Climate Records Shattered In 2013 [Pic+]

Submitted by: ElectricEye 1 year ago Science

CLICKY CLICKY


The climate is changing more rapidly in today"s world than at any other time in modern civilization.
There are 41 comments:
Male 625
Trying to read the comments, made me think of this:

0
Reply
Male 1,100
At this point this "Climate Change" junk science is so out of control, I would not believe anything published even if it proved the sky was blue often! Talk about the little boy crying wolf one too many times. The likelihood this is all a scam is just toooo great.
0
Reply
Male 675
Climate cycles are measured in the tens of thousands of years and we`re getting all excited about barely a century`s worht of records being broken?

It`s kind of like celebrating a Superbowl victory for your team after the first down of their opening drive in the first game of the regular season.

When I worked as a CPA performing financial statement audits and I tried to issue an opinion based on sample sizes that small, it wouldn`t be long before I would have lost my license. Doesn`t anyone study statistics anymore to understand what it says about sample sizes relative to the population?
0
Reply
Male 36,388
@Argus_Tuft: So insults are valid forms of argument at MIT? Do you have a PHD in "Potty Mouth"?

The FACTS as shown before you: You are wrong.

You have DIFFERENT facts? Link them.

Otherwise:

0
Reply
Male 1,253
Yeah, Crakr. You`re probably right. I`ve only been an MCT and MCAS Master for 25 years. Oh, and a Model 204 developer. So, yeah, you`re probably right, again.

I`d love to see things from your denialist point of view, but I can`t get my head that far up my ass.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
ArgusTuft: It`s pretty clear you don`t know how to read graphs, let alone trend line them.

a slight rise of +.4 C over 40 years is not statistically significant to attribute to CO2 or any other anthropogenic cause.

Also, if you take the data from 1998 to today and trend line it, the anomaly has leveled out at +.2 C since then.
0
Reply
Male 36,388
@Argus_Tuft: 2.5C?? huh?

From -.02C to +.025C= 0.45C by MY maths... that rounds out to about 1.1C per century, which isn`t much more than what`s been average since the Little Ice Age (0.8C) with NO human influence.

Where on EARTH do you get +2.5C in 40 years from the graphic @CrakrJak posted? The ENTIRE range is 1.5C, your measure would be way off the scale!

Or you mean a RATE of 2.5C per century? You have a link? The graphic of his data says NO such thing...
0
Reply
Male 1,253
Actually 5Cats. Dr. Spencer`s data shows an increase of 2.5 degrees since 1978. not 0.8 per century. I`m just quoting his data.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]But actual data, real-world measurements, do NOT support this theory, period! [/quote]
Not only that, predictions based on this theory have utterly failed to come true. If AGW were REAL science, this would immediately falsify the theory.



BTW, slandering Dr. Spencer does not change the facts.
0
Reply
Male 820
If it`s warmer, people will get to spend less to heat their homes, also using less energy for power and heat. That`s assuming that the warming is man made...which it isn`t. As an Alaskan, I welcome our new warm climate and look forward to the milder winters and increased growing season for local crops.
0
Reply
Male 36,388
@ArgusTuft: NO ONE is claiming the Earth isn`t in a LONG TERM warming period, ok? It has been warming since the Little Ice Age, ANYONE can see that!
Can we leave that strawman out for a while?

AGW says warming is faster than ever, caused 100% by humans and fueled by rising CO2.

But actual data, real-world measurements, do NOT support this theory, period!

In time it might, it`s possible `in theory`, but right now AGW is completely UN-proven. Unless you ignore the NOAA and RSS and ALL the rest of the data...

Move the goal posts all you like! Alarming rise in the past 40 years? (not 18, when AGW started it`s predictions) = That`s what @CrakrJak`s Graph covers! And the "rise" is about average: 0.8C per century!! SAME as before the CO2 rose!! Same as it has been rising since the LLI.
0
Reply
Male 5,620
Ahhhh. IAB, the place were NON-weather scientists get together to argue data they barely understand. =)
0
Reply
Male 1,253
Crakr. That data you keep showing PROVES global warming. If you were to put any trendline against that data (r squared =0) you will see the increase. Last time you quoted that guy, I downloaded all his data. It`s all available. I set it into a raw pivot and plotted many trends against it. All of it...again...all of it contradicts his claims. So that means, 1. He`s a shyte mathemetician, or, just making stuff up against what the data shows. I`ll post it if you like, but I can also email the spreadsheets to anyone who wants to see them. Didn`t manipulate the data in any way.
In fact, some of the geo data that he`s quoting shows an alarming rise in temps in the last 40 years.
Happy to share.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Davy: "Renowned" in ID he`s not. Dr.Spencer got his PhD in meteorology at the University of Wisconsin, Became Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA`s Marshall Space Flight Center and received the Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for global temperature monitoring work with satellites. He helped build the Aqua satellite and continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer on-board. His research has been entirely supported by US government.

