Re: [asa] Data doesn't support global warming

From: Glenn Morton <>
Date: Thu Dec 17 2009 - 17:09:34 EST

Reply for Rich Blinne:


>>>>And your posts do not post temperature anomalies, a usual denialist technique to hide the trends. If the stations did not have 12 months of data in the year they weren't counted. This is what I instructed the graphing software to do. You can go to the same web page and generate your own plots if you wish. <<<


Graphing it in anomaly or temperature makes no difference, except that people understand temperature.


Fact: we are told by your side that the world is warming, but you just now say that I am not supposed to actually look at the average temperature to see if the temperature is going up? Is that really your position?




1. Choose all the stations north of the Arctic Circle

2. Only include data where there was 12 months of coverage per year

3. Use the raw data

4. Plot average anomaly <<<<


How fascinating, Rich. You say that you are engaged with the data, but you are not telling me to download data that you can't seem to bring yourself to engage with. What is wrong with your mouse-finger?


I did your work for you Rich. Here are the pictures (gosh I thought you said you engaged with the data)


The warming above the arctic circle is not any big shakes and is not out of bounds of what has happened before. What more work trying to support your position can I do for you....I have all the time in the world to do your research for you who are supposedly so engaged with the data.


As I said Rich, the data I am plotting is Russian government monthly data given to the Dutch weather service who then serves it out to guys who have an ounce of curiosity and willingness to work. Those who don't, don't get to see these problems. The plots you requested don't show anomalous warming.

Please explain this failed prediction of AGW, Rich. Please explain why the maps you trust are so out of step with the raw data.





>>>>So whatever CRU chose for their homogenization I didn't use it. I came up with the same answer they did anyway using only the raw data.





Snip illegally stolen e-mail. Since you copied this you must have changed your mind concerning your copyrights on your e-mail. I am now free to post your e-mails to me sent me in the past, right? Note the date of the e-mail and look at this more up close plot noting what happened after 2004:



Yeah so you are not going to comment on the fact that they made sure that competing studies or criticisms of their work didn't get published???? Yet you are going to claim that all these wondrous studies prove your point because no one could get a criticism published?


Come on Rich. Those emails are now so public that they can't be put back in the box. I didn't make them public, someone else did, and when you made my private email public YOU made it public and it is STILL out there for one and all to see. The difference between us Rich is that I didn't make anyone's private email public, but once public, there simply is no putting it out of the public sector again.



Your link doesn't work

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Dec 17 17:09:39 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Dec 17 2009 - 17:09:39 EST