Well, it seems some people are taking exception to the fact that we’ve used BEST’s data to show that the BEST claims of no warming abatement was false. It seems BEST isn’t confident about the last two plots of their data. (March and April) Okay, well being the generous soul that I am, let’s take out the last two data points. Again, we don’t have to do anything really fancy, all we have to do is pop over to the WFT site and end our plot 2 months prior. This renders this graph…..
Lol, now, we have a graph that Tamino reproduced. His start period is earlier than mine. I went to 10 years prior using a start time of 2001.75. But, here we can see a barely perceptible incline in the graph. Now, there are a number of things to recall. First, the original graph was posted in a response to the claim by Muller that there is no evidence that the globe has abated in its warming. Clearly, this was a false statement. This graph, even without the last two plots still shows basically a flat line. Also, recall that this isn’t current data. BEST’s data ends in April 2010. We cut off the last two months, so this ends in Feb. 2010. So, what will a completion of the data look like according to the rest of the data sets? To finish the decadal view, here are the land data sets, (WFT has taken GIS off of the land data set, so this is Crutem, RSS, and UAH, land coverage only.)
But, now, also recall that this is land only data. As we showed in an earlier post, the land only data is is significantly warmer than global temps. So, if and when BEST comes up to date, it will show a negative decadal trend for their land only data which suggests an even more negative trend when considering global coverage. Can we now dispense with the idea that BEST brought any new data or thoughts to the table? Surely, even though the time frame is shorter than what the alarmist want, we can all recognize that the temp increases seen in the 1990s has abated. Some of the world’s most famous alarmists acknowledge this abatement.