OT: Global cooling 34 million years ago

things like hurricanes, floods, droughts, fires, and famines kill people.

Late at night, by candle light, John Fields penned this immortal opus:

Strange. I understood what Bill was on about first time around, and English isn't even my primary language. I'm fluent in four, which might help.

- YD.

--
File corruption detected. Select option:
1 - Call the cops
2 - Call the press
3 - Bribe it

Remove HAT if replying by mail.

Not as many as wars do.

Thanks, Rich

Annual HadCRUT-3, unsmoothed and smoothed, is shown as a graph at:

The smoothed curve had a unidirectional decrease of about .2 degree C from 1941 to 1949. If the smoothed curve drops .1 degree C from its peak so far of 2004 to 2012 or drops unidirectionally through 2010, all that is going to do is show that the rise is unsteady.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Make that from .482 in 2005 to .323 in 2008 for individual year data, and 2008 was cooled by a major La Nina.

The 1998 spike was indeed .546 degree C (for entire year), but from the greatest El Nino on record, and was short enough in duration and sufficiently balanced by the 2000 La Nina for smoothed global annual temperature to increase fairly steadily through the late 1990's and 2000 to its peak so far of 2004. Smoothed global HadCRUT-3 has since fallen so far by about .05, maybe .06 degree C.

Who in NOAA is saying that? Where can I find that? I am aware that the sun is experiencing a downturn in its output that is likely to continue to about 2030-2040 or so.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Have a look at "page 630" (42nd page of this 74 page PDF).

I do think the cloud albedo feedback should be less than the surface albedo feedback, and I don't sense great certainty that the cloud albedo feedback is even positive. But they do consider feedbacks from both vater vapor and clouds. Water vapor itself is considered a significant positive feedback mechanism.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

From what I've read earlier (and it has admittedly been at least 2 or

3 years now), the sign of cloud feedback is known to be different for low altitude versus high altitude. It's the net result with other feedbacks included that I think remains uncertain. I really need to go find some more recent material on it.

Jon

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0...Jim Thompson

than

y t s

an

Cool. You found data.

Now try some arithmetic. Using the Hadley data, calculate the average anomaly from 1989-1998. Compare it to the average anomaly from 1999 to 2008.

e.

World War I (1914-1918) killed about 16 million.

Spanish Flu epidemic (1918) killed about 50 million.

Average of the 10 annual global HadCRUT-3 figures 1989-1998 is .2215 degree C "anomaly", as in above 1961-1990 average.

Average of the 10 annual global HadCRUT-3 figures 1999-2008 is .3991 degree C "anomaly", as in above 1961-1990 average.

This is despite the former rather than the latter including the hottest single year of 1998, .546 degree warmer than 1961-1990 average, due to the greatest El Nino on record.

- the figure for the year is 14th column, when counting the column with the year as

1st column.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

The average anomaly will say nothing about the trend.

ll,

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0...Jim Thompson

s.

y

nt than

nds

ome

may

crut

e as

ven

than

s e

ay

y t

So what's the trend?

Show your work

em

t

will,

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0...Jim Thompson

l

eas.

ny

say

rent than

ounds

some

it may

adcrut

nge as

even

y

nt than

nds

ome

may

my

n't

e.

he

68

ge

To be fair, here is some of mine:

Year Anomaly 5-year ave 9-year ave

1981 0.12 1982 0.011 1983 0.177 0.0498 1984 -0.021 0.0316 1985 -0.038 0.0652 0.082222222 1986 0.029 0.0658 0.097111111 1987 0.179 0.0906 0.119444444 1988 0.18 0.149 0.106555556 1989 0.103 0.1856 0.120555556 1990 0.254 0.162 0.143777778 1991 0.212 0.147 0.171111111 1992 0.061 0.1606 0.166444444 1993 0.105 0.1648 0.185444444 1994 0.171 0.1498 0.234666667 1995 0.275 0.2078 0.239333333 1996 0.137 0.296 0.245777778 1997 0.351 0.321 0.284444444 1998 0.546 0.32 0.324333333 1999 0.296 0.3744 0.357888889 2000 0.27 0.397 0.377 2001 0.409 0.3824 0.415333333 2002 0.464 0.4126 0.423222222 2003 0.473 0.455 2004 0.447 0.4576 2005 0.482 0.4458 2006 0.422 0.4158 2007 0.405 2008 0.323

See the trend?

than

hadcrut

as

These guys smooth using a 21 point binomial filter:

Your 5 year average and their curve are trending downwards from a peak around 2003/04.

Which is what I would expect from solar activity:

Just like his other head.

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white listed, or I
will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

why are men so mean to women

and then there's william shatner, lj simpson and bobby barettta but let's not dwell on such details

if this dude is so genuine, he'd never buy the swimsuit issue of Discover and leave it out on his desk in the first place

mk5000

"The meanness starts when girls are about 10 or 11 and are beginning to compete for boys and pay more attention to the media, It's probably rooted in biology, and then girls are bombarded with external messages that say it's all about hooking a man."--Dava Guerin

And another NASA acknowledgement of the change in solar activity:

/quote

pril 1, 2009: The sunspot cycle is behaving a little like the stock market. Just when you think it has hit bottom, it goes even lower.

2008 was a bear. There were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year's 366 days (73%). To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go all the way back to 1913, which had 311 spotless days: plot. Prompted by these numbers, some observers suggested that the solar cycle had hit bottom in 2008.

Maybe not. Sunspot counts for 2009 have dropped even lower. As of March 31st, there were no sunspots on 78 of the year's 90 days (87%).

It adds up to one inescapable conclusion: "We're experiencing a very deep solar minimum," says solar physicist Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center.

"This is the quietest sun we've seen in almost a century," agrees sunspot expert David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.

/end quote

/quote

"Since the Space Age began in the 1950s, solar activity has been generally high," notes Hathaway. "Five of the ten most intense solar cycles on record have occurred in the last 50 years. We're just not used to this kind of deep calm."

/end quote

The solid block of 5 intense cyclessince the 1950s correlates with AGW. Shucks we must be to blame for the intense cycles, excess CO2 is leaking into space and upseting the sun.