on a volcano... AIUI volcanoes burp CO2 frequently -there must be some form of VCIE "volcanic CO2 island effect"
Yes, that single volcano sure has bothered me! There are other sources and a groovy project would be comparing all of these. There are some fabulous slides about revealing total failure of all international protocols to reduce the growth rate, but this would be a cracking nut for that ARIMA spanner to crack, with the pandemic period offering a rare chance to see what happened when we all sat at home.
"What the heck was going on at those three North American Arctic stations?"
JD. I wonder if the time series data from the Global Monitoring Laboratory 1973 to present will unearth a worm? I plotted data using their graph tool 2010-2020 . Eyeball says no spike?
Morning! I've just checked the source data for Barrow using KNMI climate explorer and there's deffo a hike for 2016 - 2019. You can't see this using the NOAA link you kindly provided because the utility does not permit plotting of annual means - all you get are hourly averages whose variation totally swamps the underlying year-on-year trend.
JD. I'll go back there next week and dig a bit more. As I said, I only did a rough eyeball with the plot function and data on their meta data site. From the picture, the station is a really nice techie-looking "rural" windy site for collecting honest data. Let's pretend for now the fraudsters have not yet tweaked the raw data. I'm still puzzled by your three arctic US stations. The only other "within arctic" site where there are US bods is Summit Camp, Greenland. Fairbanks airport is south of the circle.
Excellent work - to answer your question as to how it is possible to witness cooling in the most intense period of industrialisation the alarmist types seem to have invented the term 'global weirding' to explain why cooling is part of warming. Just as Orwell predicted 'War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength'
Yes indeed! Gone are the classical constructs of hypothesis and experiment. Hypothesis testing and critical thought are no more and in their place we have a form of religious belief. You'll often find me stating that I'm wearing the wrong colour socks, this being a nod to the ludicrous nature of the situation. If the world became an ice ball tomorrow they'd still be arguing that human emissions are to blame.
Incidentally, you can blow the global weirding excuse out of the water by a return to the basic physics. CO2, being photo-reactive, absorbs IR, which affects Earth's energy balance by retaining this energy in the atmosphere instead of it being lost to space. Regardless of what the polar vortex and other jet streams do to create wacky weather on the ground (weirding), the lower troposphere *must* be warming if CO2 is increasing (assuming the theory is correct). However, satellite and high altitude balloon data reveals the lower troposphere is not warming in line with expectation despite a near exponential increase in CO2, this being due to saturation of the absorption spectra. At some point I'll pull down the latest UAH NSST6 sat data and take folk through this
Is CO2 increase exponential?
A solid question! Although it looks like an exponential rise to our eyeballs it is certainly not exponential in the pure mathematical sense, being far more aggressive in its growth. However, I often use the phrase 'near exponential' so that folk get the general idea of something explosive.
I may well pen an article on the dynamics of CO2, for which a non-linear function is needed of the form: β0 + β1.t + β2.t^β3. They key coefficient here is β3, which defines the acceleration, but I won't spoil the forthcoming article by revealing what value this takes!
Yes an interesting topic to pursue.... so after 25-odd years of preaching about reducing "emissions" the effect has been - what? Has your β3 factor been impacted? And what other sources of CO2 measurement across the globe are there and do they agree? Does seem odd having a measuring station on a volcano... AIUI volcanoes burp CO2 frequently -there must be some form of VCIE "volcanic CO2 island effect"
Yes, that single volcano sure has bothered me! There are other sources and a groovy project would be comparing all of these. There are some fabulous slides about revealing total failure of all international protocols to reduce the growth rate, but this would be a cracking nut for that ARIMA spanner to crack, with the pandemic period offering a rare chance to see what happened when we all sat at home.
"What the heck was going on at those three North American Arctic stations?"
JD. I wonder if the time series data from the Global Monitoring Laboratory 1973 to present will unearth a worm? I plotted data using their graph tool 2010-2020 . Eyeball says no spike?
https://gml.noaa.gov/dv/iadv/graph.php?code=BRW&program=met&type=temp
Nice picture of the Barrow station, Alaska on their first page:
https://www.gml.noaa.gov/
Morning! I've just checked the source data for Barrow using KNMI climate explorer and there's deffo a hike for 2016 - 2019. You can't see this using the NOAA link you kindly provided because the utility does not permit plotting of annual means - all you get are hourly averages whose variation totally swamps the underlying year-on-year trend.
JD. I'll go back there next week and dig a bit more. As I said, I only did a rough eyeball with the plot function and data on their meta data site. From the picture, the station is a really nice techie-looking "rural" windy site for collecting honest data. Let's pretend for now the fraudsters have not yet tweaked the raw data. I'm still puzzled by your three arctic US stations. The only other "within arctic" site where there are US bods is Summit Camp, Greenland. Fairbanks airport is south of the circle.
KNMI lists the following North American stations...
BARROW_AP,_AK (United States)
KOTZEBUE_AP,_AK (United States)
CAMBRIDGE_BAY_A,_NU (Canada)
...you'll need to derive annual means to spot the hike, and ideally compare these three series to Russian and Scandinavian stations.