In response to a lot of nonsense that was being published about Typhoon Haiyan, I published the post Typhoon Haiyan Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies for Early Storm Track. The post was not about tropical cyclones in general nor about the recipe for a tropical cyclone. I’ve presented that recipe here. My post was a quick and simple post about sea surface temperature anomalies. It was intended to dispel some of the nonsensical claims about links to manmade global warming.
Anthony Watts then included the first graph and part of the text as an update to his post Super Typhoon Haiyan, ‘…as intense as a tropical cyclone can get. ‘
Sou at HotWhopper has difficulty with WattsUpWithThat and with persons who regularly publish posts there. And one of the persons on this planet she dislikes most is me. She obviously had difficulty with my above-linked presentation of sea surface temperature anomaly data, because much of her post here was about it. One of the lines of evidence she presented was the following map and text:
…Here is the anomaly chart for the 8 November from the link on this page (Daily/Globe/Anomaly). It shows that most of the area didn’t differ from the baseline by more than +/- 1°C, although some areas were 1 to 2°C above the baseline.
Now we can understand why Perennially Puzzled Bob Tisdale keeps getting things wrong, even though we can’t excuse it. Bob’s not had any formal training in meteorology or climate science and is, by inclination, a climate science denier. He spends his days trying to figure out how to reject science – ironically having to start with real science from real scientists so that he can distort it and pretend the facts aren’t the facts.
Sou obviously has a limited grasp of reality, or she willfully misleads her readers, or, most likely, both. Apparently, with her arrow, Sou thinks Haiyan was on the equator on November 8, at a longitude of about 165E.
In reality the typhoon was about 4500 km away in the Philippines at about 11N, 125E. See the storm track map here, and the distance calculator here.
For Sou, I’ve placed the storm location on November 8 on her map of the sea surface temperature anomalies for November 8.
Get a clue, Sou. You have the unlimited capacity to make yourself look foolish. But if that’s your goal in life, please continue. Few people can take you seriously anyway.
Bob Tisdale - Climate Observations 
If Sou is representative of those warmista academically qualified in ‘climate science’, for whatever that may be, then it is understandable why they are incapable of proper analysis … can’t even get regions of the world right and I would expect that identifying anything beyond her backyard would be equally challenging to her.
Sou truly lives in an alternate universe – one of psychological projection. From her recent post entitled
“WUWT readers are too scared to read about rising sea levels in National Geographic”
She writes..
“That’s one of the main reasons why sites like WUWT are so popular. It exists as a placebo for people who are scared; telling fearful people not to worry because “all the science is wrong”.”
Scared? We “denialists” are scared? Scared of what? It’s the warmers like Sou that are scared – that the heavily CO2 laden skies are falling.
Thanks for taking some time to push back on her maniacal ravings.
Hi Bob,
I had a similar experience with your graph. I posted a link to it on The Groan (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/08/typhoon-haiyan-rich-ignore-climate-change) after someone had claimed sea surface temperatures were rising, and making storms more intense.
I got this reply:
“You’ve pointed me to a graph from Bob Tisdale, so hardly convincig evidence, but given that it seems to show a rising trend in sea surface temperatures in the region I’m not clear why you have chosen this as your evidence.”
After I’d pointed out your black trend line was, in fact, flat, s/he responded:
“Erm, no it’s not.
Do you see why I might be sceptical of a graph produced by Tisdale? Do you think it accidental that his graphs can so easily be misread by those who want to be misled?”
There was no explanation of why your graph might be wrong (difficult as I pointed out you had simply graphed the same data used by the IPCC) just an Ad Hom at your good self, and an inability to see a flat line as, well, flat.
Who are the deniers again?
Soarer, sorry to tell you this but the red lines in this graph…
…and this one…
…are not trend lines. Those are the most recent temperature readings. There are clearly warming trends visible in both graphs. When I present trends, I typically list the trends on the graph. Sorry if you misunderstood the graphs.
But here are the trends before and after 1998. Both are relatively flat, suggesting the leftover warm waters from the 1997/98 El Nino are responsible for the warming trend there.
Thanks for the correction Bob. Always happy to learn.
Soarer: Do you have a link to the exact exchange you had at The Guardian so that I don’t have to read through all of the comments? I’d like to add my two cents.Disregard the above, Soarer. I found the comments.
A caution based on one of your comments: You shouldn’t extend a short-term trend as you have. The trend is only for the period illustrated.
Regards
Bob for the record. “sou” aka Miriam O’Brien has reached the level of what I consider “Internet Stalker” More on her here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/my-blog-spawn/
The best policy is to ignore her, since she thrives on attention, even negative attention.
Bob, you certainly rattled poor silly Sou’s cage there!
What a truly remarkable, voluminous outpouring of venom, practically unprecedented even from the most rabid Warmists, even Hokey Schtick Mann and Scooter Nuttycelli could learn a thing or two about invective from that little lot.
They don’t like it up ’em!
Hot Whopper Blog is written by Miriam O’brien, aka ‘Sou’. She claims to have an MBA and BAgrSc(Hons), according to her company’s advertisement
Click to access mobccapab.pdf
http://www.drroyspencer.com/about/