An end to the ‘Modern Warm Regime’ identified from TSI data?

Only time will tell, but this may be another indicator that we are entering the next grand minimum.

Watts Up With That?

Dr. Sam Outcalt : Emeritus Professor of Physical Geography, University of Michigan writes in with an analysis of the recently revised TSI Data from the University of Colorado as mentioned on WUWT here. He notes that elements of his analysis align with some notable changes in global temperature.


Hi Anthony:

I did a Hurst ReScaling of the Revised TSI Data from the University of Colorado.

View original post 222 more words

11 thoughts on “An end to the ‘Modern Warm Regime’ identified from TSI data?

  1. stefanthedenier February 12, 2014 / 6:27 pm

    Guess what’s the temp in your room – then look at the thermometer; you will see that you are wrong +/- by 2-3C. Because on 99,999999999999999% of the planet’s surface area nobody monitors… how can they ”guess” what’s the temp there and how often is changing?!

    Atmosphere is not like human body – when under the armpit is warmer by a degree = the whole body is warmer by that much – in the atmosphere temp is constantly changing / interdependently, on every square kilometer

    Thermometer is suitable to monitor room temp; but outside, one thermometer for 10000m2…
    6000 thermometers monitoring is not enough to monitor all Hilton hotel’s rooms – what about the rest of the planet? They talk with confidence about the whole planet’s temp to a precision of one hundredth of a degree… what a joke, wasting billions… nobody knows what was last years planet’s temp, to save his / her life…. the truth on the end always wins!

    • Anthony j. Mengotto February 13, 2014 / 1:48 pm

      Stefan the denier, I agree somewhat with your theory. Here’s a more logical factor, and that is you can not rely on atmosphere temperatures. The reason for this is the people monitoring it do not take into consideration of not only do you have the sun’s energy heating the atmosphere but so does the ground temperatures going back up to the atmosphere. The atmosphere is so thick and big it is many miles thick. It is taking longer for the cooling to happen up there verses the ground temperature’s. This winter weather is proving this theory. Because atmosphere temperatures are somewhat the same while temperatures on the ground this winter have been 10 – 15 degree’s below the average. If we were 10 – 15 degree’s above average in the summer they would say there’s uncontrollable warming. So now we have to consider now that were in uncontrollable cooling. Anthony

  2. stefanthedenier February 13, 2014 / 6:39 pm

    Hi Anthony, the ”colder” or warmer temperature never gets on the whole planet simultaneously. In USA you have colder days – in Australia are heath-waves, to balance. That always happens colder / warmer on different places, otherwise the winds would stop. That’s what the ”normal” laws of physics say. That makes the Warmist wrong in both cases; weather shouldn’t be looked ”locally” but overall on the whole planet.

    Sunlight goes trough the atmosphere, because air is transparent; than heats the ground -> horizontal winds cool the ground -> vertical winds take that heat high up, where is always cold – discharge that heat – instantly that air shrinks because becomes colder than all the air below. Shrinks – becomes colder / heavier and drops down to the ground to bring that extra coldness and equalizes in a jiffy, doesn’t wait 100years to expand, or shrink – expansion when warmed is instant / shrinking when cooled is INSTANT

    Therefore: same laws of physics existed 1000y ago, 2000y ago; same laws of physics will be in 100y from today. Which means: the past global warmings were not GLOBAL, past ice ages were never GLOBAL! Which makes the ”Skeptics” just as wrong for using ”proxy” data as global.


    • Anthony J. Mengotto February 13, 2014 / 11:32 pm

      Hi Stefan, You are right as far as we should look at global temperatures and not local temperatures. But I don’t see how that is possible since 70% of the planet is water. You would have to look at temperatures on the land, sea, and atmosphere globally in order to get a accurate reading as far as are we cooling or warming. Also the jet stream going to the north or to the south plays a major role in this. If the jet stream goes and stays to the south longer in the winter we have a cold winter, if it stays to the north longer during the winter we have a mild winter. I always have said, If you can control the jet stream then you can control the weather. Anthony

      • stefanthedenier February 24, 2014 / 7:50 pm

        Anthony, the ”jet stream” is part of the GLOBAL temp. that jet stream happens for a reason, as everything else.

        not just the temp over land AND sea, BUT: the heat in the whole troposphere, not just on the ground: because: when and where is cloudy – on the ground is cooler, but upper atmosphere is warmer than normal = overall is the same – therefore: monitoring only on the surface gives misleading result:

    • rishrac February 22, 2014 / 9:51 pm

      Stefan, that’s where I ran into the argument with AGW that the heat is in my view released, and I think I can back that up mathematically, or retained in the view of the IPCC. That’s pretty much what this entire debate comes down to. Of course in their view, ‘the science is settled’. Basically, more heat, more water vapor.. heat is released from the water vapor (it will rain or snow eventually).. so if the heat is retained, then you have runaway global heating, it it’s released and not returned, no.

      • stefanthedenier February 24, 2014 / 7:43 pm

        Hi rishrac, water vapor producing warmer climate, is deceiving! Water vapor makes colder days / warmer nights – overall is always the same as in Sahara on same latitude; where is hot days, but cold nights. The mistake is that: both camps look only for the hottest minute in 24h and ignore the difference in the other 1439 minutes. have look this:

  3. rishrac February 24, 2014 / 9:48 pm

    Stefan.. I agree. I wasn’t trying to explain it all, just this little part of it that plays a significant role in the theory of ‘tipping point’ where the feedback causes run away global heating.

    I’ve learned to only debate the particular issue at hand. Running down side issues can waste a lot of time and really accomplishes nothing because by the time you get there or win, loose or draw, you’ve forgotten or the main issue has become unimportant.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s