What you are leaving out is that the amount of energy radiating away also increased, so Hansen et. al. estimates an imbalance of 0.58 ± 0.15 W/m2 for the period from 2005-2010.
Opps …
We can see what this imbalance has caused (maybe), looking at the change from 2005-2014
Compare with previous 16 year period
Why there is a huge dispute about a “pause” is sort of obvious.
This is wrong, replace with:
Maybe best forget the whole thing …
Still isn’t working out, if we’re having to increase the temperature of the oceans, we’ll be waiting a very long time before bad things start happening. Too much carbon is missing and not enough energy is being added, too many unknowns to make any screwball prediction.
Why do you hate science?
She spurned my love, lead me on until I was on one knee … took my ring and left me for another … why do you hate science?
I wouldn’t say you guys hate science. You don’t really know it well enough to have strong feelings about it.
Lol.
This is like watching pigs try to fly.
It’s more like watching pigs cherry pick data in a ridiculous attempt to refute climate science, all while pointing at their own efforts and yelling “Science!!1!”
Miss Sakamoto, he ain’t.
But neither is he an airhead. Although while I’m impressed with the length of those legs, he’s not an intellectual giant.
Dolby FTW!
Oldies but Goodies from the thread.
Mmmm, naked hot dogs…
Ah, the good old days.
I can still remember like it was yesterday, when I first read a rant about cold and where is the global warming?
At first I didn’t believe it was an actual real document, it had to be some fake, written by some anti-science denier. I also didn’t know early October had been so fucking cold in Boulder, since the media didn’t report on it. After I checked, I had some sympathy for the points made, three all time records for cold broken in one week for Boulder. And the snow, goddamn, the snow. (Trenberth couldn’t have known what was coming just a few weeks later) But certainly anyone going through record cold and snow could be expected to be a bit cross about it.
Yes, the data must surely be wrong.
For the lurkers, or anyone who is actually interested in weather and climate
Something I’ve done for over five years now, ever since I first saw Trenberth’s travesty and the rest of the oh so interesting things in the Climategate emails, is to simply check the records. It’s easy and even fun.
Like Jacksonville FL, where the records go way back, and we can look at unadjusted records, meaning nobody has changed the actual data. Like Saturday, August 22, 2015, we can see the record low for the day is 64 °F (1930) and the high is 100 °F (1900)
Looking at daily records for high and lows, in an area that is experiencing global warming, you expect to see record highs being set recently, and fewer record lows. Especially in summer and fall, when no arctic warming should have any influence on the polar vortex at all.
It’s very rare to have either a 98 °F day in early September, or a low of 61 °F, so when we see a new record for the low set, and the previous day a tie, it means something.
Like, it hasn’t been that cool on those days in 98 years. The same is true for the highs as well. If it ever gets to 98 °F on Sept 1st there,it would break the record set in 1912. Same for reaching 99 °F on the third, it would break the record set in 1912.
OK this is probably only fun for an extreme weather geek, but I know you are out there 
So we expect to see more records for warm being broken, than records for cold. All the more so, since the UHI effect should reduce the night time cooling in an area like Jacksonville.
Except that is wrong. The readings from the airport in no way can be compared to the old readings from near the river downtown, way back when it was a small town, compared to the present huge ass metropolitan center.
The airport is way out of town, far from the river. The only readings from there that matter would be the ones since it started acting as the NWS official site.
Cherry picking. Also particularizing by location. He zeroes in on one specific place in the country that has data he likes, but fails to work with overall global data.
Typical FX dishonesty.
He’s still getting paid that sweet sweet oil money. What was that saying, its hard to make a man understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it?
A good scientist looks to disprove his theories. Fuxsie looks for the very specific circumstances under which his hold. It’s why he could never answer my question in Great Debates.