By The below graph is why I have always advocated for satellite temperatures being used to measure temperature, because the system of 11 satellites give readings of temperatures across the Earth that are not impacted by the Urban Heat Island effect or data manipulation by shady scientists. Typically these shady scientists do not like the satellite data because it is what has been primarily used to show the cooling and flat lining of temperatures over the past few years unlike the surface temperature data that they have been proven to be manipulating, however I am sure they will more than welcome these recent satellite temperature findings:
Via Dr. Roy Spencer.
Before any of you alarmists out there start cheering and conducting any animal sacrifices to your high priest Al Gore, this data simply shows that after a decade of flat lining and cooling temperatures that warming may be starting again. That may seem strange considering the record cold temperatures and wild weather around the globe this year, but it actually does make sense. The warming from the satellite temperature data is linked to the El Nino effect being seen in the Pacific causing temperatures over the oceans to rise. Oceans of course make up the most of the Earth’s surface, especially the Pacific and any temperature rise there can easily off set the temperature drops we have seen over the land this year.
Here is a great graphic from NOAA that shows the current El Nino warming in the Pacific:
There has been so far no proof that El Nino is linked to manned made global warming and scientists cannot even through computer models connect El Nino to natural global warming. In addition the current temperature levels are still no where near temperature levels seen in the past to include the most recent Medieval Warming Period.
4:38 pm on March 9th, 2010 1
There are a lot of factors that influence the weather, and temperature graphs are going to be all over the place. It's the projections that are a large source of disagreement.
I like the fact that you posted this.
5:14 pm on March 9th, 2010 2
Not surprised to see this posted. It's another data point, and the more info the better.
Many of us have been unfairly branded "skeptics" for simply questioning whether the science is indeed "settled". The earth may or may not be warming. If it is, it may or may not be caused by man, and it may or may not be unusual or otherwise outside the normal historic fluctuations.
I just get very suspicious when people are telling me to shut the hell up and/or die a painful death from cancer.
12:30 am on March 10th, 2010 3
The climate models did not predict the decade of flat lining and cooling temperatures. Now that we know much of the data was fraudulent being put into these models we know why. The satellite temperatures are much more difficult to manipulate compared to weather stations on the ground. During the cooling decade shown by data from the satellites many of the alarmists continued to use fudged surface temperatures to support their claims.
I am however not surprised we are seeing some warming again considering how this recent warming is small compared to prior warmings thus the reason why these scientists from the CRU were doing everything they can to fudge tree ring records and make the Medieval Warming Period disappear.
1:35 am on March 11th, 2010 4
1. Climate models are not designed to resolve trends on annual timescales.
2. That graph shows a warming trend over the whole series. 'Flatlining' over <10 yrs is irrelevant. Sunspot cycles, El Niño, orbital effects,vulcanism, GHG emissions (manmade and natural), aerosol concentrations, cloudiness, psuedo-random effects (weather for example), are largely independent of each other and operate on cycles of different wavelengths. That means that sometimes the cycles will be in- or out- of phase. Short term effects in the general trend are therefore unpredictable.
3. Slander scientists is either, resorting to their level, childish, the very kind of behaviour that led to some of the comments in the emails ILLEAGALLY hacked from the CRU (depending on your perspective).
4. NO satellite data makes a geo-physical measurement without some sort of processing. NO satellite provides global coverage. Therefore dataseries are form multiple measurements with some form of spatial and temporal averaging. You cannot take surface point measurements without pre-processing anymore than you can take data from GOES or a NOAA Pathfinder sat. without calibrating it.
You lack the very objectivity that you accuse the scientists of. That makes you a hypocrit.
Ian
(A scientist with an interest in NK matters).