Saturday
May142016
by 
Josh
Josh Spin this - Josh 375
May 14, 2016 Ed Hawkins Josh Following Ed Hawkins lovely Global Temperature Change spirograph I thought I would add a few more centuries of data. Just for balance.
I created the little video (using an iPad) based on the graph from Dr. Judith Curry’s presentation (Hannhijarvi et al slide) but it is only an approximation. Ed's version for comparison is here.
Update on May 16, 2016 by
Josh
Josh
It seems a couple of readers have had a hard time following the links and locating their AR5 so here is the IPCC graph that the cartoon very approximately represents.
Reader Comments (53)
Ed Hawkins is after Gavin Schmidt's job.
Excellent. It would look even more dramatic had it started at the Minoan Warm Period.
I guess that's a NH spiral. Would it go the other way if it was SH? Which raises the question, if it was truly global it would disappear up its own axis.
And the conclusion? Will the graph suddenly vector up Climate Alchemy's fundamentum?
Excellent! Well done!
This carbon stuff is pretty slow-acting.
How much did the Romans put in to get things nice?
I do find it amusing (in an ironic kind of way) that people who accuse climate scientists of fiddling with data would think that this is somehow good. Kudos.
Josh.
How did you train your spider to spin its climate web?
"...and Then There's Physics"
I don't get it. It isn't true? Everything I've ever read tells me that Josh's little doodle is not only true to fact, it's not even contentious.
But there's a way of talking about climate change (and climate change scepticism) and we mustn't deviate from that. Always talk as if the other side is talking bollocks, even when they're not. Otherwise you might have to have a real debate, and we don't want that, do we?
I have no problem with having a real debate.
Gus - he's probably just pining for the Minoans like Phillip Bratby. I'll bet he said as much to Ed.
Do you mean one where you talk yourself down a logical dead-end and then end up shouting, "that's not what I said!" when someone quotes your own words back at you?
Even more amusingly, Phil C can fly in (whilst avoiding getting chewed up by one of his beloved wind turbines) and try to rush to your defence. He'll then stomp off in a sulk when someone points out to him that fracking has been an overwhelming success.
Please Ken, start debating. I could do with a good laugh!
BTW great animation Josh. It perfectly demonstrates how climate osscilates between warm and cold without being affected by man's puny emissions of a life-giving gas.
Love it, Josh !
...and Then There's Physics
You are beginning to sound like a leftover indyref combatant. The never ending bicker as I refer to it.
Oh goody, you have monthly data from 100 forward how useful, you must publish
Do Josh's Minoan data come from using Aya's Antikythera machine to backcast First Olympiad weather reports?
Instead of turning to spin doctors and cartoonists, when time and temperature got out of whack, the Romans crunched the numerals and reset the Kalends
@ Eli Rabett
Oh goody, you have monthly data from 100 forward how useful, you must publish.
What a ridiculous argument! Do you think historic evidence should be ignored merely because the data from that period was not measured in the same way it has been since the mid-twentieth century. If such data did exist it would, no doubt, be homogenised out of existence.
Do you deny that there was a Roman Warm Period followed by a few centuries of colder weather, then a Medieval Warm Period followed by a Little Ice Age?
Should we call it a Hockey Puck graph?
The Stick is pucked.
"I have no problem with having a real debate"
As long as it's done empty chair style the like Grand Vizier Gavin eh, Ken?
Do you deny that no Romans refer to the first , or medieval authors to the second?
Hit the classics and the eddas and give us some Latin and Norse qoutes Roy
All I've got is a lot of archaeology that shows the Maya got toasted while the dark ages raged.
vvussell, were the Dark Ages during the Medieval Warm Period?
The Mayan believed in human sacrifice to appease their Gods and make the weather nice. Climate scientists just want to sacrifice human lives and humanity to make their bank accounts nice. Very backward, selfish and regressive people.
@ Russell
Why should the Romans think that their climate was unusual? Why should the Vikings who sailed to Iceland, Greenland and North America think that they were lucky to be living in a relatively warm period and that the climate would get colder in future?
