PART 5/ Opdaterede Sol/Is/temp/hav data

Kosmos, Frank,

Jeg må da sige, at det er et stort fremskridt, hvis vi kan være nogenlunde enige om, at de justeringer i temperaturserierne, der er foretaget siden ca. 1980 har været rimelige...

Having worked with many of the scientists in question, I can say with certainty that there is no grand conspiracy to artificially warm the earth

Frank Lansner skrev:
Min pointe var, at SST generelt ville have tage sig (endnu) mindre varme ud havde vi på dagen ligget nede på bare 0 i nino 3,4 index. Og den pointe er rigtig nok, selvsagt.

Frank Lansner skrev:
PS, Theis, Du skriver at oktober ONI ligger på 0 og derfor er det bemærkelsesværdigt med høje oktober tal for temperaturer.

ONI for hver af månederne i år har været følgende: -0,6; -0,6; -0,5; -0,1; 0,1; 0,1; 0,0; 0,0

It should be remembered that during ENSO, there is a 1-2 month lag between sea surface temperature change and tropospheric temperature changes, so the tropospheric temperature anomaly will take a month or two to reflect what recent global SSTs have been doing.

Ved vi ikke alle sammen godt at nedenstående GISS justering ikke har noget med videnskab at gøre? Hvis nogen mener det kan forsvares, så stå frem, det ville være interessant

Also note amongst the changes made to this temperature series the addition of 0.6 degree C to the maximum temperature series (applied to all data prior to 1971) following the installation of a Stevenson screen. That's right. While the Bureau has been claiming it must discard all data prior to 1910 because until this year stations didn't have Stevenson screens, in fact we can now see that it has accepted post-1910 data from stations that did not have screens installed until later, in some cases not until 1971

Der har været meget snak om at vi netop nu skulle have kurs mod rekord varmt 2014, men så vidt jeg kan se kan satelliter ikke bekræfte dette

Kosmos skrev:

Der har været meget snak om at vi netop nu skulle have kurs mod rekord varmt 2014, men så vidt jeg kan se kan satelliter ikke bekræfte dette

- i så fald skulle det da blive gevaldigvt varmt i årets tilbageværende 55 dage!

Der har været meget snak om at vi netop nu skulle have kurs mod rekord varmt 2014, men så vidt jeg kan se kan satelliter ikke bekræfte dette

At present, the average HadCRUT4.3 anomaly for the first 9 months of 2014 is 0.560, which is above the previous record of 0.555 set in 2010. With a September anomaly of 0.595, a new record for 2014 is a definitive possibility. However, can we trust any HADCRUT4 record or might it simply be an artifact of questionable adjustments to the temperature record?

Mit indtryk er, at det er Wang-Svalgaards fløj der bliver lyttet mest til af IPCC og selve TSI rollen i deres skriv er beskeden.

Lean et al. (2002) call into question the long-term solar
irradiance changes, such as those of Lean (2000), which
have been used in many climate model studies including
our present simulations. The basis for questioning the
previously inferred long-term changes is the realization
that secular increases in cosmogenic and geomagnetic
proxies of solar activity do not necessarily imply equivalent
secular trends of solar irradiance. Thus, it is useful to
compare the above solar irradiance forcing with a solar
irradiance scenario that includes only the well-established
Schwabe ~11 year solar cycle, indicated by the dotted
curve in Fig. 4. In this alternative solar irradiance forcing
history the 1880–2003 forcing based on the linear trend is
Fa = 0.10 W/m2 and Fe = 0.09 W/m2.
The fact that proxies of solar activity do not necessarily
imply long-term irradiance change does not mean that
long-term solar irradiance change did not occur. Ample
evidence for long-term solar change and a link to climate
has long been recognized (Eddy 1976), and solar models
admit the possibility of such change. Hoyt and Schatten
(1993), on heuristic grounds, argue for solar change at least
comparable to that of Lean (2000); their inferred solar
change is somewhat greater than that of Lean (2000) and
their secular increase of irradiance begins earlier in the
twentieth century. At least until precise measurements of
irradiance extend over several decades and more comprehensive
solar models are available, solar climate forcing is
likely to remain highly uncertain.

Nielsen, med "Wang-Svalgaards fløj" mener jeg dem der (modsat Lean, Hoyten&Schatten etc.) kun forventer ret beskedne TSI udsving.
Jeg ved godt at IPCC ikke selv nævner Svalgård og det va derfor at jeg udtrykkeligt skrev "Wang-Svalgaards fløj". Og jeg var godt klar over at du ville falde over det, jeg kender dig jo efterhånden ;-) .
Gad dog ikke at ændre teksten fordi Svalgaard dukker nærmest altid op i alle mulige debater og forsvarer deres "fløj". Forsvarer de mere beskedne udsving. Han har af en eller anden grund fået rollen som den der nærmest forsvarer IPCC´s syn på disse ting hvad enten han eller IPCC vil det... (!)

Og hvad mener min helt Scafetta?
Jo han og Solheim hælder så vidt jeg kan se til Hoyt & Schatten!

Jaja, den er langt fra sikker, men illustrerer meget godt Danmarks Non-Kulde stime