He`s a more qualified scientist, at understanding weather and climate, than you, Davy. Your attempt at smearing him was not only weak, but the NOAA data you alluded to proves he`s right.
0
Reply
Male 36,388
@madduck: Agricultural land vanishes? Is the sea going to swallow it up? Not too many farms directly beside the ocean, iirc...

Again, iirc? It`s a TINY amount of land that will be lost. At the current rate of warming & ocean rise (which is FAR below AGW `predictions`) it will be over 100 years before it`s significant.

And for every bit of land made "too dry" by rising heat? Another bit will be "thawed out" so to speak and freshly available.

The Earth was warmer before and humanity prospered! Yes, some people will be worse off, but others will be better! That`s life! Wars and such are much more likely to be over oil and clean water, rather than raw agricultural land (which, btw, needs BOTH to function!).
0
Reply
Female 7,833
because AGW only affects the USA and money will be really important as sea levels rise and agricultural land vanishes. no wars or anything... sigh. whatever...
0
Reply
Male 7,338
normalfreak2-[quote]There needs to be a lot more study put into it to find solutions.[/quote]
There IS no solution, nor are they interested in finding one.

They`re just interested in 1) making you scared of it, 2) telling you who to blame for it & 3) convincing you that redistribution of `others` money is the key.

In the end, much like idiots were all for Obamacare until they found out THEY had to pay for it, you will have the audacity to act surprised when nothing is done and YOUR money is redistributed.
0
Reply
Male 2,342
I see the deniers are still shopping for "settled science" at the "Climate Depot"...
0
Reply
Male 36,388
@ElectricEye: No offence, but what do you mean:

[quote]...in today`s world than at any other time in modern civilization.[/quote]

Where does this link say that? Since 1880? That line?

The Earth has been warmer before. MUCH warmer. Why have an arbitrary cut-off date? Why say that the temperature in 1880 (or pick any date) was THE one and only perfect temperature for the Earth and anything "warmer" is catastrophic.

The Artic Ice was the largest in 20+ years for the 2013/2014 winter... does that "disprove" anything? Your link makes a claim for the 12/13 season...
It mentions 2 other "warming" things in North America that are obviously no longer true thanks to the coldest winter (Nov-April) since 1910... what of that?

One year doesn`t prove or disprove anything... said ALL the IAB-AGW Supporters before on IAB...
0
Reply
Male 36,388
RSS Satellite Data Shows no GLOBAL warming for 17+ years.

Funny, that`s exactly what the NOAA data shows too!

BUT we cannot believe this because it doesn`t fit the AGW Theory.

THAT is what AGW is all about!
Make the data FIT the theory! Not "the other way around" eh?
The science is settled!

The NOAA Are Wrong! was the unanimous consensus of AGW Supporters not too long ago... NOW they think the NOAA is perfect?

Hummm, I wonder why?
0
Reply
Male 36,388
NOAA Shows Stable Temps In USA Past 10 Years

But THAT NOAA data is completely bogus! ONLY NOAA data which confirms massive Global Warming is valid!

Of course "only the USA" doesn`t prove anything. I know that! I keep saying that! But:
#1 - USA is a significant part of "the Globe" yes?
#2 - 10 years vs 1 year?

So where is the rest of the world warming faster to compensate for the lack of warming in the USA? Funny how NONE of the data shows that...

And this "one year trend" presented here doesn`t "prove anything" either. The Earth is gradually warming, yes, for the past 200+ years.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Ah yes, Crakrjak to the rescue, right on cue. With data from Roy Spencer, climate skeptic and (very tellingly) renowned Intelligent Design Creationist.

If it`s all the same to you CJ, I`ll go with NOAA.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Baloney. Here is the actual global temperature graph from the UAH satellite.

