# Has the world actually been cooling since 2002? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 19, 2014, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728 "2014-02-19T19:32:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/421 "2014-03-03T20:31:19Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > It may be hard to see, but summers are not cooling for most of the world. It’s only the winters that show a clear cooling trend. > > Most unexpected, and very interesting. Not even the cite you made supports what you claim, only in \*\*some \*\*areas that is happening. And once again variations were expected. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/422 "2014-03-03T20:32:14Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > 😕 > > This is FX who we already know is not willing to deal with what the experts report regarding his OP and how wrong he is as shown by me and \*\*wolfpup \*\*many times. > > The answer is yes for his 1900 question. Thank you for finally clearly answering, but that is ridiculously too much effort for one freaking point, holy shit. > [@](#): > > The order of the cleanliness you demand does not change the overall conclusion. Addressing points one at a time is the only way to build up an understanding of what each poster believes, and it’s the only way to add to anyone’s knowledge/understanding or properly challenge them so they gain understanding. Skipping the points and jumping to a final conclusion is exactly what not to do. But, let’s continue: Recap of what we all agree on (pretty much everyone in this thread, I believe, including you about a page back regarding plateau): 1 - Planet has warmed since 1900 (data shows it) 2 - Planet warming has plateaued since 2002 (data shows it) 3 - Ocean measurements are much more limited than surface temp data So, back to the questions, which is related to the OP: Why is there a plateau? Is it significant? Does the heat-in-the-ocean idea stand up to challenges? Are there any side effects to the heat in the ocean idea that we could check up on to confirm or deny? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/423 "2014-03-03T21:02:14Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > Skipping the points and jumping to a final conclusion is exactly what not to do. Seems that everyone else that is not FX is noticing a refusal to see the obvious from your part. Once again, FX linked to WUWT, the premiere denier site, and to a person that is not a climate change researcher. His cherry picks and general idea are coming from denial sources as it is his refusal to acknowledge what expert voices are telling us. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > But, let’s continue: > Recap of what we all agree on (pretty much everyone in this thread, I believe, including you about a page back regarding plateau): > 1 - Planet has warmed since 1900 (data shows it) > 2 - Planet warming has plateaued since 2002 (data shows it) No, actually there has been significant warming according to the latest research. We already pointed this earlier. To what NASA and GISS reported we have to add what Foster and Rahmstorf found. > **[Foster and Rahmstorf Measure the Global Warming Signal](https://skepticalscience.com/foster-and-rahmstorf-measure-global-warming-signal.html)** > > Foster and Rahmstorf (2011) have published a paper in Environmental Research Letters seeking to extract the human-caused global warming signal from the global surface temperature and lower troposphere temperature data.  In order to accomplish this... > [@](#): > > “When the fluctuations in temperature over the last 32 years (which tend to obscure the continuation of the global warming trend) are accounted for, it becomes obvious that there has not been any cessation, or even any slowing, of global warming over the last decade (or at any time during this time span). In other words, any deviations from an unchanging linear warming trend are explained by the influence of ENSO, volcanoes and solar variability…It is worthy of note that for all five adjusted data sets, 2009 and 2010 are the two hottest years on record…All five data sets show statistically significant warming even for the time span from 2000 to the present.” IIRC this was also something FX claimed it was impossible to do, scientists actually can separate the contributions or now nature is masking the current warming. And this is besides what NASA and GISS conclude: they found that 2013 Sustained a Long-Term Climate Warming Trend. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > 3 - Ocean measurements are much more limited than surface temp data Still the confirmations made show that there is no evidence to dismiss what they tell us. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/424 "2014-03-03T21:15:36Z")
**GIGO** , just curious about something. I know that this is a very complicated issue, but what’s your answer to the thread title? The only thing I want to really now is would your answer look more like A or B? [QUOTE=OP] Has the world actually been cooling since 2002? [/QUOTE] A) Yes, (+ much more detailed answer qualifying the affirmative) B) No, (+ much more detailed answer qualifying the negative) I’m not playing a Gotcha of any type. I’m just trying to see how fundamental the disagreement is. