This graph has been showing up a lot.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.C.lrg.gif
With words that imply it shows cooling.
But it's an optical illusion that is easily defeated.
Take a pencil (something thinner would be even better, but a pencil will do nicely).
Put it at 0.45 on the left end of the box and 0.6 on the right.
Pretty good fit to the data, yes?
Try it the other way, with 0.6 on the left and 0.45 on the right (or any other small decline).
Oops.
It's a cute illusion, caused by the clutter of monthly data points, a large y-axis compared to the changes, and including only a few years, including the unusually warm one of 1998 and the unusually cool ones of 2001-2002.
But, even with all that, the current warming rate of about +0.15-0.20 degrees/decade can still clearly be seen.
This graph is much more illuminating, though.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif
2007-09-22 04:34:33 · 10 answers · asked by Bob 7 in Environment ➔ Global Warming
Regression slope for station data in this graph:
+2.5°C per century
Regression slope for land-ocean in this graph:
+1.9° per century
Graphs: climate change skeptics attempt to compensate for their inability to understand mathematics.
2007-09-22 06:17:40 · answer #1 · answered by Keith P 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Because the conclusion that there can't be any warming is pre-determined, the thermometers must be wrong. The erroneous thermometer readings are a consequence of the little-known Universal Law of Thermometer Drift (ULTD). From the NASA data, thermometers are drifting at a rate of +0.15 to 0.20 per decade confirming the ULTD. The ULTD is a supernatural joke on scientists worldwide who mistakenly think that they are measuring a real warming trend.
2007-09-22 07:07:19 · answer #2 · answered by d/dx+d/dy+d/dz 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Also, its only 10 years worth of data. I don't believe that would be considered a statistically significant sample of data, regardless of what it shows. I wouldn't base my argument on a small sample such as that.
2007-09-23 05:35:35 · answer #3 · answered by 2007_Shelby_GT500 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Skeptic do not exist to expose truths.
They have manifested to cause disorder and sow misinformation .
And so cannot be swayed into reason.
And there is no point trying
they should not be confused with ignorance
2007-09-22 15:00:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
i don't think they realize that that entire line is above the anamoly bar.
anyways, the graph doesn't serve as evidence for either side. it's a ten year graph -- temperature has remained below or above the anamoly bar for ten year lengths in the past.
2007-09-22 09:01:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I think you're supposed to hold it upside down, Bob. I got one like that about Arctic ice melting. It helps to squint wwhen you look at it too.
2007-09-22 09:42:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because they an not smart enough to read a graph.
2007-09-22 06:48:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
I don't know - it looks like an obvious warming trend to me.
I like Vlad's answer though - 'data? I don't need no stinkin' data!'. Very appropriate!
2007-09-22 05:04:07 · answer #8 · answered by Dana1981 7 · 7⤊ 2⤋
Graphs who needs em? anybody can make one?
"oh oh oh it's a graph, god has spoken"
Well tanks for the comps Dana you could have give me a tums up for my contrarian viewpoint. I guess I'll just have to survive vicariously of of your 2 .
Mathematics: Mans attempt to compensate for his inability to understand the universe
2007-09-22 04:53:12 · answer #9 · answered by vladoviking 5 · 3⤊ 7⤋
Do you honestly think they know any better?
2007-09-22 04:43:48 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