Why do skeptics claim atmospheric data does not support global warming theory?

Question

The surface record finds warming of approximately +0.07°C per decade over the past century and +0.17°C per decade since 1979.

Deriving trends for the lower troposphere in which the stratospheric cooling is removed:

RSS v3.0 finds a trend of +0.181 °C per decade
UAH analysis finds +0.14 °C per decade

An alternative adjustment introduced by Fu et al finds trends (1979-2001) of +0.19 °C per decade when applied to the RSS data set. A less regularly updated analysis is that of Vinnikov and Grody with +0.22°C to +0.26°C per decade(1978 - 2002).

Links to each paper available here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_record

Graphically available here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Satellite_Temperatures.png

The UAH shows slightly less warming in the troposphere than the surface, all other studies show greater warming in the troposphere as models predict.

How is this evidence against the anthropogenic global warming theory, as Tomcat claims?

James read the question next time. It clearly states that the papers are all LINKED from the Wikipedia page.

James read the question next time. It clearly states that the papers are all LINKED from the Wikipedia page.

truthsfifth - the stratosphere is supposed to cool. That's part of the global warming theory as well. The troposphere warms and stratosphere cools.

I don't know why you start babbling about Bill Clinton.

The past 100 years of warming have been primarily caused by human greenhouse gas emissions, and secondarily due to variations in the Sun (mostly prior to 1975):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

Please take some time to learn about the science behind global warming.

Tomcat, way to avoid answering the question. Try reading the caption next time:

"Note: In the above figure, there is still a significant discrepancy between the very earliest satellite measurements and the ground based measurements at that time. For this reason only the interval 1982-2005 was used in calculating each trend."

Answer 1

It seems to me that Tomcat's attitude is that of the responsible skeptic, open to new information as it comes in. See, for example, his chosen Best Answer and reasoning here:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Amiq6ryzHIWA1xM78TwdOr3ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070922185114AAggylf&show=7#profile-info-pZi3HXdnaa

In the meantime, I remain a bit leery of all satellite-borne observations to derive atmospheric temperature at altitude. The single advantage of satellite observation is global coverage, but the vertical resolution is really horrible, no matter what algorithm you use to slice & dice the data. And since it's vertical resolution, more than global coverage, which is at issue (if indeed it really is an issue), the only way to get that right is to use balloon-borne instruments.

Since 1958, the regression slope for surface temps has been +1.3°C per century, and for 850 hPa pressure altitude, it has been +1.6°C per century. This is pretty much exactly what theory and models predict. Here's the radiosonde data from Hadley:
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/hadat2/hadat2_monthly_global_mean.txt

Answer 2

See my answer to Bob's question on the same topic.

It comes down to Epistemology and memes.

(I wonder if the deniers will make a point about how often the believers ask the same question ... they would be served well by seeing themselves in my answer, too. Two sides of the same coin!)

Answer 3

So wait, it's warmer........ if you eliminate the areas that are cooler......

VERY convincing.....

I know, I know, it's warmer lower and cooler higher and that sort of kind of, almost corresponds to where most of the CO2 is, sort of. So in theory that could mean that the upper atmosphere is weighing down on the troposphere - if we forgot that the troposphere, if warmer, should be expanding....

So even if the smaller troposphere somehow proved the CO2 blanket theory - how about the fact that when that started happening, Bill Clinton was President!

How about that?

What caused the prior 100 years of warming, which accounts for about 2/3 of the total warming to date?

Face it - you're grasping at straws.

Answer 4

Dana, come on now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Satellite_Temperatures.png

The slope in your reference is cherry picked, it is this kind of rhetoric that makes people skeptical, if the slope started at the beginning of the satellite record, it does not show a warming of 1.3 times the surface, not even close.

Answer 5

Wikipedia is not a reliable site.

Answer 6

wikipedia is not a reliable source. any fool can put up information on that site and any fool can edit it to.

Answer 7

just spin the wheel.

maybe you can get it to warm up even faster if you land on a higher number.