« First fuel cell boat cruises Amsterdam's canals | Main | Recession Elsewhere, but It’s Booming in China »

Dec 09, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Naum

NASA GISS takes explicit steps in their analysis to remove any such spurious signal by normalizing urban station data trends to the surrounding rural stations. It is a real phenomenon, but it is one climate scientists are well aware of and have taken any required steps to remove its influence from the raw data.

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/02/warming-due-to-urban-heat-island.php

Would have taken you < 2 minutes to discover that.


Michael W. Kruse

I can play this game too, Naum:

http://climateaudit.org/2007/06/14/parker-2006-an-urban-myth/

Bottom line is that studies conducted by a community that persistently denies access to their data, models, and computer code, who actively works for the suppression of contrary studies, and who uses demagoguery (ex. climate change skeptics are equivalent to holocaust deniers) to silence dissent are not trustworthy. When climate science becomes a truly open scientific pursuit I will take their claims more seriously.

phil_style

I've heard it sadi that the UHE is taken into account in the statistical representation of temperature data. What I'd really like to see is a data set goin back say 150 years comprised of, say 100 temperature guages in rural areas, across all landmasses. And a second set INCLUDING ocean based measurements for the same period. Then a THIRD set with 100 sites' worth of urban measurements included with the rural data (total sites = 200).

Then I'l like to be able to look at the three data sets myslef, without people telling me what conclusions I'm supposed to draw.

Naum

Sorry, will take the word of a scientist over PR flacks…

And those studies you refer to have been independently collaborated…

Here is what we know for sure (even credible skeptics acknowledge):

1) “Ice-core gas samples show that the current concentration in CO2 is unprecedented for at least 500,000 years.”

2) “based on carbon isotope data, it is all but certain that the present, unprecedented rise in CO2 is due mainly to human output.”

3) “CO2 (and methane) in the atmosphere are nearly transparent to UV and visible radiation, but absorb in the infrared, creating a “greenhouse.””

4) “For sure, the average temperature of the atmosphere has been rising for most of the last 50 years.”

5) “The Arctic ice cap is getting smaller, in apparent response to this global temperature increase. Sea level is rising, due to the thermal expansion of the oceans and, increasingly, to melting of the Greenland and/or Antarctic ice caps. It has been shown to most people’s satisfaction that the Greenland ice cap is getting smaller.”

Josh Rowley

As a non-scientist, I find Naum's #5 to be among the more convincing pieces of evidence for global warming. A Google search will lead to numerous videos showing the shrinkage of the Arctic ice cap.

I fail to see how urban areas tending to be warmer than rural areas disproves global warming.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Kruse Kronicle on Kindle

Check It Out









Categories