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/425 "2014-03-03T21:17:54Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > No, actually there has been significant warming according to the latest research. We already pointed this earlier. To what NASA and GISS reported we have to add what Foster and Rahmstorf found. “No”??? You agreed previously that there has been a plateau since 2002. This is what you said previously: “I could go for it being a “pause”” Then here in this post you say “No”, as if you don’t agree there has been a plateau or “pause”. We are talking about what the measurements show at this point. The measurements show a plateau in global temp since 2002. > [@](#): > > Still the confirmations made show that there is no evidence to dismiss what they tell us. It shouldn’t be accepted or dismissed. The normal process of science is that there needs to be a lot of challenges and confirmation before drawing a conclusion one way or another. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/426 "2014-03-03T21:43:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > **GIGO** , just curious about something. I know that this is a very complicated issue, but what’s your answer to the thread title? The only thing I want to really now is would your answer look more like A or B? > > A) Yes, (+ much more detailed qualifying the affirmative) > > B) No, (+ more detailed answer qualifying the negative) > > I’m not playing a Gotcha of any type. I’m just trying to see how fundamental the disagreement is. As my previous posts remarked, for the question of “Has the world actually been cooling since 2002?” The answer is no. The most defensible position would had been that for the surface temperatures there is an apparent holding pattern, but this is not the whole picture, once the oceans are taken into account that “pause” is not there. If the contribution from human released CO2 and other global warming gases was not doing anything then the temperatures would be more aligned to the temperatures seen in the decades of the 50’s or the 60’s, but the human element is still there, keeping the already reached levels up there and holding for the time the natural cycles that are keeping that surface temperature in the apparent holding pattern to increase the warming to yet another \*\*higher \*\*level for contrarians to claim once again that there is another pause. Forgetting that the human element is added to what the cycles of nature are doing. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/427 "2014-03-03T21:49:13Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > “No”??? > > You agreed previously that there has been a plateau since 2002. Just surface temperature, you need to read also what I typed before and after in this thread. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > It shouldn’t be accepted or dismissed. > > The normal process of science is that there needs to be a lot of challenges and confirmation before drawing a conclusion one way or another. As \*\*wolfpup \*\*noticed others have already confirmed or supported the conclusions with more research. What one could call confirmations are in reality challenges as if there was no supporting evidence then the results would had been contrary to what was reported. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/428 "2014-03-03T22:05:10Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > As my previous posts remarked, for the question of “Has the world actually been cooling since 2002?” > > The answer is no. > > The most defensible position would had been that for the surface temperatures there is an apparent holding pattern, but this is not the whole picture, once the oceans are taken into account that “pause” is not there. > > If the contribution from human released CO2 and other global warming gases was not doing anything then the temperatures would be more aligned to the temperatures seen in the decades of the 50’s or the 60’s, but the human element is still there, keeping the already reached levels up there and holding for the time the natural cycles that are keeping that surface temperature in the apparent holding pattern to increase the warming to yet another \*\*higher \*\*level for contrarians to claim once again that there is another pause. Forgetting that the human element is added to what the cycles of nature are doing. Thank you. It would be great if more answers were as direct and on point as this. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/429 "2014-03-03T23:06:06Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > How can 2002 be cherry picked if the discussion is about what has happened since 2002? It’s not supposed to be representative of the trend of the 21st century. There’s no reason to have a discussion about “what happened since 2002”, because 2002 isn’t a meaningful point to isolate. It may be meaningful to discuss what has been happening in the rough timeframe during which the temperature trend has been slower than the 20th century average, which is what I was describing and what the cited paper is addressing, as well as the two other papers I linked to. **The first prerequisite to such a discussion is a scientifically honest representation of the observations** , not a biased one seemingly designed to drive an agenda. The entire topic of this thread is a red herring, focusing on a supposed “cooling” that doesn’t actually exist and showing no interest whatsoever in discussing the actual pertinent science. Apparently as long as you get the message that global warming is over, it’s all good. