Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (20985)	3/25/2008 8:45:55 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

.O4/decade starting from a relative high. So? Look at either GHCN-ERSST or HadCRUT from the late 1800's till now and you get 0.03 to 0.05/decade. 0.04 fits in there just fine. It is even higher than the HadCRUT for the entire period, because the recent rate is even higher, which more than makes up for your cherry picked start. Here are the results I got: HadCRUT: 1870-2007: 0.03/dec, 100% 1964-2007: 0.04/dec, 99.6% 1970-2007: 0.05/dec, 99.9% 1981-1991: -0.07/dec, 49% (Gee almost twice as fast falling!) or 1994-2004: 0.27/dec, 97.7% (Gee, almost 7x as fast rising!) What where you expecting? Just thought I'd add those cherry picked decades for the nitwit who keeps blathering and posting nonsense about the 1998-2008 period. There are plenty of other such periods in the data. I showed one of the better falling ones in recent times and one of the better rising ones, but I'm sure you could find even better ones. Only a fool would try to draw any climate conclusions form either of them. Or from any other decade. The point remains that the long term trends are fairly close from the different data sets, and the last 30 years have seen an acceleration. Feel free to explain both facts.