The fascinating comprehension of the consensus.
Convinced the past is wrong.
Sure what the future holds.
Yet remain at a loss about the present?
Ho hum...
Instead of turning to spin doctors and cartoonists, when time and temperature got out of whack, the Romans crunched the numerals and reset the Kalends
May 14, 2016 at 6:20 PM | Russell
vvussell, did the Romans have a Lewandowsky Spin Doctor, and Skeptical Skunks Cartoonist called John Cook?
Roy, I never thought you'd ask:
http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2015/06/mark-steyn-and-grapes-of-wrath.html
The problem with all of these is they focus on tiny little variations as if those are huge issues. The planet gains and loses energy to space. The average temperature is in the range of 288 K, not one or two degrees C. I'm okay with either graph, if they use proper scales. Do this again at 288 K as a base, and it will be interesting to watch. How much variation would you see from 3 K in the middle and 288 K about 3/4 the way to the outside of the graph? I think it would be an unbroken, unvarying line going round and round in the same place, right?
Josh, do one on the history of climate sensitivity:
https://cliscep.com/2016/05/12/new-paper-on-climate-sensitivity-supports-low-%E2%89%881c-estimates/
Also, the videos must be on YouTube.
‘Oh goody, you have monthly data from 100 forward how useful, you must publish …”.
=============================================================
Making an animation showing the monthly global surface temperature data back to say 46 BC is no more ridiculous than doing it back to 1850.
Roy said "Do you deny that there was a Roman Warm Period followed by a few centuries of colder weather, then a Medieval Warm Period followed by a Little Ice Age?"
Oh my gawd...looks awefully like a pattern of warming followed by cooling followed by warming again!
Mailman
May 14, 2016 at 10:18 PM Roy
Surprising to see Russell using that argument when the warmongers make the assumption that our current coldish climate is ideal and must be made eternal.
Change and decay in all around I see:
O thou who changest not, abide with me!
Making an animation showing the monthly global surface temperature data back to say 46 BC is no more ridiculous than doing it back to 1850.
+1 Chris!
The huge bias of chumps like Eli and ATTC is showing again for all to see...
British imperialism blamed for spin on climate science.
In Argentina death spirals turn counter-clockwise.
Will US/UK/EU Climate Science spin down the plughole in a different direction to Antipodean Climate Science?
golf Charlie.
Antipodean climate scientists (many now unemployed) will assemble at Cape Grim in three weeks to herald the long feared arrival of 400ppm CO2. They will join hands with their Argentinean brothers to protest against the northern hegemony of climate science and their spin doctors. "They treat climate threats as if they were cartoons" a spokesperson said, who wished to remain identified (name nevertheless withheld to protect the stupid).
Alan Kendall, should we all be celebrating the fact that as the much feared 400ppm 'happens', nobody can find anything that has 'happened', as a result?
China and South East Asia will certainly be celebrating all the jobs lost in the US/EU as manufacturing has been relocated away from countries with lethal contaminations of Green Blob legislation.
Is it known what useful purpose will not be provided, by the redundancy of climate scientists? There can't be more things that MIGHT happen? Surely the redundancies are as a result of failing to work out how, why, and where the science was settled, and who settled it. If there had been a proper scientific debate, many of these people might have chosen to do something useful with their lives, rather than being paid to ruin the lives of others.
Improved weather forecasting is good, but climate modelling has been a disaster.
golf charlie,
If only they had found someone to guide them toward new career opportunities:
'In 2000, Hansen advanced an alternative view of global warming, arguing that the 0.74±0.18 °C rise in average global temperatures over the previous 100 years had been driven mainly by greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide, such as methane.'
Eli Rabett (4.39pm May 14)
Data provided by Lewandowski's 32 757 year old survey participant.
@GC: the problem is that Hansen made a key mistake in 1969, to believe that he had solved the problem of modelling the intense forward scattering by cloud aerosols. He didn't realise that there is a second optical effect which with just a few large droplets, gives higher albedo.
