[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Speaking of Big Al though, this is interesting...

Would this Antartica cold record be another of those radical weather events Al has been talking about recently (like, for example he mentioned superstorm Sandy) that proves global warming is throwing the climate out of whack? Is it getting so warm it's setting records for cold?

So, 'one' is a pattern again? And just for a little reading comprehension - it was the coldest ever recorded. Not the coldest ever. You have to read the extra word there.

[Zipperfish]

Worth keeping mind also that this was tracked by satellite, not by a land measurement. One of the reasons we're finding colder temperatures is because we can measure temperatures pretty much anywhere now.

I think the coldest I've ever personally experienced is -49 deg C. That was back before every threw and extra -20 on for "wind chill" too.

[DrCaleb]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Worth keeping mind also that this was tracked by satellite, not by a land measurement. One of the reasons we're finding colder temperatures is because we can measure temperatures pretty much anywhere now.

I think the coldest I've ever personally experienced is -49 deg C. That was back before every threw and extra -20 on for "wind chill" too.

True enough. And there was such opposition to satellite measurements of temperature the last time it was brought up, we wouldn't want to cause controversy or anything.

current-events-f59/realclimate-global-warming-since-1997-underestimated-by-hal-t106826.html

[Zipperfish]

Oh yeah--that was a gooder!

[fifeboy]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Maybe, our record keeping just doesn't go back far enough and this temperature measurement is well within the "normal" range.

I agree, we should get some satellite data from the Medieval warm spell and compare them.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Worth keeping mind also that this was tracked by satellite, not by a land measurement. One of the reasons we're finding colder temperatures is because we can measure temperatures pretty much anywhere now.

I think the coldest I've ever personally experienced is -49 deg C. That was back before every threw and extra -20 on for "wind chill" too.

True enough. And there was such opposition to satellite measurements of temperature the last time it was brought up, we wouldn't want to cause controversy or anything.

current-events-f59/realclimate-global-warming-since-1997-underestimated-by-hal-t106826.html

Fair enough on adding 'recorded' to coldest ever, but when we do that we also must understand when people start talking about ice melt records on the other side of the globe, in the arctic, they are talking about a record length of about 30 years, or the length of the satellite record.

In any case it doesn't matter. The point was the Antarctic record even if it is just a satellite record is another example of recent radical weather events such as the one Gore and others have been using to make some kind of desperate point they hope to use to support the hypothesis of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming.

Also why are you thinking the controversy concerning the study in your link concerned satellite measurements? It did not. Other links on the thread and several mentions make it clear, the controversy concerned the policy of creating measurements where there were none with magic math, not satellites.

There was a similar study on that sort of silliness done in the Antarctic several years ago. It is called Steig et al. It was mentioned in the linked thread, and has been pretty much discredited.

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Also why are you thinking the controversy concerning the study in your link concerned satellite measurements? It did not.

Unless, of course, you read the first paragraph of the article.

$1:

A new study by British and Canadian researchers shows that the global temperature rise of the past 15 years has been greatly underestimated. The reason is the data gaps in the weather station network, especially in the Arctic. If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

[stratos]

$1:

If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

But then the record cold temps set only a few years apart would in a small degree offset the warming numbers, would they not?

And no I'm not trying to be a jerk just trying to get a better grasp of the whole situation/debate surrounding Global Warming.

[DrCaleb]

stratos stratos:

$1:

If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

But then the record cold temps set only a few years apart would in a small degree offset the warming numbers, would they not?

And no I'm not trying to be a jerk just trying to get a better grasp of the whole situation/debate surrounding Global Warming.

That's why we measure these things based on yearly 'averages'. So that record temperatures (high or low) even themselves out and we can see a trend instead of spikes. Try looking at a trend graph for the Stock Market as opposed to a daily result, you'll see what I mean.

A record hot or cold day means nothing in the context of thousands of years; like a mouse pissing in the ocean.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Also why are you thinking the controversy concerning the study in your link concerned satellite measurements? It did not.

Unless, of course, you read the first paragraph of the article.

$1:

A new study by British and Canadian researchers shows that the global temperature rise of the past 15 years has been greatly underestimated. The reason is the data gaps in the weather station network, especially in the Arctic. If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

Yes that was the way your blog described the paper. However we are now discussing the controversy. The controversy mentioned in the opposing blog was described like this...

