I think the whole surface temperature record is complete crap, but 0.35 degrees is all Phil could come up with?
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3vgl.txt
The surface temperature record is controlled by Phil Jones and James Hansen. That is like letting Bill “Spygate” Belichick referee and scorekeep at the Superbowl.
Home thermostats should be considered weapons and controlled by the government now that we know a couple of degrees of warming can kill people.
I would like to use your chart. I have written a book, based on the research of others, “Man-Made Global Warming? It’s Foolishness in words that all can understand.” this excerpt would be a future addition:
Global Warming Is Not a Problem
The current understanding, world-wide, of global warming is incorrect. A new book provides sufficient detail, if you are open to discussion, that proves that. But before I tell you more, let me show you something about carbon dioxide (CO2).
Everybody knows that our use of fossil fuels (for automobiles, electric utilities, industry, etc.) is increasing our atmosphere’s content of CO2 and causing global warming. Our “scientists” have told us so. And they have revealed that our activities with fossil fuels and the resulting increase in CO2 have caused global temperatures to rise to dangerous levels – with the worst occurring since the industrialized 1950s. That information “is settled science” and has been spread world-wide by the popular media.
Now, let me show you something important that they have not told us.
Real-Science, at the site, http://www.real-science.com/correlating-co2-temperature-geologic-record, shows a plot of CO2 (in atmospheric parts per million) and temperature (in degrees Celsius) for 600 million years. It shows that for 600 million years of our history, CO2 and earth temperatures have had absolutely no relationship to each other.
Figure 1 (10°C = 50°F; 25°C = 77°F)
The authors say, “During the Ordovician [period] CO2 was more than ten times higher than at present. Global temperatures ranged between very hot and an ice age. We can state with 100% certainty that as CO2 increases, temperatures will either go up, go down, or stay the same.”
Our warming-enthusiast scientists’ warnings of world devastation from man-made global warming were not scientifically based and showed a dangerous ignorance of world history. And our popular press spread the word. Now, just as they shifted from global-warming to climate-change when it was evident that temperatures had dropped since 1998, you are beginning to see, as this information is made public, a shift from CO2 as the global-warming culprit, to methane or some other gas as the cause.
(If you have doubts about the above information, Google: CO2, global temperature, millions. The information is available from other sources. If you have a compelling interest in the history of the earth, this site and http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm are Internet sites in which to spend some time. Don’t pay any attention to the usual suspects – NOAA, NASA, etc.; they still need funding to satisfy their lifestyle, and since their past work has been shown to be disreputable, they have been picking and choosing. For temperature data, ignore theirs, use the publically available data at the CRU Internet site given in the book. Do you know how scientists are selected? The book reveals all.)
Some die-hards have questioned the plotted temperatures in Fig. 1 and where they came from. Mr. Scotese explains at his site, and some of his work is presented in the book.
Others have questioned the validity of CO2, because of the methods used to reveal magnitudes for millions of years. For them, we offer more recent information. Temperatures, as anomalies, degrees Celsius and Fahrenheit since 1998, the hottest globally for the entire global-temperature history is provided in Fig. 8, pages 100 and 101 in the book.
Since 1998, temperatures have wobbled, but dropped in magnitude. If the two waltz together, as alarmists claim, CO2 should have followed suit and trended down also. David Evans’ work shows, definitely, there is no togetherness. His temperature and CO2 data, starting in 2002, show that even though CO2 is rising definitively, temperatures have trended down during the entire period.
Figure 2
The temperatures shown do not agree with the CRU data that I have been observing since 2009. However, using my data for 1998 ‘til 2011, the temperature anomalies varied from 0.526 in 1998 to 0.348 in 2011. The average of all 14 years is 0.411. That magnitude is substantially less than 0.526 at the start and shows that temperatures dropped. CO2 went in the opposite direction: for the fourteen years it increased as shown.
The top graphic on page 3 is a plot of anomalies that the global-warming scientists have published widely. An anomaly is actually a temperature measured in degrees Celsius, from which the number 14 has been subtracted. This, not explained in any writings I have seen, is a fact which I obtained from Dr. Phil Jones, University of East Anglia, Climate Research Unit (CRU), by accident
But looking at the curves for the past thirteen years (1998 has been recognized as the warmest), it is obvious that temperature and CO2 disagree with each other.
Figure 3
An Anomaly plot has to show positive and negative readings, so a reference point, 0, is necessary, and in this case is somewhat unusual — 0 is actually a temperature of 14 Deg. Celsius (equivalent to 57.2 Deg. F in the United States). The middle graph shows the plot that results from converting anomalies to absolute temperature in degrees Celsius – by adding 14 to each anomaly. You can see how the conversion to degrees Celsius smooths the curve – takes away some of its threatening qualities. The Celsius scale, known as the Centigrade scale until 1954, is used in United States laboratory environments and in all areas of the rest of the world.
The above plot of anomalies exhibits an increase or decrease far more definitively than a plot of actual temperature measurements. For example, in 1982 the anomaly was 0.015 and the temperature increased until 1998, to an anomaly of 0.529. Plotting this shows an increase of 34.27, or 3,427%; But reference to the middle graph, the Celsius scale, shows that the actual Celsius temperature for those years went from 14.015 Degrees C to 14.529 , for a change of only .03667, or 3.67%, and the lowest graph, the Fahrenheit scale, the temperature increased from 57.23 Degrees F to 58.15 – only 0.01607 — a 1.61% increase in actual temperature.
You cannot work to that degree of accuracy by referring to the charts. But I can; I am working with the actual data for that period. (However I should note: The actual temperatures with which I am working, which the scientists have provided, were not measured with sufficient accuracy, so I’m not working to the necessary degree of accuracy, either. The book explains the measurement sensor problems)
The bottom graph shows the average yearly global temperatures plotted in degrees Fahrenheit. It is difficult to show graphically, but that introduces a further, but much smaller, smoothing effect from that shown in the middle Celsius graph.
The book tells of a previous scientists’ fear; the earth, cooling dangerously, was ice-age bound. An excerpt:
In the 1970s, “a major cooling of the planet” was “widely considered inevitable” because it was “well established” that the Northern Hemisphere’s climate “has been getting cooler since about 1950” (The New York Times, May 21, 1975). Although some disputed that the “cooling trend” could result in “a return to another ice age” (the Times, Sept. 14, 1975), others anticipated “a full-blown 10,000-year ice age” involving “extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation” (Science News, March 1, 1975, and Science magazine, Dec. 10, 1976, respectively).
Checking the top chart during this time, it shows that anomalies had bobbled up and down as they dropped during that period, but had decreased from 1944 until 1976.
If this meets with your approval, please let me know.
Tom Shipley
[email protected]