Dan, the context for the graph is that it was produced by NCEP and covers the whole globe Outgoing Longwave Radiation from 1948. It shows an approx 6W/m^2 INCREASE in OLR over the period. Clearly, this need for the planet to lose more heat was due to an INCREASE in energy reaching the Earth's surface from the Sun due to changes in cloud cover, plus whatever other changes in the internal energy budget were caused by long term oceanic oscillations, humidty, co2 increase, particulate decrease, changing ocean surface biota, ice albedo, and a whole host of other factors.
Simple it aint.
Dan says that John Cook said that Kevin Trenberth said:
"Kevin Trenberth considers it "a travesty that we can't" get equipment that measures ocean temperatures deeper than 2000 meters. "
Here's what Kevin Trenberth actually said:
From: Tom Wigley
To: Gavin Schmidt
Subject: Re: BBC U-turn on climate
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:43:54 -0600
Cc: Michael Mann , Kevin Trenberth , Stephen H Schneider , Myles Allen , peter stott , “Philip D. Jones”
, Benjamin Santer , Thomas R Karl , Jim Hansen , Michael Oppenheimer
I just think that you need to be up front with uncertainties
and the possibility of compensating errors.
>>>>> Kevin Trenberth wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all
>>>>>> Well I have my own article on where the heck is global
>>>>>> warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have
>>>>>> broken records the past two days for the coldest days on
>>>>>> record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days
>>>>>> was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the
>>>>>> previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F
>>>>>> and also a record low, well below the previous record low.
>>>>>> This is January weather (see the Rockies baseball playoff game
>>>>>> was canceled on saturday and then played last night in below
>>>>>> freezing weather).
>>>>>> Trenberth, K. E., 2009: An imperative for climate change
>>>>>> planning: tracking Earth’s global energy. /Current Opinion in
>>>>>> Environmental Sustainability/, *1*, 19-27,
>>>>>> doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.06.001. [PDF]
>>>>>> (A PDF of the published version can be obtained from the author.)
>>>>>> The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at
>>>>>> the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data
>>>>>> published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there
>>>>>> should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong.
>>>>>> Our observing system is inadequate.
>>>>>> That said there is a LOT of nonsense about the PDO. People
>>>>>> like CPC are tracking PDO on a monthly basis but it is highly
>>>>>> correlated with ENSO. Most of what they are seeing is the
>>>>>> change in ENSO not real PDO. It surely isn’t decadal. The
>>>>>> PDO is already reversing with the switch to El Nino. The PDO
>>>>>> index became positive in September for first time since Sept
>>>>>> 2007. see
Tom Wigley comes out of this mess with more integrity than most of the people on the cc list IMO.
I know you will like this exerpt I took from the 2nd link above, since you and your buddies like to misquote what Kevin Trenberth said, along with everyone else.
As a matter of fact Dan, I and many other sceptics have been exhorting all and sundry to download and read the complete archive of emails for themselves, so they can make a balanced judgement about the issues for climate science, and science as a whole.
When are you and your gang going to 'acquire' more emails to misquote - right before another election?
I've no idea. If more emails are released, you can be sure we'll let you all know promptly. After all, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF PUBLIC MONEY are being spent on the say so of the RealClimate Team who are being told privately by Tom Wigley that
"you need to be up front with uncertainties and the possibility of compensating errors."
Possible compensating errors include a very long list, among which I would rank the following near the top. The IPCC cheerfully admits that there is a "low level of scientific understanding" regarding these, while at the same time saying they are "95% certain" that more than half the late C20th warming is due to man:-
Large UV variation (up to 25%) within the solar spectrum
The causes of global and latitudinal changes in cloud cover, density, altitude and diurnal coverage.
The causes of multidecadal oceanic oscillations evident in the temperature records.
The causes and timing of El Nino and La Nina events: You'll find plenty of papers about this - that disagree with each other.
I could go on... and on .... and probably will when we've covered these issues.