$1:

Cowtan & Way are trying to address this lack of surface station data in these regions by doing infill from satellite data. At first glance, this seems an admirable and reasonable goal, but one should always be wary of trying to create data where there is none, something we learned about in Steig et al’s discredited paper on the supposed Antarctic warming.

They were using an algorithmic method of extrapolating data called Kriging.

http://wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Kriging

[stratos]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

stratos stratos:

$1:

If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

But then the record cold temps set only a few years apart would in a small degree offset the warming numbers, would they not?

And no I'm not trying to be a jerk just trying to get a better grasp of the whole situation/debate surrounding Global Warming.

That's why we measure these things based on yearly 'averages'. So that record temperatures (high or low) even themselves out and we can see a trend instead of spikes. Try looking at a trend graph for the Stock Market as opposed to a daily result, you'll see what I mean.

A record hot or cold day means nothing in the context of thousands of years; like a mouse pissing in the ocean.

Very true and thinking of it along the stock market trend does help. I seen this article on the record low temp and a couple days later another deal on the ant-artic having lava flows or something along that line. I found it very interesting that a place with such cold temps also had lava/molten flows coming out. This was do to the earths crust being so thin there something like 10 miles deep.

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Also why are you thinking the controversy concerning the study in your link concerned satellite measurements? It did not.

Unless, of course, you read the first paragraph of the article.

$1:

A new study by British and Canadian researchers shows that the global temperature rise of the past 15 years has been greatly underestimated. The reason is the data gaps in the weather station network, especially in the Arctic. If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

Yes that was the way your blog described the paper. However we are now discussing the controversy. The controversy mentioned in the opposing blog was described like this...

My Blog? I don't have a blog. As discussed, the paper was from the Royal Meteorological Society, on the ARVIC website.

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

$1:

Cowtan & Way are trying to address this lack of surface station data in these regions by doing infill from satellite data. At first glance, this seems an admirable and reasonable goal, but one should always be wary of trying to create data where there is none, something we learned about in Steig et al’s discredited paper on the supposed Antarctic warming.

They were using an algorithmic method of extrapolating data called Kriging.

http://wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Kriging

I am familiar with this. Read back in the Science Journal thread, most science now is done through statistical analysis. Kringing is a valid technique that's used a bit in Quantum Physics because measuring quarks is pretty much impossible. It's tried and true math.

And there is Satellite measurement of temperature through the Arctic. But it's not as accurate as a ground station, so the difference must be extrapolated based on known experimental data. Not as accurate, but far more accurate than no temperature information at all.

[DrCaleb]

stratos stratos:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

A record hot or cold day means nothing in the context of thousands of years; like a mouse pissing in the ocean.

Very true and thinking of it along the stock market trend does help. I seen this article on the record low temp and a couple days later another deal on the ant-artic having lava flows or something along that line. I found it very interesting that a place with such cold temps also had lava/molten flows coming out. This was do to the earths crust being so thin there something like 10 miles deep.

Yea, the heat the Earth has internally is from the Earth's rotation and from nuclear reactions like Uranium and Thorium.

The ice that sits on the Antarctic continent is so heavy, it presses the plate down closer to the centre of the earth.

Think too of Jupiter's moon Titan Lava flows there too, but it's Basalt and liquid Sulphur! Mars and Venus also have lava, and the temps on Venus would cremate you or I in a heartbeat.

[fifeboy]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

In any case it doesn't matter. The point was the Antarctic record even if it is just a satellite record is another example of recent radical weather events such as the one Gore and others have been using to make some kind of desperate point they hope to use to support the hypothesis of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming.

Can we be sure if it's a "recent radical weather event(s)?" It's in an area where very few people have been, on a plateau of ice that has depressions in it? Seems much like a cold trap to me. Could be it's a very common event there in the southern winter.

[stratos]

$1:

The ice that sits on the Antarctic continent is so heavy, it presses the plate down closer to the centre of the earth.

Sweet never would have thought about the ice pressure thinning out the earths crust but it makes complete sense to me.

$1:

Think too of Jupiter's moon Titan Lava flows there too, but it's Basalt and liquid Sulphur!

Last news I read on Titan was that they still did not know the true cause of this, some speculation is that its from ice plates rubbing against each other. The friction causing the ice to melt and vaporize.