CHERRYPICKING AGAIN

Roger Coppock wrote
The trend on the 80 to 85 degree South latitude band
hadcrut2v.dat file is positive. In fact, it is the fastest
warming of any 5 degree latitude band on the data
set. It's a WHOPPING +9 +- 4 K per century of
warming !! As I recall, there is a single statation
responsible for it. Please see:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
The greater majority the stations in the 80 to 85 degree South latitude
band are on the volcanic Antarctic Peninsula.
Your single station in probably on a hot spot.
You've been told time and time again that the bulk of the of the
Antarctic is cooling.Even Global Warming Climatologists tell us that,
but you still insist on telling us that it is warming.

wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote
The trend on the 80 to 85 degree South latitude band
hadcrut2v.dat file is positive. In fact, it is the fastest
warming of any 5 degree latitude band on the data
set. It's a WHOPPING +9 +- 4 K per century of
warming !! As I recall, there is a single station
responsible for it. Please see:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/


That was in reply to this:
-------
aloha.kakuikanu
Date: Mon, Dec 4 2006 11:13 am

Yep. No station in antarctic interior evidences any warming during
the [ . . . ]
-------

Obviously, I found a station in the interior that is warming
and made my point, Aloha's all exclusive statement is
not true. Scientists rarely make all exclusive or all
inclusive statements.

For more information on zonal temperatures please see:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/GISS...n_Latitude.jpg
Following the predictions made by Arrhenius in 1896:
- All 8 bands are warming.
- The Northern Hemisphere is warming faster than the Southern.
- The North pole is warming faster than the Equator.
- My son has discovered that the extreme warming at the
North Pole moved down to lower latitudes over the last
century.

All of these patterns strongly indicate greenhouse gas forcing.
They totally rule out many other potential causes of the recent
warming, like an increase in solar radiation.

Rogers name should be "Roger Crackpot"


"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote
The trend on the 80 to 85 degree South latitude band
hadcrut2v.dat file is positive. In fact, it is the fastest
warming of any 5 degree latitude band on the data
set. It's a WHOPPING +9 +- 4 K per century of
warming !! As I recall, there is a single station
responsible for it. Please see:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/


That was in reply to this:
-------
aloha.kakuikanu
Date: Mon, Dec 4 2006 11:13 am

Yep. No station in antarctic interior evidences any warming during
the [ . . . ]
-------

Obviously, I found a station in the interior that is warming
and made my point, Aloha's all exclusive statement is
not true. Scientists rarely make all exclusive or all
inclusive statements.

For more information on zonal temperatures please see:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/GISS...n_Latitude.jpg
Following the predictions made by Arrhenius in 1896:
- All 8 bands are warming.
- The Northern Hemisphere is warming faster than the Southern.
- The North pole is warming faster than the Equator.
- My son has discovered that the extreme warming at the
North Pole moved down to lower latitudes over the last
century.

All of these patterns strongly indicate greenhouse gas forcing.
They totally rule out many other potential causes of the recent
warming, like an increase in solar radiation.

wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote
The trend on the 80 to 85 degree South latitude band
hadcrut2v.dat file is positive. In fact, it is the fastest
warming of any 5 degree latitude band on the data
set. It's a WHOPPING +9 +- 4 K per century of
warming !! As I recall, there is a single statation
responsible for it. Please see:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
The greater majority the stations in the 80 to 85 degree South latitude
band are on the volcanic Antarctic Peninsula.
Your single station in probably on a hot spot.
You've been told time and time again that the bulk of the of the
Antarctic is cooling.

That's why the ice shelfs are melting and breaking off. Because they
are getting colder.
Brilliant.



Even Global Warming Climatologists tell us that,
but you still insist on telling us that it is warming.

Ken Wood wrote:
wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote
The trend on the 80 to 85 degree South latitude band
hadcrut2v.dat file is positive. In fact, it is the fastest
warming of any 5 degree latitude band on the data
set. It's a WHOPPING +9 +- 4 K per century of
warming !! As I recall, there is a single statation
responsible for it. Please see:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
The greater majority the stations in the 80 to 85 degree South latitude
band are on the volcanic Antarctic Peninsula.
Your single station in probably on a hot spot.
You've been told time and time again that the bulk of the of the
Antarctic is cooling.

That's why the ice shelfs are melting and breaking off. Because they
are getting colder.
Brilliant.




