Climate and Weather

Ricky Fandango said:
Why would a stable climate be remarkable?
I'll tell you why.
Climate is not, and never has been, "stable".
Click to expand...

411t%2B8HOvfL._SY300_.jpg
 
Ricky Fandango said:
You people can believe whatever you want.
Im not gonna try and make you change.
Click to expand...

I will believe the data that conscientious scientists all over the world are gathering. I will believe that the Arrhenius equations relating atmospheric CO2 concentration to global temperature are correct, since they have been confirmed by laboratory and field measurements and experiments. I will believe that there are a lot of opponents to those views because they fear that the logical reaction to the observed causes of climate change may cause them some financial distress, so much so that they are willing to finance bullshit propaganda hoping that they can convince enough gullible suckers to be able to paralyze the political response.
 
espola said:
I will believe the data that conscientious scientists all over the world are gathering. I will believe that the Arrhenius equations relating atmospheric CO2 concentration to global temperature are correct, since they have been confirmed by laboratory and field measurements and experiments. I will believe that there are a lot of opponents to those views because they fear that the logical reaction to the observed causes of climate change may cause them some financial distress, so much so that they are willing to finance bullshit propaganda hoping that they can convince enough gullible suckers to be able to paralyze the political response.
Click to expand...
Very sensitive post.
Are you ok?

You are free to believe whatever you want.
Free country.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
Your red shaded area should have a hump in it between 1920 and 1950 according to the data points.
Click to expand...

As I said, the forcing term does not encompass the 30's warming/60's-70's cooling. There were clearly other forcings involved during those periods. They are interesting, but, as far as I know, they have not come up on our little....whatever we want to call it.

Ricky Fandango said:
It should also have a flattening after 2000.
Click to expand...

Polynomial regression says no. Of course, you are welcome to download the data and do your own analysis.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
As I said, the forcing term does not encompass the 30's warming/60's-70's cooling. There were clearly other forcings involved during those periods. They are interesting, but, as far as I know, they have not come up on our little....whatever we want to call it.



Polynomial regression says no. Of course, you are welcome to download the data and do your own analysis.
Click to expand...
The graph you posted is fine.
My observation is not exceptional, its just what I see.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
There are 14 on 5928.
What is the trend since the beginning of the thread?
You chart seems to show 2017 being cooler than 2016.
Click to expand...

With the exception of the 30's warming/60's-70's cooling cycle mentioned earlier, the trend can be described as
y = 0.3sin(6.3x) + 5.0E10-7 10(EXP)3. That's the point.

2016 was a strong El Nino year, which has a big effect on NH. That is a probable explanation.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
With the exception of the 30's warming/60's-70's cooling cycle mentioned earlier, the trend can be described as
y = 0.3sin(6.3x) + 5.0E10-7 10(EXP)3. That's the point.

2016 was a strong El Nino year, which has a big effect on NH. That is a probable explanation.
Click to expand...
I can look at the graphic and see the data points.
 
espola said:
That looks like it would need another function and coefficient to be factored in. What do you suggest?
Click to expand...

Perhaps adding a sine with one cycle starting from 1880 ending about now, maximum in mid-30s and minimum mid-60s, with the time scale contorted to match those extremes, and coefficient to match the variation from the previous set of functions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top