Re: Global warming? TEC
Posted by AW on 5/09/08
Here is an article and a link to more information that shows the study over a much longer time period. On 5/09/08, T.E.C. - Iowa wrote: > > Hey AW, > > Regarding your comment, “The chart spans only thirty years; hardly > long enough to base an evaluation upon it.” The chart is only a > visual that is trying to explain the difference between climate > and weather. Thus it is too small for dealing with the whole > issue of climate change. > > Yet, it does make the point (I posted the graph at the bottom). > The blue trend lines show trends over an eight year period. Some > of the line show an increase, some a decrease, and some little or > no change at all. This means that eight years is NOT long enough > to use in climate work. The span of time does NOT screen out the > “noise.” In this case the noise is the normal variation caused by > the weather. > > I say noise because it is clear with even a casual glance that the > temperature is increasing across time on the graph. The idea that > should come from the graph is that longer time periods are needed > for climate research. Also, if you read the article I linked to, > Dr. Kevin Trenberth sums it up with the comment, “Too many think > global warming means monotonic relentless warming everywhere year > after year. It does not happen that way.” > > PS: A better question would be, “What would be the minimum number > of years that might be used in climate work?”
NOAA
Posts on this thread, including this one
- Global warming? What's up with this?, 5/04/08, by curious.
- Re: Global warming? What's up with this?, 5/04/08, by T.E.C. - Iowa.
- Re: Global warming? Iowa, 5/08/08, by Datum.
- Re: Global warming? What's up with this?, 5/08/08, by aggie'swife.
- Re: Global warming? AW, 5/09/08, by T.E.C. - Iowa.
- Re: Global warming? Datum, 5/09/08, by T.E.C. - Iowa.
- Re: Global warming? TEC, 5/09/08, by AW.
- Re: Global warming? TEC (fixed the link), 5/09/08, by AW.
- Re: Global warming? AW, 5/12/08, by T.E.C. - Iowa.
|