The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Here's the Arctic:



And the Antarctic:



And here's Greenland:

Challenge accepted.
First off sample size. For something as complex as the earth a 29 year sample size is a joke, further more comparing 29 year sample size to individual winters is text book definition cherry picking.
On top of that the same bunch of people who were telling us the polar ice caps were going to be melted by 2010 were convinced in the late 1970s the next ice age was here. So it would be reasonable to assume that the late 1970s and early 1980s were cooler than usual.
Plus in the mid 90s mount penitubo erupted, causing 2 years of 2°F cooler than normal temps.
I also noticed a few years were conveniently left out on those charts, I'm sure those years didn't matter at all. It just looks exactly like more cherry picking.
I should also add the 2017 greenland melt does not appear to be much of a statical anomaly, unless some one is going out of their way to make it look that way.
Bottom line, I want them to be right, looking forward to seeing a warmer world.

[NeilBlanchard]

We have data for a much longer period, from other sources than satellites.


[click on image for link]

And the trend of all 37 years is downward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20pjigmWwiw

[oil pan 4]

When numbers are cherry picked like this using invalid sample size there is great potential to get the trend to show whatever you want.

[freebeard]

We should be preparing for extreme heat, extreme cold, hard radiation and loss of oxygen in the atmosphere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcnPDFKCliU

[oil pan 4]

So basically like living in new Mexico.

[NeilBlanchard]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

When numbers are cherry picked like this using invalid sample size there is great potential to get the trend to show whatever you want.

What are you talking about? This is the data, and you can check it out.

[NeilBlanchard]

Originally Posted by freebeard

We should be preparing for extreme heat, extreme cold, hard radiation and loss of oxygen in the atmosphere.

Um, the magnetic poles have switched in the past, and we are still protected from the solar wind. Mars has lost most of its atmosphere, because it magnetosphere weakened, and the solar wind stripped it away.

We are fine in this regard. We know because of ... science.

[freebeard]

Their not saying we'd lose all the oxygen, just the O2 over the poles. The stuff we were killing with hair spray.

During previous pole flips there was no vulnerable electromagnetic technology to go boom/whimper.

[oil pan 4]

With the artic sea ice one they use 1981-2010 as the "base line" compare the base line to 2011 and 2012 then 2016 and 2017, while leaving out 2013, 2014 and 2015.
Then same thing with the antarctic except they leave out 2011 through 2015.
Thats called Cherry picking.

Given the limited available data all years should be included in the base line, even the ones that don't support the predetermined outcome.

[niky]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

With the artic sea ice one they use 1981-2010 as the "base line" compare the base line to 2011 and 2012 then 2016 and 2017, while leaving out 2013, 2014 and 2015.
Then same thing with the antarctic except they leave out 2011 through 2015.
Thats called Cherry picking.

Given the limited available data all years should be included in the base line, even the ones that don't support the predetermined outcome.

It's for simplicity's sake.

It's easy enough to find graphs with the missing data if you want it. The trend is still the same.