B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY



Saturday, 13 February 2010
Q&A: Professor Phil Jones

B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread.

Firm

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread.

Firm

quote:





Donald Trump is not a big believer in global warming. "With the coldest winter ever recorded, with snow setting record levels up and down the coast, the Nobel committee should take the Nobel Prize back from Al Gore," the tycoon told members of his Trump National Golf Club in Westchester in a recent speech. "Gore wants us to clean up our factories and plants in order to protect us from global warming, when China and other countries couldn't care less. It would make us totally noncompetitive in the manufacturing world, and China, Japan and India are laughing at America's stupidity." The crowd of 500 stood up and cheered.



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/global_cooling_7njz5ZtpFblMuF5Vf7LJmN#ixzz0fcrLKcsR

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY



Saturday, 13 February 2010
Q&A: Professor Phil Jones

B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread.

Firm

Maybe you don't understand the meaning of the term "statistically significant"? Or maybe you're attempting to misrepresent the data?

It's really easy to find the warmest decade on record. Take theaverage temperature of each 1o year span as far back as we have records. Order them from highest to lowest. Don't be surprised when 2000 to 2009 comes out on top.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY



Saturday, 13 February 2010
Q&A: Professor Phil Jones

B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread.

Firm

Maybe you don't understand the meaning of the term "statistically significant"? Or maybe you're attempting to misrepresent the data?

It's really easy to find the warmest decade on record. Take theaverage temperature of each 1o year span as far back as we have records. Order them from highest to lowest. Don't be surprised when 2000 to 2009 comes out on top.

1999-2008 is a decade, 1998-2007 is a decade, 1997-2006 is a decade...etc. Which is hottest?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Why do you sign your posts "Idiots".

How many of you are there?

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm

Q&A: Professor Phil Jones

D -Question: Do you agree that natural influences could have contributed significantly to the global warming observed from 1975-1998, and, if so, please could you specify each natural influence and express its radiative forcing over the period in Watts per square metre.


Answer: This area is slightly outside my area of expertise. When considering changes over this period we need to consider all possible factors (so human and natural influences as well as natural internal variability of the climate system). Natural influences (from volcanoes and the Sun) over this period could have contributed to the change over this period. Volcanic influences from the two large eruptions (El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991) would exert a negative influence. Solar influence was about flat over this period. Combining only these two natural influences, therefore, we might have expected some cooling over this period.

E. Question: E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?

Answer: I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

________________________


Firm, I hope by including some of the other questions asked and answered from the rest of this interview will illuminate to others the type of a man that you are. It goes to show how manipulative certain people can be when they employ a "pick and choose methodology" in only utilizing the parts of an interview that they feel might aid their side of an argument where the information dispensed throughout the "whole" of the interview clearly shows to refute.

You are a dishonest person.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


Those answers just strike you as the simple and honest responses of a poor victim, huh, DG?  No problem with a cult leader suddenly making common sense admissions his followers would have attacked as on par with denying the Holocaust, not so very long ago?  I see desperate spinning, from a desperate man.

The sooner the actual environmentalists denounce these spokesholes, the better.

add;  That wasn't very nice, what you said to Firm.  The link was there, and the snipped portion was an accurate reflection of Jones fancy footwork throughout the whole.