Climate Denial Crock of the Week - Party like it's 1998

"This result is not unexpected. NASA GISS found a major contributor to the record hot 2005 was the extreme Arctic warming (Hansen 2006). As there are few meterological stations in the Arctic, NASA extrapolated temperature anomalies from the nearest measurement stations. They found the estimated strong Arctic warmth was consistent with infrared satellite measurements and record low sea ice concentrations".

"They found recent warming has been higher than that shown by HadCRUT. This is because HadCRUT is sampling regions that have exhibited less change, on average, than the entire globe".
The ECMWF analysis shows that in data-sparse regions such as Russia, Africa and Canada, there is strong warming over land that is not included in the HadCRUT's sampling data. This leads the ECMWF to infer with high confidence that the HadCRUT record is at the lower end of likely warming".

(Cont.)

google Skeptical Science

"1998 is not the hottest year on record"

"A new independent analysis of the HadCRUT record sheds light on this discrepancy. The analysis is by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) who calculated global temperature, utilising a range of sources including surface temperature measurements, satellites, radiosondes, ships and buoys".

(Cont.)

@greenman3610
google the 32,000 scientist

giz,
your projectile vomiting has been repeated incredibly since the beginning of your comments. your scrotumized body,-of evidence since your birth,-has proved to come from under the table.

BTW,your nuts haven't dropped yet

greenman3610
I wasn't sure if he was talking about ktbear or my long winded comment about the NASA temperature record. I was trying to explain to the deniers that if they look at the last two decades you can find several years where temperature didn't increase but that doesn't mean global warming stoped then. If they look at the red trend line they'll see warming continues.

greenman - this conversation involved reading three lengthy (and poorly written, factually in-accurate) articles posted from daksinamurti's. profile page. Do you have any clue where we are in this conversation? Your comment makes you look, well kinda dumb. We are talking about alleged oxygen depletion as a function of CO2, NOT the temp decline from 98 onward.

Thanks for chiming in tho.

There are many emails showing conversations where they are told to delete conversations between themselves and the DoJ, and furthermore that data stil has not been released, and yes it said to have been deleted.

Again just saying it wasn't really doesn't prove shit. Get a clue. So far your methods of disproving the climategate emails - are just you saying "out of context" and "nothing was deleted". PROVE IT. -because the emails PROVE otherwise. Jackass.

To be fair, show us that phrase in a sentence where it is "in context". Where 'hiding the decline' doesn't mean what we all think it does.

You know -beyond that, what about the deletion of critical data?, and denying freedom of information requests and working with the DoJ to curtail the information being released. I'd say that falls right in line with hiding more data. (including the decline) Simply saying it was "taken out of context" doesn't prove shit.

nothing to explain.
temps have not fallen.
google
Statisticians reject global cooling