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > I don’t have time now but I will check your counter examples about **FX** later. Please do. Some of them are hilarious. I would point out this revealing line in one of his posts that I linked: _“Scientists who have spent a lifetime in study and research of these matters are some of the biggest skeptics of the ‘climate’ experts, as they can see how the ‘science’ is agenda driven, not evidence based.”_ Notice the implication of the sarcastically quoted words: climate science isn’t actually science, it’s a conspiracy to push an agenda. This is basically this individual’s central thesis and explains everything he posts. I enjoy discussing climate science and don’t even mind “debating” points that I think are obvious with genuine skeptics such as yourself, but the above isn’t skepticism – it’s unmitigated bullshit. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > The normal process of science is that there needs to be a lot of challenges and confirmation before drawing a conclusion one way or another. Absolutely. The problem with climate science discussions tends to be that a great many individuals launch from their armchairs specious demands for confirmation of matters that have already been very well confirmed in the scientific literature. It’s one of those areas at the intersection of science and public policy where many have strong opinions about the science but not actually very much information about it – compounded by having a significant amount of **bad** information from an incessant campaign of denialism by vested interests. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2014, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/430 "2014-03-03T23:27:02Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Not hard at all. [This post was wrong](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17122677&postcount=27) in every respect. [I showed why here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17123960&postcount=37). Ok, I tried to follow the sun thing and found data on both sides. I looked at the graph you linked to showing a small impact: [![](https://www.realclimate.org/images/ipcc_rad_forc_ar5.jpg) ](https://www.realclimate.org/images/ipcc_rad_forc_ar5.jpg) This graph that **FX** linked to seems to show a correlation between sun and temp: [http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocng\_textbook/chapter05/Images/Fig5-14.htm](http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocng_textbook/chapter05/Images/Fig5-14.htm) So I Googled, found this link which says all of the following at different parts of the article: sun has a large impact on climate, sun has mostly regional impacts on climate, sun has small impact onclimate: > **[Tiny Solar Activity Changes Affect Earth's Climate](https://www.space.com/19280-solar-activity-earth-climate.html)** > > Even small changes in solar activity can impact Earth's climate in significant and surprisingly complex ways, researchers say. The sun's solar activity cycle will peak in 2013. When I look at graphs of sunspots vs temp, I see a lot of correlation up until 1980 then divergence. So it seems there is definitely a relationship, do you disagree with that? ---
**Author:** ![sleestak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@sleestak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleestak)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/431 "2014-03-04T00:51:50Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Seems that everyone else that is not FX is noticing a refusal to see the obvious from your part. > > Once again, FX linked to WUWT, the premiere denier site, and to a person that is not a climate change researcher. And you consistently link to the Alarmist site SKs, which is way _less_ neutral than WUWT. Hell, it is founded by a Climate Communications Fellow, whatever the hell that is. On top of that, lets take a look at some of SkS ‘team’. Ari Jokimai: A hobbyist who as a BSc in Comp Sci. James Wright is a science student. John Mason, a geologist. Baerbel W - a zoo volunteer. Dikran Marsupial is a computer scientist at University of East Angila. Having read through the absolutely horrid code that came out of Climate Gate, I wouldn’t let that guy touch any system of mine. Hey, they also have JG, a technical illustrator. But you know, your constant appeals to authority are quite cute. [QUOTE=GIGObuster] The most defensible position would had been that for the surface temperatures there is an apparent holding pattern, but this is not the whole picture, once the oceans are taken into account that “pause” is not there. [/QUOTE] This, by the way, is a pure damned guess because after the pause went on long enough to prove that the models are not working, the alarmists had to find the heat somewhere. It is interesting, as the heat went where the measurements _aren’t_. A note on the missing