0
Reply
Male 13,624
what ever ......
0
Reply
Male 15,832
@madduck The devastating poverty, starvation, and loss of freedom that we would suffer if the AGW crowd get to implement their prescriptions will be a thousand times worse than adjusting to global temperatures increasing by a couple of degrees.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
If short-term weather patterns can`t be used to refute global warming, how is it that they can be used to support it? Hypocrite much?
0
Reply
Male 36,388
@madduck: But it`s a "sure bet" 100% guarantee that massive spending WILL ruin the economies of any nation! Look how much damage has been caused by "mild" spending!

That against the "prediction" of catastrophe?
>It has been warmer: humanity flourished!
>Sea levels have been higher, and lower, and there`s sweet-FA we can do about that.
>The spending done has mostly benefited China! Which is "immune" to things like Kyoto Accord or "CO2 Reductions".

It`s a scam. Regardless of if the "science" is accurate or not? The "carbon credits" and all that stuff is a scam.

It takes money FROM the poor (higher taxes, 200% higher utility rates, fewer jobs) and gives it TO the rich (incentives, hand-outs, rents for long power lines in the UK).

There`s better ways to do it, but NONE of those are approved by the AGW Supporters. Not even allowed to ASK! Right @normalfreak2?
0
Reply
Male 10,339
@747pilot:

Problem is, here in the southeast US, it never snows in the winter, until the past two.

0
Reply
Male 10,339
I`m not denying. I just can`t be bothered.

I prefer it warm. Bring it on!
0
Reply
Male 1,454
Everyone knows this is happening, anyone who is at least 25 years old knows what is happening. Snow in the winter when you`re kids.. now rain all winter, hotter summers.

Why are we continuing to break climate records? well because we`re polluting more and more. In fact today we are polluting more than ever before. Tomorrow will beat today. Next month will beat tomorrow. 6 months from now will beat next month.
0
Reply
Female 7,833
It`s a pretty dangerous bet you are making there 5cats, especially as you think that money will just evaporate.. Especially as one thing we all need to do is not to over consume. If I am right and you are wrong the results will be catastrophic, If you are right we diverted cash from one source to another- and given the banking system is equally f.ed then that is unstable too no matter what.
0
Reply
Male 5,916
Neither is the alternative 5cats. You do measured changes things that will help. You are right throwing blindly at the problem won`t solve it but the time for obstructing the AGW theory needs to end. There needs to be a lot more study put into it to find solutions.
0
Reply
Male 36,388
@madduck: Spending 100 Trillion $$ on a problem that cannot "be fixed" means your children and grandchildren(to the seventh generation!) will be bankrupt paying for our folly...

Spending all that AGW money on actual, useful things would be 10X better AND probably save the environment MORE (since some "AGW Fixes" make things WORSE! Looking at Ethanol, for example) than simply leaving things alone...

Change for "the sake of doing something" is (almost) NEVER a good idea...
0
Reply
Female 7,833
I wouldn`t mind Davy- but it is my future, and that of my children which will be affected.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Doesn`t matter. Deniers` gonna deny.
0
Reply
Male 1,444
Ok the Earth is something like 4 billions years old and this is stating that climate records have been shattered since records have been kept which was 134 years ago. 4 billion years vs. 134 years. Ok since we know based on science that the earth has indeed been far warmer in the past I would say this study does not quite have the impact it thinks it does.
0
Reply
Male 36,388
Wll, since WHEN I LINKED the NOAA the AGW Supporters said they were NOT a valid group? They should be unanimous in rejecting this report as well, yes?

After all, they`re not hypocrites or anything...

And this warming trend they speak of? Yes, it has been warming for the past 200+ years, no one is arguing that.

The "annual rate of warming" has also been MUCH higher in the past, for a single year (4.40 C, this reports says 1.12 C for 2013)

And it`s still FAR below AGW`s predictions...

AND AND Team AGW always tells us "one year doesn`t prove anything" so I`m sure thy will apply THAT maxim to this report too, correct?

HAHAHAHA! Not a chance...
0
Reply
Female 7,833
I`m quite sure those with investments in fossil fuels etc will think of a way to convince their acolytes this actually is either a good thing or wrong. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns...
0
Reply
Male 5,094
0
Reply
Male 68
Uh oh, the conservative squad of this website won`t like this.
0
Reply
Male 2,729
Link: Climate Records Shattered In 2013 [Pic+] [Rate Link] - The climate is changing more rapidly in today`s world than at any other time in modern civilization.
0
Reply