skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Perhaps this decade will be similar to the 1940s; ups and downs but overall sideways. Except of course it has continued upwards at around .1C/decade. With the increasing solar activity, I'd expect the next 5 years to bring the post 1998 trend upwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strongbad Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Except of course it has continued upwards at around .1C/decade. With the increasing solar activity, I'd expect the next 5 years to bring the post 1998 trend upwards. Hmmmm, try comparing solar activity in 1998 to now. I don't think we can compare what the next 5 years will bring with those 5, as our Sun is Much quieter now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Except of course it has continued upwards at around .1C/decade. With the increasing solar activity, I'd expect the next 5 years to bring the post 1998 trend upwards. That's ENSO and solar-corrected. You aren't applying the same analsysis to the beginning of the last PDO phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 That's ENSO and solar-corrected. You aren't applying the same analsysis to the beginning of the last PDO phase. No it's not.. the unadjusted HadCRUT+UAH polar, GISS, and GISS+UAH polar trend are over .1C/decade since 1998, and the UAH trend is just under .1C/decade. RSS is the only source that doesn't show ~.1C+/decade of warming. Adjusting for solar and ENSO brings the trend close to .2C/decade. It never ceases to amaze me that 'skeptics' can't wrap their heads around the fact that we have been warming since 1998. It's like they're still stuck on some WUWT post from 2008 doing a trend from the 1998 el nino to the 2008 la nina. MOVE ON. The problem for deniers is the post-1998 trend is now a long enough period (13 years) that even starting in a Nino and ending in a Nina still yields over .1C of warming. Which is why the new fad is starting trends in the 2002-2005 Nino and ending in La Ninas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 No it's not.. the unadjusted HadCRUT+UAH polar, GISS, and GISS+UAH polar trend are over .1C/decade since 1998, and the UAH trend is just under .1C/decade. Adjusting for solar and ENSO brings the trend close to .2C/decade. It never ceases to amaze me that 'skeptics' can't wrap their heads around the fact that we have been warming since 1998. It's like they're still stuck on some WUWT post from 2008 doing a trend from the 1998 el nino to the 2008 la nina. MOVE ON. The problem for deniers is the post-1998 trend is now a long enough period (13 years) that even starting in a Nino and ending in a Nina still yields over .1C of warming. Which is why the new fad is starting trends in the 2002-2005 Nino and ending in La Ninas. The past decade would be 2001 - 2011. And that's starting with the tail end of a -ENSO period and ending with a -ENSO period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 The past decade would be 2001 - 2011. And that's starting with the tail end of a -ENSO period and ending with a -ENSO period. He said 'this' decade ... I have no idea what he means by that? 2000-2009? 2001-2010? 2010-2019? I chose 1998-present because 1998 was when most deniers used to claim that global warming stopped. And the original question was if the PDO was/is/will cause cooling .. and 1998 is the year the PDO went neutral and 2006 the year it went negative. Thus 1998-present encompasses the full transition from +PDO to -PDO. Of course now the new fad is 2002-present because the trends starting in 1998 are all too positive. 3-5 years from now I'm sure they'll abandon the 2002-present trends and start their trends in the 2010 El Nino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 He said 'this' decade ... I have no idea what he means by that? 2000-2009? 2001-2010? 2010-2019? I chose 1998-present because 1998 was when most deniers used to claim that global warming stopped. Of course now the new fad is 2002-present because the trends starting in 1998 are all too positive. 3-5 years from now I'm sure they'll abandon the 2002-present trends and start their trends in the 2010 El Nino. Whatever. The 2009-10 El Nino had major impacts for the trend to current, but that will go back down again when 2011 is complete. 2001-2011 will be the new 10 year trend, and of course it is dependent on ENSO as always. Just as 1998-2008 led to a negative trend with most temp sources, and 2000-2010 led to a major positive trend. 2001-2011 will be much more balanced than either of those. And your .2C/decade ENSO/solar corrected trend is exagerrated, of course. We have already been over this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 And your .2C/decade ENSO/solar corrected trend is exagerrated, of course. We have already been over this. Really? News to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Really? News to me. It's all in the global temp thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 It's all in the global temp thread. I bumped the thread and found no valid criticisms. Moreover, my method has been used in peer-reviewed journal articles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mencken_Fan Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Except of course it has continued upwards at around .1C/decade. With the increasing solar activity, I'd expect the next 5 years to bring the post 1998 trend upwards. Still some debate as to where this solar cycle is headed: http://www.solen.inf.../cyclcomp2.html On another note, the globe is presently warm as heck, and with the awesome Arctic melt this year there is no sign of a cooling trend. Anyone who sees a cooling trend is either delusional or ignorant as to what a trend is. Whether climate or a market (where I'm proficient at technical analysis) a chart is a chart and a trend is a trend. A trend is a move either up or down, sustained over time, with higher highs and higher lows or vise verse. (Going sideways is trend-less but does not qualify as a reversal.) A technician using a straight edge can pinpoint precisely where trend breaks occur; but only after they occur. One cannot see a trend changing because it's only noise until the trend break actually happens. (This is a key application of "buy stop" and "sell stop" trading orders.) Many people are assuming a trend reversal based on what those in the market would call "fundamental knowledge"; but trends by definition are "technical"; they are not "fundamental." (Markets consist of only two data sets or "knowledge bases"; technical and fundamental.) Other than the inevitable "noise" in the charts, we are either trend-less or trending up. If a downtrend is in the process of forming; so be it - but we can't know until it reveals itself on the chart. Betting on a downtrend today is a crap shoot. No sophisticated trader would do it with the global temperature charts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.