heat. Originally in about 2011 when people started noticing that the pause was too long and started to become a problem, they had to find an answer as it invalidated their models. So it went into the oceans. Except, and this is from Kevin Trenberth who is definitely a warmist, the Argo data isn’t good enough to tell. > [@](#): > > Trenberth questions whether the Argo measurements are mature enough to tell as definite a story as Hansen lays out. He has seen many discrepancies among analyses of the data, and there are still “issues of missing and erroneous data and calibration,” he said. The Argo floats are valuable, he added, but “they’re not there yet.” [Link](http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059955427). Each Argo buoy represents 39,000 square miles. There are 3566 Argo buoys for the entire planet. Basing ocean heat measurements off of Argo is like basing the average temperature in Kentucky by reading one thermometer. On top of that, the Argo floats have been operational since the early 2000’s. So, at best, we have 14 years of data. Before that, we have no idea what the ocean was doing below the surface. We do have a long record of surface temperatures, however they aren’t reliable because the method of getting the temperatures, dropping a canvas bucket into the water from a boat, is fraught with potential errors. These errors, from dropping the bucket next to the ships exhaust to letting the bucket cool before taking the measurement to bad thermometers, make that particular record fairly useless. So, the ‘heat went into the ocean’ argument has some serious flaws. The most serious flaw, of course, is the fact that\* none of the vaunted climate models predicted the pause or heat going into the ocean\*. Not one. But the models do predict that sea ice is going to decrease in the Arctic and Antarctic. The problem with that, of course, is that the Antarctic sea ice is increasing. > [@](#): > > For the latter, the issue is reconciling the observed expansion of Antarctic sea ice extent during the satellite era with robust modeling evidence that the ice should melt as a result of stratospheric ozone depletion (and increases in GHGs). [Link](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.2330/abstract). A robust model isn’t robust if it is wrong. And the climate models are consistently wrong. Slee ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/432 "2014-03-04T01:11:44Z")
Well stated. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/433 "2014-03-04T01:16:03Z")
> [@sleestak](#): > > And you consistently link to the Alarmist site SKs, which is way _less_ neutral than WUWT. Hell, it is founded by a Climate Communications Fellow, whatever the hell that is. On top of that, lets take a look at some of SkS ‘team’. Ari Jokimai: A hobbyist who as a BSc in Comp Sci. James Wright is a science student. John Mason, a geologist. Baerbel W - a zoo volunteer. Dikran Marsupial is a computer scientist at University of East Angila. Having read through the absolutely horrid code that came out of Climate Gate, I wouldn’t let that guy touch any system of mine. > > Hey, they also have JG, a technical illustrator. > > But you know, your constant appeals to authority are quite cute. The fallacy of shooting the messenger is still a fallacy. Everyone can see that you did not deal with the science that they link and quote, as it is clear also that you ignore the contributors that have more experience, like Barry Bickmore. One could then dismiss everything that you say then, expect that you are completely missing that Tremberth is not only using the Argo data, for the simply logical reason that it does not go too far back. Also that report you use was from 2011, as the latest articles show there is more research that was done and analysts made; so yeah, as always you come to discussions to this one with no good pickings. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/434 "2014-03-04T01:19:38Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > Well stated. Ans as usual, you do not look carefully at what was posted, calling a scientist that was one of the most important critics of the issue of the missing heat a warmist just shows that scientific discussion is not the purpose of his post. Just like Muller when it found that WUWT reason for existing was a mirage (the declaration that surface stations were giving useless data and or exaggerating the heat due to urban heat islands) Muller then was trashed, never mind that Anthony Watts told all that he was going to accept what Muller and his Berkeley team would find. It has been a few years already and no declaration that they were wrong is ever posted in his denier blog. