Nuuk, Greenland temperatures rose from 1900 to 1940, and have since been declining. Greenland climate researchers normally claim that they only have data from 2003-2007.
2010 is shaping up to be Greenland’s second coldest year of the current millennium, which is one reason why sea level is falling.
climograph of nuuk greenland, greenland charts, nuuk greenland climate graph
Steve, Maybe if we draw a line on that chart depicting the rising temperatures from 1980 – 2007 we could get funding from these ‘environmental institutions’ and ‘think tanks’ the worlds new scientific authority on all issues.
But we would have to somehow discredit other scientific data, like Solar variation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation
and the vast History of sun spot cycles and the collected observational data since 1600 ad and their relation to temperatures on earth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sunspot_Numbers.png
But not to worry that seems to be covered by a well funded team of journalists and man made global warming advocacy groups.
We could make a fortune if we swapped sides. lol
Ever notice how weather stations at rural locations that have not changed or have not been “upgraded” don’t seem to show any CAGW? I mean, if one were to take all the land stations that have been reporting for the last 100 years or so and look at that data set; I bet one would not see anything to get excited about.
It’s monitored on only 6000 places on the planet, for IPCC. Because of uneven distribution; the data confuses even the Warmist. B] if you monitor 3m above the thermometer on any monitoring place they have; would be different temperature. Doesn’t the 3m, 130m above belong to the same atmosphere? Therefore they collect data on 15 000m3, what about in the rest of the atmosphere?
On one cubic kilometre, there are 500 different temperatures; and they change every few minutes. Needs to have on 60 billion places data collected; every few minutes; from the ground to the stratosphere – to start talking about how warm is in the planet’s atmosphere. Atmosphere is not as human body; if under the armpit gets warmer by 0,5degrees = the whole body is warmer by that much. In the atmosphere works the opposite. If one place gets warmer – other place must get colder (the laws of physics say so / my formula says so. Therefore, nobody knows what was the temperature correctly even last year = cannot compare it with another year. Comparing one unknown with another unknown should be left to the Warmist; when Skeptics are doing it = you are only dignifying the misleading propaganda.
When some area gets warmer (as in big city heat) the 500km3 of air expands by 50km3 – expansion is instant – those extra 50km3 of air don’t go outside the city, because is already air there. It goes up and increases the volume of the atmosphere by 50km3. That air intercepts extra coldness in 3,5 seconds – in a jiffy that extra coldness falls some other place – it makes it to be colder. Overall, the atmosphere has same warmth units every hour of every month, every year and millennia. The laws of physics say: extra heat in the planet’s atmosphere is not accumulative. I.e. unless the Warmist and the Skeptics abolish the laws of physics and the winds by legislation and in UN= both camps are dead wrong.
Antarctic or Greenland is warmer, so be it; don’t argue, here are real proofs for the Skeptics: the density of the air on Antarctic / Greenland is the greatest – if it gets warmer – air expands = bigger volume of the atmosphere. Which means same as increasing the size of the car radiator: intercepts more coldness = that coldness falls somewhere to make it cooler. Don’t worry, the ice on Antarctic / Greenland will not melt because of heat; there is permanent ice far north in New Zealand and Patagonia. b] where is 1km thick ice on Greenland; on same latitude in Finland potatoes are growing. Water freezes on zero degrees centigrade; average on Antarctic is -34⁰C below zero. The average is twice as cold than in your deep freezer. If Arctic ocean has less ice as shield – accumulates extra coldness = Greenland will become colder, not warmer. That has nothing to do with the phony GLOBAL warming or cooling.
If the temperature was warmer where the thermometers were, so be it = on many other places without monitoring, was colder. If it gets warmer in Europe / USA by 8⁰C, needs to get colder in Oceania by only 0,8⁰C, to be equal. Because Oceania is 10 times larger. Check if they have 10 times more monitoring places in Oceania than in Europe +USA. That will tell you enough that IPCC are not interested in the truth. Stop arguing by using their data. All you are succeeding when you do, is to give impression to the people on the street that: only behind a good horse is lots of dust. Stop dignifying the Warmist, get all the proofs, facts and formulas on http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com
Ice on the polar caps doesn’t depend on temperature, but on availability of row material for renewal of ice every winter. So, if is warmer some area – that doesn’t make the Warmist correct; because another area is gone colder. If it gets colder where the most monitoring is – that doesn’t make the Skeptics correct – because some other place is gone warmer, instantly. Ask them; what was the temperature 178m NE of Fiji, on 15 January at 9AM? What about on the same place at 156m altitude? Doesn’t that count? What was the temperature at that same date and time 43m above East Anglia university?! If they don’t know what was the temperature above their backyard – how can they tell about the whole atmosphere on the planet. Horizontal and vertical winds never stop and are never same speed and direction. In their measurements, inaccuracy is plus / minus 7⁰C. In their charts, they know for centuries if temperature was going up or down by 0,3⁰C for individual year…?!?!?! It’s only to confuse the Urban Sheep. Please get all the real proofs from my blog. For everything there are correct and wrong proofs. Correct proofs /facts are easy to recognise / prove.