Re: Not So Bright
Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:57 am
May 2013 was #339.
And here's the scary thing: According to the famous "hockey stick" graph, the sharp upturn in global temperature started around 1900. That means that the comparison is being made against temps that were already higher than previous centuries.
Or:
Consider the average monthly temperatures of the hottest calendar century on record. Since February 1985, we've had 339 months hotter than each average. Now, this wouldn't mean much if we'd also had around 339 months that were cooler than average. Instead, the number of months since February 1985 for which the temperature was equal to or less than average is zero.
An unchanging trend would predict a hotter-to-cooler ratio of around 170:170, or 1:1. Don Bright's argument would require a ratio significantly lower, like 140:200. Instead, we see 339:0.
Bright is now implicitly arguing that infinity (339/0) is less than 1 (170/170).
That's correct.Doug wrote:I guess the average here is average for the 20th century?
And here's the scary thing: According to the famous "hockey stick" graph, the sharp upturn in global temperature started around 1900. That means that the comparison is being made against temps that were already higher than previous centuries.
Or:
Consider the average monthly temperatures of the hottest calendar century on record. Since February 1985, we've had 339 months hotter than each average. Now, this wouldn't mean much if we'd also had around 339 months that were cooler than average. Instead, the number of months since February 1985 for which the temperature was equal to or less than average is zero.
An unchanging trend would predict a hotter-to-cooler ratio of around 170:170, or 1:1. Don Bright's argument would require a ratio significantly lower, like 140:200. Instead, we see 339:0.
Bright is now implicitly arguing that infinity (339/0) is less than 1 (170/170).