Even Global Warming Climatologists tell us that,
but you still insist on telling us that it is warming.
The only Ice shelves to break up are in a volcanic zone, the others
have have not changed in 100 years Filchner sailed up to the Rohnne ice
shelf 1908. He could not have done that in the last 25 years, there is
too much pack ice in the way.
The Antarctic is cooling. Gavin Schmidt has admitted as much in the
paper
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/...lSchmidt1.html
If even climate scientists tell us that the Antarctic is cooling why
can't you believe them
instead of Roger Crackpot?

AGW is a scam wrote:

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/...lSchmidt1.html
If even climate scientists tell us that the Antarctic is cooling why
can't you believe them
instead of Roger Crackpot?



Did you even read the abstract of what he wrote?
"While most of the Earth warmed rapidly during recent decades, surface
temperatures decreased significantly over most of Antarctica. This
cooling is consistent with circulation changes associated with a shift
in the Southern Annular Mode (SAM). It has been suggested that both
Antarctic ozone depletion and increasing greenhouses gases have
contributed to these trends. We show that a climate model including the
stratosphere and both composition changes reproduces the vertical
structure and seasonality of observed trends. We find that the two
factors have had comparable surface impacts over recent decades, though
ozone dominates above the middle troposphere. Projected impacts of the
two factors on circulation over the next fifty years oppose one another,
resulting in minimal trends. In contrast, their effects on surface
climate reinforce one another, causing a departure from the SAM pattern
and a turnabout in Antarctic temperatures, which rise more rapidly than
elsewhere in the Southern Hemisphere."
He says the cooling is due to overall global warming causing atmospheric
circulation changes over Antarctica.

Pat

In article . com,
"AGW is a scam" wrote:

Ken Wood wrote:
wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote
The trend on the 80 to 85 degree South latitude band
hadcrut2v.dat file is positive. In fact, it is the fastest
warming of any 5 degree latitude band on the data
set. It's a WHOPPING +9 +- 4 K per century of
warming !! As I recall, there is a single statation
responsible for it. Please see:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
The greater majority the stations in the 80 to 85 degree South latitude
band are on the volcanic Antarctic Peninsula.
Your single station in probably on a hot spot.
You've been told time and time again that the bulk of the of the
Antarctic is cooling.

That's why the ice shelfs are melting and breaking off. Because they
are getting colder.
Brilliant.




Even Global Warming Climatologists tell us that,
but you still insist on telling us that it is warming.
The only Ice shelves to break up are in a volcanic zone, the others

False.

have have not changed in 100 years Filchner sailed up to the Rohnne ice
shelf 1908. He could not have done that in the last 25 years, there is
too much pack ice in the way.
The Antarctic is cooling.

False again. Parts are, parts are not.

Gavin Schmidt has admitted as much in the
paper
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/...lSchmidt1.html
If even climate scientists tell us that the Antarctic is cooling why
can't you believe them
instead of Roger Crackpot?


So why don't you believe what he also says:

"While most of the Earth warmed rapidly during recent decades, surface
temperatures decreased significantly over most of Antarctica. This cooling is
consistent with circulation changes associated with a shift in the Southern
Annular Mode (SAM). It has been suggested that both Antarctic ozone depletion
and increasing greenhouses gases have contributed to these trends."

Greenhouse gases are increasing. QED

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/...lSchmidt1.html
If even climate scientists tell us that the Antarctic is cooling why
can't you believe them
instead of Roger Crackpot?



Did you even read the abstract of what he wrote?
"While most of the Earth warmed rapidly during recent decades, surface
temperatures decreased significantly over most of Antarctica. This
cooling is consistent with circulation changes associated with a shift
in the Southern Annular Mode (SAM). It has been suggested that both
Antarctic ozone depletion and increasing greenhouses gases have
contributed to these trends. We show that a climate model including the
stratosphere and both composition changes reproduces the vertical
structure and seasonality of observed trends. We find that the two
factors have had comparable surface impacts over recent decades, though
ozone dominates above the middle troposphere. Projected impacts of the
two factors on circulation over the next fifty years oppose one another,
resulting in minimal trends. In contrast, their effects on surface
climate reinforce one another, causing a departure from the SAM pattern
and a turnabout in Antarctic temperatures, which rise more rapidly than
elsewhere in the Southern Hemisphere."
He says the cooling is due to overall global warming causing atmospheric
circulation changes over Antarctica.


Correction, he says "it has been suggested" that overall global
warming caused that. He's a scientist perhaps, and no alternative
explanation has been proposed. however, all of this noise in the
signal makes it very difficult to listen to the music.
What the "climate scientists" are doing is shotgunning models out
there so that virtually any observed result will fit ONE of them,
neglecting the fact that the same model which "predicted" X was exactly
WRONG on Y. I will accept that climate science is no longer a
pseudo-science on level with psychology when theres a poster that
climate scientists all have on their wall that shows a map of the globe
with temperature anomolies charted and they consistently point to it
and say "yup, that fits the standard model" when new data comes in.

