Maybe They Can Graft Briffa’s Tree Ring Data After 1930?

The only two factors which affect the climate, are fluid movements in the Earth’s core and CO2.

Scientists compared existing data from models of fluid movements within Earth’s core and length-of-day observations against two sets of global surface temperature data extending back to the 19th century – from NASA’s Goddard Institute and the UK’s Met Office. Human-produced temperature changes based on climate models of the Earth’s atmosphere and ocean were then subtracted to generate corrected temperature records.

A portion of the study shows after 1930 global surface air temperatures began to rise without corresponding changes in other variables.

And while researchers now turn their attention toward a scientific explanation of these correlations, it’s clear that the Earth core’s effect on climate is substantially smaller than human effects.

“It’s just a wiggle on top of what ever else is going on,” said JPL’s Steve Marcus, a co-author of the study. “It’s just an added variability on top of these larger trends we’ve observed in climate over the last century or so, when human global warming has certainly been kicking in.”

The study, says Dickey, “gives you a timetable showing when global change came into play, in the 1930s and 1940s, so it’s very interesting to see that effect, and that agrees with our knowledge of our industrialization of the world.”

Michael Ghil, a distinguished professor of climate dynamics at UCLA familiar with the research calls the graph “pretty striking.”

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_17603445

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Maybe They Can Graft Briffa’s Tree Ring Data After 1930?

  1. suyts says:

    That’s……no…..I’m not reading up on this piece of inanity. I got as far as the two sets of global temps. If these pinheads don’t know they are essentially the same sets of data then babbling about the swirling iron core liquids effecting the temps can’t be correct either. Its an assumption based on a faulty premise.

  2. Latitude says:

    as long as they keep trying to explain CO2 chemically and with mathematical formulas they’ll never get it right….
    CO2 has to be explained biologically

    But explaining it the way they do is a whole lot easier and they don’t have to know as much….

    ….what would you expect from nothing more than glorified weathermen

  3. omnologos says:

    it’s models, not turtles, all the way down

Leave a Reply to suyts Cancel reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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