So the cloud data in the models are wrong and the sign of the 2nd AIE is reversed. No longer can the modellers claim CO2-AGW is being hidden by 'global dimming'; the real AGW has been really 'global brightening'. CO2 ECS falls to near zero. Our establishment knows it, so does the climate modelling community. The game now is to extricate politicians and Cllmate Alchemists as quietly as possible from the pit they have dug.
The tactic has been to let the blowhards become isolated whilst the adept find a safe niche.
NCC 1701E Thank you for the explanation.
Has any computer climate modeller ever tried putting in correct data, having adjusted the formulae, just as an experiment to find ouf if anything accurate is produced?
They all seem to assume their formulae are correct, and adjust the data, and still defend the output as though their jobs depended on it.
The Jim Hansen climate science show has never been as funny as Jim Hensen's Muppet Show, but they continue to provide moments of ridiculous indignation.
@GC:I observed clouds as droplets coarsened in an unique situation, so was able to judge that the existing optical physics, from Twomey, only applies to freshly nucleated clouds. In short the claim that optical depth is proportional to 1/r does not apply once droplet coarsening starts.
In the US, this was known in a different guise 6 year ago and the paper was ready to publish. it was blocked. The data were released recently in a heavily disguised form now the main researcher is retired.
This is the power of the Climate Alchemy Establishment at work. I feel sorry for the radiation people because they too have been conned by the people at the top withholding key science.
NCC 1701E, deliberately withholding/suppressing key witness evidence from over 25 years ago, by those in Authority, has been what the Hillsborough investigation has been all about. Those involved in abusing their authority have enjoyed their careers.
Thanks to fossil fuels we have all sorts of inane occupations now where folk are paid to obsess about trivia rather than spend all their time just spending all out time just trying to survive on this hostile planet, which was the case prior to the industrial revolution. What is very well known since it is in every historical account ever written is that warm has been demonstrably better for life on Earth than cold. Ignorance about that very basic fact is nothing to boast about.
@GC: Yup, it has been the same as Hillsborough. Establishments in all occupations mutually cover their arses by a sort of synchronised fan dance, the effectiveness of which suddenly slumps when whistleblowers appear on the scene.
This mental picture, which I attribute to too Reginald Perrin is a prompt for another Josh cartoon!
First, the cartoon data is fake while the Hawkins' data is scientific.
Second, even if not fake, it does not matter because the warming now IS YOUR FAULT, climate deniers.
Read all about it from legitimate sources like DeSmog, Sks, Stoat, etc.
Ayla, it is what John Cook writes for SKS that is the best faked cartoon data. His 97% Consensus papers are modern comedy classics, that represent the pinnacle of climate science's greatest achievements, that will be sniggered about for centuries to come.
The very name of John Cook makes the corpses of long dead Pascal or Archimedes convulse in their graves.
Do speak with nothing but the fitting reverence that deserves the scientific stature of John Cook or do not speak at all.
Ayla, "Pin the 97% Consensus on a Donkey" is sure to be a great parlour game for climate scientists, as they consider new lines of employment. Australian climate scientists are already playing it, and others are sure to follow. I expect John Cook's stature will make him immune to a few little pricks from Climate Science.
Thanks Josh. Hilarious and useful all at the same time. I thought Ed Hawkins truncated version served well to highlight the meddlesome phenomenon of the 'adjustment bureau'.
Deniers must always provide links to credible sources to back any claim whatsoever they make.
Otherwise, if they say the sky is blue, it must be assumed it is not.
Ayla
Save your energies for the great task ahead
Your minions strive to achieve your will
Yet they are on double time already
Three more texts to ponder and extract their true meaning.
Have you no pity?
These new fellahs, Cook and Hawkins,
Both spin their data in ways that make others blanch
While you spin with the minds of climate criminals
Chastising them with whips of logic
The scars will forever remind them of their sin.
We await your pronouncements upon the doom that awaits
When we pass the tipping point of 400ppm CO2
Surely then the unbelieven will recant?
The grand slam of climate meanderings is in your grasp