Tigger wrote:
Actually as you well know, the sentence was supposed to say "the satellite data". Thanks for playing again Fluffy.
You're welcome.
As for the GISS site, the data as well as your beloved IPCC report agrees that the majority of the temperature change in the 20th century occurred by the 1950s. I'm using your source, your data, you can't explain the answer they are given with there data, so are throwing more data at it.
up .4 C from 1900 to 1950, another .5 C from 1950 to 2000 ?
Are you looking at the same graph I'm looking at?
Make fun of the climatologists in the 70's for saying a new ice age is on the way by saying that climatologists today expect warming.
Not sure what your point is here,
That's because you can't read two sentences in a row. Splitting the two up looses the point. Oh, but you really knew that, that's why you split them up in your reply.
I also think it funny that KennyR believes its right because thats what they teach him in school, completely disregarding that they taught new ice age in those very same schools years ago.
Back in the 50's the continents didn't move around.
My issue is that the satellite data verified by balloon data do not show the trends in either the troposphere or stratosphere to support the current IPCC Global Warming theory. A theory that predicted dire circumstances over 10 years ago and which by the time of the 3rd report had to revise its numbers down hugely (for the 2nd time) because the data of the last 10 years dont really support the theory.
Science gets revised. Perhaps you are confusing it with religion.
Anyway, the ground temperatures suggest warming. The atmospheric temperatures are all over the map suggesting increased movement, consistant with increased energy.
You complain that the model doesn't model the data well, and that's true, but that is no reason to revise the data.