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/435 "2014-03-04T01:28:50Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > Ok, I tried to follow the sun thing and found data on both sides. > > So I Googled, found this link which says all of the following at different parts of the article: sun has a large impact on climate, sun has mostly regional impacts on climate, sun has small impact onclimate: > [Tiny Solar Activity Changes Affect Earth's Climate | Space](http://www.space.com/19280-solar-activity-earth-climate.html) > When I look at graphs of sunspots vs temp, I see a lot of correlation up until 1980 then divergence. > > So it seems there is definitely a relationship, do you disagree with that? Well, the last link also has the researcher saying that: > [@](#): > > Although the sun is the main source of heat for Earth, the researchers note that solar variability may have more of a regional effect than a global one. As such, solar variability is not the cause of the global warming seen in recent times. > > **“While the sun is by far the dominant energy source powering our climate system, do not assume that it is causing much of recent climate changes. It’s pretty stable,” Kopp said. “Think of it as an 800-pound gorilla in climate — it has the weight to cause enormous changes, but luckily for us, it’s pretty placidly lazy. While solar changes have historically caused climate changes, the sun is mostly likely responsible for less than 15 percent of the global temperature increases we’ve seen over the last century, during which human-caused changes such as increased greenhouse gases caused the majority of warming.”** - Lika Guhathakurta at NASA’s Living with a Star Program That the correlation was lost starting around the 70’-80’ was seen as yet another piece of evidence that the warming was clearly being driven now by the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/436 "2014-03-04T01:52:38Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Well, the last link also has the researcher saying that: > That the correlation was lost starting around the 70’-80’ was seen as yet another piece of evidence that the warming was clearly being driven now by the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere. Yes, I read that. Now look at the oceanworld graph. Do you see that sun activity and temp seem to be correlated up until about 1980? ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/437 "2014-03-04T01:53:05Z")
Learned people who actually study the sun would think the self proclaimed experts who want to tell you the sun has little to do with climate are sort of touched. If they ever bothered to read any of the idiot stew that passes for “climate” science you find on blogs. Hell, even the wikipedia page on this can’t hide the reality of things. > **[File:Sunspot Numbers.png](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sunspot_Numbers.png)** > > Original file (1,813 × 762 pixels, file size: 115 KB, MIME type: image/png) > This figure summarizes sunspot number observations. Since c. 1749, continuous monthly averages\[dead link\] of sunspot activity have been available and are shown here as reported by the Solar Influences Data Analysis Center, World Data Center for the Sunspot Index, at the Royal Observatory of Belgium. These figures are based on an average of measurements from many different observatories around the world. Prior to 1749... > [@](#): > > I have to agree there is a lot of information out there on the Internet; but what about understanding? Let me put out a few remarks that might help your understanding of propagation. > **[HF Propagation tutorial](http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/qsl-hf-tutorial-nm7m.htm)** > > HF Propagation, by NM7M [![](http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/Radio/solar-cycle-19-23.gif) ](http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/Radio/solar-cycle-19-23.gif) ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/438 "2014-03-04T01:55:35Z")
[![](http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/Radio/solar-cycle-19-23.gif) ](http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/Radio/solar-cycle-19-23.gif) Take a wild guess what the late sixties and seventies has in common with the period from 1998 to present. Hint: It has to do with winters ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/439 "2014-03-04T02:10:01Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > Yes, I read that. > > Now look at the oceanworld graph. > > Do you see that sun activity and temp seem to be correlated up until about 1980? That is what I said. As the correlation was lost, the idea that the sun is driving the current increase in warming is not supported. Something else in the background is driving the increase. And I can see that FX is once again calling experts like Lika Guhathakurta a “self proclaimed expert” normal for someone that comes with the assumption that all experts are into a conspiracy. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2014, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728/440 "2014-03-04T02:29:24Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > That is what I said. Ok good, we both see it. > [@](#): > > As the correlation was lost, the idea that the sun is driving the current increase in warming is not supported. Something else in the background is driving the increase. No doubt there is a divergence that implies something else at work. But my point of the recent post was that **wolfpup** seemed to be saying the sun doesn’t really impact the climate, and the graph seems to say otherwise (generally) and I was trying to figure out if I was misinterpreting what he was saying. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-the-world-actually-been-cooling-since-2002/681728.md?page=23)