Lloyd Parker wrote:
In article . com,
"AGW is a scam" wrote:

Ken Wood wrote:
wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote
The trend on the 80 to 85 degree South latitude band
hadcrut2v.dat file is positive. In fact, it is the fastest
warming of any 5 degree latitude band on the data
set. It's a WHOPPING +9 +- 4 K per century of
warming !! As I recall, there is a single statation
responsible for it. Please see:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
The greater majority the stations in the 80 to 85 degree South latitude
band are on the volcanic Antarctic Peninsula.
Your single station in probably on a hot spot.
You've been told time and time again that the bulk of the of the
Antarctic is cooling.

That's why the ice shelfs are melting and breaking off. Because they
are getting colder.
Brilliant.




Even Global Warming Climatologists tell us that,
but you still insist on telling us that it is warming.
The only Ice shelves to break up are in a volcanic zone, the others

False.

have have not changed in 100 years Filchner sailed up to the Rohnne ice
shelf 1908. He could not have done that in the last 25 years, there is
too much pack ice in the way.
The Antarctic is cooling.

False again. Parts are, parts are not.

Gavin Schmidt has admitted as much in the
paper
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/...lSchmidt1.html
If even climate scientists tell us that the Antarctic is cooling why
can't you believe them
instead of Roger Crackpot?


So why don't you believe what he also says:

"While most of the Earth warmed rapidly during recent decades, surface
temperatures decreased significantly over most of Antarctica. This cooling is
consistent with circulation changes associated with a shift in the Southern
Annular Mode (SAM). It has been suggested that both Antarctic ozone depletion
and increasing greenhouses gases have contributed to these trends."
xx
Greenhouse gases are increasing. QED

This term 'grenhouse gas' is made up and false. You have no science.
The solar constant is 1370 Wm-2. At the equator 1000 Wm-2 is recieved
at the surface. As angle to the sun increases, the amount of the near
infrared and UV reaching the surface diminishes and the solar radiation
consists of mainly the visible wavelenths. The near infrareds make it
to the lower atmosphere where they are absorbed. Air pressure is 1/2 at
6 kilometers. Concentration of energy is also decreased by angle of the
surface to the sun

The solar constant is 50% visible light, 41% infrareds and 9% UV. 1% of
the sun's energy is absorbed in UV in the stratosphere. In the analyses
of the radiation that reaches the surface at the equator, none of the
radiation of frequency 3 microns or longer reach the surface, although
there may be reradiated energy at these energies from other frequencies
which have been absorbed. These thermal frequencies are about 200 or so
Wm-2, which never make it to the lower atmosphere.

This directly in itself disproves the theory of grenhouse gases. NONE
of the energy of these frequencies passes through the atmosphere.
Likewise, these frequencies do not pass back out either, to be
restricted by increasing concentrations of CO2 as the theory presumes.
But, I would not expect an academic scientist to be able to follow this
exact train of logic which can be documented and established. Perhaps
your criminal defense lawyer may think it is important though.

Another point is that any restriction of passing radiation through the
atmosphere will restrict incoming solar radiation, not only outgoing
thermal radiation.

Secondly, 1000 Wm-2 equals 90C. 1370Wm-2 is 121C. The atmosphere
greatly protects the earth from the high temperatures that would be
induced by the sun. There is no evidence of day time temperatures
increased by GHGs from calculated temperatures. In fact only the direct
cooling of rapid convection by the air keeps temperatures down from
what they should be in the incident radiation. Overall temperatures and
night time temperatures are normal for absorbed energy at the surface
and temperature of the land mass and oceans, and the inability of the
thermal frequencies to pass directly out through the atmosphere. No
calculated existence of the 'grenhouse effect', is existent in valid
calculations of incident energy from the sun and earth's temperatures.

And no direct laboratory evidence exists of inordinate absorption of
thermal frequencies by CO2.

1370Wm-2,,,!000Wm-2.
Grenhouse theory does not have adequate analyses of these two important
numbers.
Grenhouse theory is direct fraud.
Grenhouse theory does not have the oppurtunity to make up an anlyses at
this point, which is their normal method.

Kent Deatherage
CO2Phobia is a psycological disease. Fraud grand larceny is a felony.

On 2006-12-23 02:20:46 +0000, said:


And no direct laboratory evidence exists of inordinate absorption of
thermal frequencies by CO2.

Stick to the roofing - as your science is SORELY lacking. Have a look
at the atmospheric transmission chart.
--

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to
persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

Carl Sagan


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com