"
now your upper troposphere charts are
a) a cherry pick and do not reflect the whole atmosphere
and/or
b) your KDMI data is wrong, as it's been before
but I'm not going to hunt that down
"
OK, so I did hunt that down. All of ten minutes to find your cheat, while shutting down over here.
NOAA data is the NCEP/NCAR analysis
turns out it is invalid
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010JD014192/full
"
The five reanalyses analyzed here (the older NCEP/NCAR and ERA40 reanalyses and the more modern Japanese Reanalysis (JRA), Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA), and European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)-interim reanalyses) unanimously agree that specific humidity generally increases in response to short-term climate variations (e.g., El Niño). In response to decadal climate fluctuations, the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis is unique in showing decreases in tropical mid and upper tropospheric specific humidity as the climate warms. All of the other reanalyses show that decadal warming is accompanied by increases in mid and upper tropospheric specific humidity. We conclude from this that it is doubtful that these negative long-term specific humidity trends in the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis are realistic for several reasons. First, the newer reanalyses include improvements specifically designed to increase the fidelity of long-term trends in their parameters, so the positive trends found there should be more reliable than in the older reanalyses. Second, all of the reanalyses except the NCEP/NCAR assimilate satellite radiances rather than being solely dependent on radiosonde humidity measurements to constrain upper tropospheric humidity. Third, the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis exhibits a large bias in tropical upper tropospheric specific humidity. And finally, we point out that there exists no theoretical support for having a positive short-term water vapor feedback and a negative long-term one.
"
Nice cherry pick of false data, jopo
still up to your dirty tricks
