Kathy Fools Guardian Readers!
By Paul Homewood
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/aug/25/how-talk-climate-sceptic
In 2011 the Guardian interviewed Katharine Hayhoe, climate scientist at Texas Tech, self appointed saviour of the world and promoter of wonderful, clean energy, fluffy bunnies and all thing nice.
She was asked:
In the southern plains, where recent summers have been so scorching, have you seen sizeable increases in average temperatures that could be defined as climate change?
She replied:
What we’ve actually seen, at least in West Texas, is an increase primarily in winter temperatures. Our very cold days are getting less frequent and our winter temperatures are increasing in nearly every station we look at across Texas and Oklahoma. We haven’t seen a significant trend yet in our summers.
When I asked her, she told me she had begun her trends from 1960. I wonder why!
Meanwhile, winter temperatures in Texas have been trending downwards since the turn of the century, and appear to have changed little since the 1930-60 era.
If Katharine is right about the connection with global warming, two things follow:
1) There has been global cooling since 1999.
2) Global temperatures were at a similar level to now back in the 1930’s through 50’s.
Kathy wants to discuss how to talk to climate sceptics. I suggest she starts by telling the whole truth.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
2) Global temperatures were at a similar level to now back in the 1930’s through 50’s
Also very similar to the whole of the first quarter of the 20th century.
No warming since 1910 ! 100 years. Just a dip from 1950 – 1980
Very similar to Australia, actually. !
USCRN is also COOLING since it was installed in 2005, at about 0.5ºC/decade
And since USHCN is being adjusted to match, it will also be cooling since 2005.
Go here
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/national-temperature-index/time-series?datasets%5B%5D=uscrn¶meter=anom-tavg&time_scale=p12&begyear=2004&endyear=2015&month=12
and you they will plot data for you
scroll down and below graph there is a download line with little excel symbol
so you can check Andy is right
just remember to divide dates by 100!
Yep.. Andy is right ! 🙂
Thanks JS.
Paul, in your recent post you demonstrated that in 1997, they said the actual temperature was 62.45F.
For 2014, they said it was 1.24F above the 20thC average of 57.0F.
Has anyone from NOAA GISS, or even Zeke or Mosher attempted to explain this. Have the stations used in 2014 dramatically changed fro those used in 1997? If so, what is their anomaly based on?
“Zeke or Mosher attempted to explain this”
LOL.. asking Zeke or Mosh to explain anything, is a fool’s errand. !! 🙂
They pretend to do science, but regurgitate gobbledygook.
Dodgy Bros used car type salesmen, the pair of them. 🙂
Andy, I know they both tend to get lost in the minutia of irrelevant smidgeons. However for the GAT of 2014 to be four degrees F cooler is either an extreme change in the stations used, or a typo. If it was a typo one would think it would have been corrected by now.
Here is a graphic on changes to the stations used.
In my view, if this 4 degree GAT is correct, it is a powerful story, and needs more attention.
If correct it means they have essentially destroyed the entire global climate record through endless and continues changes to both the stations used, and the changes to the stations. FUBAR would be a mild description.
However this graphic does not show any 62.4 degree GAT.
Also, this comment by Bill Ilis, is worthy of greater attention. In this case it is death by a thousand cuts, continuing to change the past.
I’ve seen no explanation.
But the difference is so large that it is hard to see that sea temperatures are not also involved. If that is the case, I can’t see how we can make any meaningful comparisons with the 20thC
There’s still no proof after all of these years;
The only thing “man-made” is our fears.
Will the scientists remain
On their gravy train,
As the fog of deception now clears?
“The only thing “man-made” is our fears”
NO, the other thing that is “man-made” is the warming in the HadCrut and GISS data.
Its not a natural, real warming.. its a man-made fabrication.
using data from woodfortrees since 2005 hadcrut4 and rss show -0.02/decade, uah is essentially flat, and giss is +0.03/decade
uscrn indicates that rss/hadcrut4 is more likely to be correct. (yes I know uscrn is only for US not whole earth). Giss would appear to be have been adjusted entirely satisfactorily.
I wonder how 2014 can have been hottest year on record if temperatures have been cooling since 2005
yours confused
Jeremy Shiers, according to the Climatic Research Unit – Global Temperature Record (University of East Anglia, UK):
The value for 2014, given uncertainties discussed in Morice et al. (2012), is not distinguishable from the years 2010 (0.555°C), 2005 (0.543°C) and 1998 (0.535°C).
From Info sheet #1 (February 2015, Dr. Phil Jones, Climatic Research Unit, .pdf), at http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/documents/421974/1295957/Info+sheet+%231-qfaptx9s.pdf
HadCRUT4 showed a slight cooling from 2003 to 2013, but 2014 flattened that trend.
It seems to me the whole of global warming/climate change support is due to people listening and quoting what other people say and not looking at the data (corrupt or otherwise).
CRU can say what they like the data shows otherwise
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2005/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2005/trend
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1995
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/rss
strange rss 1998 much higher than hadcrut4
we might meditate on the meaning (if any) of an annual global temperature
As an illustration on the value of looking at the data, rather than paying attention to what people say, our host wrote a series of posts illustrating Met Office claims of unusually wet winter in 2013/14 were not supported by data from the errr Met Office
0.56°C in 2014, 0.555°C in 2010, 0.543°C in 2005 and 0.535°C in 1998, are data, homogenized and adjusted, but HadCRUT data.
From http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/