Comments on: A New Leaderboard at the U.S. Open

By: WELCOME BACK, CLIMATE AUDIT | Sunrise's Swansong

WELCOME BACK, CLIMATE AUDIT | Sunrise's Swansong — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 19:13:23 +0000

[...] http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/08/a-new-leaderboard-at-the-us-open/ [...]

By: transrp

transrp — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:23:27 +0000

The complete scientific illiteracy here is scary. Did not a single person here bother to look at the actual data?? Did no one notice the column on the right? Surely given your right wing tendencies, you would have looked at the right hand column. The one that shows 5 year averages? And while the 30′s peaked at .58, EVERY single 5 year period after 1998 was over .6 with one exception, 2009.

But wait… It gets worse. I actually looked at the individual years from the link that you gave.
years yrly mean 5 year mean
1998 1.3040 0.6268
2006 1.2890 0.7784
1934 1.2210 0.4088
1921 1.1000 0.1202
1999 1.0650 0.8234

It is like 911 “truthers” or creationists. All of the referenced facts are lies. You just make things up. Note above that years 3&4 are not so special when you examine 5 year mean.

Of course, given your scientific illiteracy, and willful blindness, one should not expect you to see the obvious. As to mangrove swamps shrinking. What is your point? With rising waters and more severe weather, what did you expect? But they are not moving south to get away from the cooling are they. ON the other hand, almost every other species on the planet that can relocate, including plants is either moving north or up. Perhaps you can find one that is not.

By: Mooloo

Mooloo — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 10:40:47 +0000

All these temperature measurements are sort of red herrings, if for no other reason than that they are subject to human errors. Look for changes in ecologies that indicate warming

Why would measurements of ecology be less prone to error than simple measurement of temperature? I would suggest that determining the boundary point of a species is a terrible guide, prone to all sorts of wishful thinking.

Mangrove swamps are a warm water phenomenon. They are declining world-wide. Are we to take this as evidence that the water is getting colder?

No doubt we can find some area where warm temperature species are expanding. Especially if we don’t look too hard for the spots where the opposite is true.

By: Was 1934 the Warmest Year on Record . . . Again? · Sierra Club New York City Group

Tue, 24 Jul 2012 10:08:11 +0000

[...] data NASA corrected were data for the US and Steve McIntyre was forthright in reporting this (shown in right column). In any case, the corrections were small [...]

By: Was 1934 the Warmest Year on Record . . . Again? |

Was 1934 the Warmest Year on Record . . . Again? | — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 07:39:41 +0000

[...] data NASA corrected were data for the US and Steve McIntyre was forthright in reporting this (shown in right column). In any case, the corrections were small [...]

By: The Memory of Cherry Blossoms « DeHavelle.com

The Memory of Cherry Blossoms « DeHavelle.com — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 07:39:56 +0000

[...] But I note, looking back through NYTimes archives, that the 1930s had peek blooms in March sometimes, and sometimes in May during the bitter cold 1970s. I note that “cherry picker” scientists are careful not to go back to the earlier warm cycle, when the US reached its warmest year (1934), a record that was only adjusted out of existence after several years of tinkering. [...]

By: Does Hansen’s Error “Matter”? « Climate Audit

Does Hansen’s Error “Matter”? « Climate Audit — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:37:03 +0000

[...] changes in the U.S. history were not brought to the attention of readers by GISS itself, but in this post at climateaudit. As a result of the GISS revisions, there was a change in the “leader [...]

By: How Accurate are Global Temperatures? - Page 5 - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Mon, 04 Oct 2010 15:15:10 +0000

[...] 8 2007 So why did you post that wrong link with the 2007 table???? Where is the correct link??? A New Leaderboard at the U.S. Open Climate Audit comment 31 I suggest that you read the article as well. __________________ if you stop blaming [...]

By: Doug Nusbaum

Doug Nusbaum — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:26:44 +0000

All these temperature measurements are sort of red herrings, if for no other reason than that they are subject to human errors. Look for changes in ecologies that indicate warming (or cooling – but there are none of those) temperatures. Migration patterns of flora and fauna. (Flora move up mountains until they get to the top and die, or they move north) Changes in time of migration. Changes in sex ratios of some amphibians. Continuously shrinking ice sheets and glaciers. Earlier melt times and later freeze times of large bodies of water and rivers. Average these over decades.

And before some ignoramus points to more ice and snow in the antarctic, let me say that that is evidence of global warming, not cooling. This is also true of glaciers that grow in areas that, despite general warming, still seldom get above freezing. Find a climate expert to explain it to you. It has to do with the fact that a warmer antarctic or mountains are still well below freezing almost the the entire year, and the earth is still not warm enough for it to rain there.

Nature will not be fooled.

By: Faster than everyplace else… | Watts Up With That?

Faster than everyplace else… | Watts Up With That? — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 04:57:07 +0000

[...] A New Leaderboard at the U.S. Open « Climate Audit Four of the top 10 are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900. [...]