Goan what do you think the phrase urban related trend and mention of urban warming in the quote means?

I just googled it and check out what interesting quote WIki has under Urban Heat Island – see what quote you find …it might look familiar 😯

It also lets you know how with 70% of the earth being Sea -this is also rising and cannot be a factor of urban heating – would also mitigate any measure of urban heating.
Epic Fail there

Junkyard – care to expand on that? You adding your own little bits on to what I've said in order to suit your own agenda?

WTF are you on about what extra bits have I added ?
What on earth are you saying /accusing me off?

All I have done is quote the views of the IPCC on the effects of UHI – which they have called urban related trend or urban warming in the quote.
The IPCC and the hundreds of contributors do know what they are doing and know what they are talking about…all I have done is quote from them.

Did you miss the bit where I was stating to which urban heat island theory I was referring? I'm talking about the one that follows:

Back in the day they built weather stations – they built them away from towns – those weather stations had thermometers in them – they gave temperature readings. You still with me?

As time went by the towns spread and got closer and closer to these weather stations – the heat from the buildings made the weather stations warmer – the readings on the thermometers went up.

Does it surprise you that the temperature went up when they started building houses next to weather stations?

linky

As time went by the towns spread and got closer and closer to these weather stations – the heat from the buildings made the weather stations warmer – the readings on the thermometers went up.

ahh right, so now that we know about Urban Heat Islands we can adjust for this effect or avoid it all together. So shouldn't our measured temperatures be LOWER than those artificially high UHI ones?

And how does UHI explain temperatures measured from sattelites?

Or changes in ocean temperatures?

Or temperatures taken from weather balloons?

Or from unmanned stations?

Urban heat island = Urban heat effect – google urban heat effect it comes back with results on urban heat islands UHI and describes exactly what you have – it being warmer in urban areas. It is not a new pheneomena it was first noted in the 19th C London ? iirc. There is no other I am aware of. It does work as you say but is only a small effect.

IPCC explained it accounts for

0.006°C per decade since 1900 for land, and 0.002°C per decade since 1900 for blended land with ocean, as ocean UHI is zero

UHI is only a small factor in all of this as the IPCC state. I have been talking about exactly the same thing as you.

Lord your link is to a release from a russian free market think tank – Institute of Economic Analysis – reported elsewhere but not directly quoted anywhere I found with a quick search – can you link to ther article directly?
when the met were asked about cherry picking data they said the following

The World Meteorological Organisation chooses the set of stations designated as essential climate stations that have been released by the Met Office. These are evenly distributed across the globe and provide a fair representation of changes in global average temperature over land. We do not choose these stations and therefore it is impossible for the Met Office to fix the data.

The global temperatures record, HadCRUT has been shown to underestimate the rise in global average temperatures over the past 30 years when compared against a fuller analysis of global temperatures. This analysis includes information from a wide range of sources such as satellites, radiosondes, and sea surface temperature data, but does not include surface observations used in HadCRUT, so is fully independent.

The analysis shows that HadCRUT under-estimates the warming in the Russian region, in particular, because of the limited availability of Northern Hemisphere high latitude observations. The Met Office is keen to publish all underpinning station data as it becomes available. We are already in the process of seeking agreement to release the underpinning data from its owners.
or graph here

from
http://greenerblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/todays-buzz-is-about-moscow-based-free.html
also here
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/12/russian_analysis_confirms_20th.php

Not convinced that the smaller set was cherry picked looking at that graph and they look pretty similiar to me esp from 1960 onwards

the urban heat island thing is well known, and has been taken into account.

interesting to note that it's unpopulated places like siberia / alaska / greenland / antarctica that have seen the most warming.

the 'heat island' thing is so old i'm dissapointed with you goan. – go an find something better than that. you've let yourself down.

'show me evidence and i will let it change me' – greg craven.

I'm not reading five pages, can anyone summarise this one?

a lot of people think that their opinion matters.

lol @ goan's UHI…

I'm not reading five pages, can anyone summarise this one?

Just Goan trying to troll up yet another climate change thread (his fifth or sixth this week) this time by randomly sprinkling in things he's just found on google 😀

Obliged.

Goodnight.

direct link to the article.

PMSL @ Lord!

cheers LORD 😆 i deserved that 😕

but they are not climate scientists are they ?
Any comment on the graph?

Any comment on the graph?

its very pretty… lots of colours 🙂

Earth The Climate Wars

Well worth a watch.

3rd episode, ~35 minutes has a great section on the historic record showing a 5 degree jump in 1-3 years (max). Something the models don't suggest (because they're shit).

What you have done is take a measure from one location and think that it was occuring globally.WHY oh why ahve you done this? Global warming is quite likely to do the same locally in the UK. When the large quantity of fresh and cold water enters the sea – from melting of ice caps and glaciers due to global warming. This then has a massive effect on the thermohaline circulations- due to salinity and temperature differences. Locally at the UK the North Atlantic Drift no longer arrives – we would cool drastically even though the global temperature was increasing- I knwo imagine that- and by degrees in years /decades – check what countries we are level with and see their temperatures. Once a new thermohaline circulation is established if it follows the same pattern you get rapid rising as the even warmer water returns to increase the temperature again by a number of degrees in a few years and to higher levels than before.
Even if you doubt my explanation you still need to explain why this happening in the past negates anthropogenic climate change. You also need to explain why the vast quantities of harmful gases that are being released are having no effect. I am happy to hear an explanation and your evidence beyond claiming the current models are sh1t.
Does anyone think it is likely that anyone on here is going to come up with something that climate scientists are not aware of? …where do you think we know about the rapid change from
? It is not new knowledge to them.
who was cherry picking data?

Thought we could relive all th eold ones at the same time 😉
Yes I am bored of them

What you have done is take a measure from one location and think that it was occuring globally.WHY oh why ahve you done this? Global warming is quite likely to do the same locally in the UK. When the large quantity of fresh and cold water enters the sea – from melting of ice caps and glaciers due to global warming. This then has a massive effect on the thermohaline circulations- due to salinity and temperature differences. Locally at the UK the North Atlantic Drift no longer arrives – we would cool drastically even though the global temperature was increasing- I knwo imagine that- and by degrees in years /decades – check what countries we are level with and see their temperatures. Once a new thermohaline circulation is established if it follows the same pattern you get rapid rising as the even warmer water returns to increase the temperature again by a number of degrees in a few years and to higher levels than before.
Even if you doubt my explanation you still need to explain why this happening in the past negates anthropogenic climate change. You also need to explain why the vast quantities of harmful gases that are being released are having no effect. I am happy to hear an explanation and your evidence beyond claiming the current models are sh1t.
Does anyone think it is likely that anyone on here is going to come up with something that climate scientists are not aware of? …where do you think we know about the rapid change from? It is not new knowledge to them.

The debate is far from over!

Indeed, but taking part in that debate is more than just saying "'t isn't".

For example, here is some evidence that global warming actually isn't happening:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/