[_ Old Earth _] Climate change

[brewmama]

For one thing, I actually looked at the data. As you see, it hardly affects the graph. And it certainly does not reverse the obvious temperature rise. Even most deniers admit that there has been a considerable rise since that time. If you doubt this, consider hardiness zones:

Must be all those left-wing zinnias, um? Stupid plants, flowering earlier and earlier. Don't they know it's getting colder?

No,apparently, they don't. Maybe reality should mean more to you than political correctness?

That's your evidence? Perhaps you should have read further:

"Compared to the 1990 version, zone boundaries in this edition of the map have shifted in many areas. The new map is generally one 5-degree Fahrenheit half-zone warmer than the previous map throughout much of the United States. This is mostly a result of using temperature data from a longer and more recent time period; the new map uses data measured at weather stations during the 30-year period 1976-2005. In contrast, the 1990 map was based on temperature data from only a 13-year period of 1974-1986.

However, some of the changes in the zones are a result of new, more sophisticated methods for mapping zones between weather stations. These include algorithms that considered for the first time such factors as changes in elevation, nearness to large bodies of water, and position on the terrain, such as valley bottoms and ridge tops. Also, the new map used temperature data from many more stations than did the 1990 map. These advances greatly improved the accuracy and detail of the map, especially in mountainous regions of the western United States. In some cases, they resulted in changes to cooler, rather than warmer, zones."

 

[Obadiah]

That just goes to show ya that when people only want to win an argument they can always find statistics to back up their claim, no matter how wrong it is.

 

[Barbarian]

That's your evidence? Perhaps you should have read further:

I've read the excuses. And the attempts to explain away the evidence. But of course, the fact is plants are flowering and surviving significantly farther north now, than just a few years ago. No way to dodge reality. As Obidiah said, you can play with statistics, but unless you can show us that Algore fooled all those crops and plants, you're out of luck.

That just goes to show ya that when people only want to win an argument they can always find statistics to back up their claim, no matter how wrong it is.

Anyone can look at the maps I provided, and see a few tiny areas where the revision showed cooler areas. However, almost all the changes had them hotter than previously thought.

 

[Barbarian]

Or, until the climate cycles cold again...more likely.

Not for a long time to come. A cold turn as strong and prolonged as this hot spell is unlikely for many years. And there would have to be a huge turnaround in technology to make it happen. Not out of the question, but it's not something we can realistically count on.

Then we'll hear all over again we have to urgently submit to a totalitarian world government to control our lives is order to stop the next glacier, for our own good, of course.

When did you think it happened the first time?

 

[turnorburn]

This isn't fake to some it doesn't exist.. when asked people respond with a blank stare.. What's Fukushima?

There is a massive pool of warm water in the Gulf of Alaska, NOAA scientist Nate Mantua said in an email. It is unprecedented in the historical record, he added… the past year is way out of the historical range — “so who knows what will happen?”…

Scientists across NOAA Fisheries are watching a persistent expanse of exceptionally warm water spanning the Gulf of Alaska that could send reverberations through the marine food web. The warm expanse appeared about a year ago and the longer it lingers, the greater potential it has to affect ocean life… “Right now it’s super warm all the way across the Pacific to Japan,” said Bill Peterson, an oceanographer with NOAA.

These are certainly record high temperature levels. Bob Tisdale, a manmade climate change skeptic, has an excellent summary of this situation here.

This report here, by Howard Freeland and Frank Whitney, was linked to in the Enenews post.

In March 2014 there was something very unusual occurring in the Northeast (NE) Pacific that might have substantial consequences for biota in the Gulf of Alaska and southward into the subtropics… we see SST departures of 4.5 standard deviations… The anomaly field covers a large region of the N.E. Pacific… The authors of this article have never seen [such] deviations… Something as extraordinary as a 4.5-sigma deviation requires corroboration…

An increase of 4.5-sigma in sea surface temperatures is about one-fifth the probability of being dealt a straight flush in five-card poker, and twice the probability of being dealt a royal flush. In other words, it is wildly improbable that it is a result of a natural process.

The answer is that Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant has releasing extremely radioactively contaminated water, starting in March 2011. The worst part was at the beginning. By early April 2011, humungous levels of iodine-131 and cesium-137 had been released.

There at the bottom: "humungous levels of iodine-131 and cesium-137 had been released"

That's what started the search on ways to combat it..

 

[turnorburn]

Found this radiation tracking site if anyone's interested..

http://www.netc.com/

 

[Barbarian]

You've assumed correlation means causation. In fact, something far more likely to have produced enough hot air to warm the Pacific happened in March 2011:

The annual dinner features a lighthearted speech from the president; that year, President Obama chose Mr. Trump, then flirting with his own presidential bid, as a punch line.

He lampooned Mr. Trump’s gaudy taste in décor. He ridiculed his fixation on false rumors that the president had been born in Kenya. He belittled his reality show, “The Celebrity Apprentice.”

Mr. Trump at first offered a drawn smile, then a game wave of the hand. But as the president’s mocking of him continued and people at other tables craned their necks to gauge his reaction, Mr. Trump hunched forward with a frozen grimace.

After the dinner ended, Mr. Trump quickly left, appearing bruised. He was “incredibly gracious and engaged on the way in,” recalled Marcus Brauchli, then the executive editor of The Washington Post, but departed “with maximum efficiency.”


That evening of public abasement, rather than sending Mr. Trump away, accelerated his ferocious efforts to gain stature within the political world. And it captured the degree to which Mr. Trump’s campaign is driven by a deep yearning sometimes obscured by his bluster and bragging: a desire to be taken seriously.

That desire has played out over the last several years within a Republican Party that placated and indulged him, and accepted his money and support, seemingly not grasping how fervently determined he was to become a major force in American politics. In the process, the party bestowed upon Mr. Trump the kind of legitimacy that he craved, which has helped him pursue a credible bid for the presidency.

“Everybody has a little regret there, and everybody read it wrong,” said David Keene, a former chairman of the American Conservative Union, an activist group Mr. Trump cultivated. Of Mr. Trump’s rise, Mr. Keene said, “It’s almost comical, except it’s liable to end up with him as the nominee.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/us/politics/donald-trump-campaign.html?_r=0

 

[brewmama]

I've read the excuses. And the attempts to explain away the evidence. But of course, the fact is plants are flowering and surviving significantly farther north now, than just a few years ago. No way to dodge reality. As Obidiah said, you can play with statistics, but unless you can show us that Algore fooled all those crops and plants, you're out of luck.
Anyone can look at the maps I provided, and see a few tiny areas where the revision showed cooler areas. However, almost all the changes had them hotter than previously thought.

WHAT are you talking about? I was quoting the ag dept that made the changes!

 

[Barbarian]

WHAT are you talking about?

The changes on the map. As you saw, I showed them to you. As your source says, they are overwhelmingly warmer than previously measured, but notice on the map a few tiny places in the (mostly desert) southwest, where it was recorded as cooler than before. That's the changes you were talking about. Go back and look at the map; that'he Dept. of Agriculture data.

I was quoting the ag dept that made the changes!

Yep. That is the data that they used to move the hardiness zones farther north. But it's based on the survivability of various plants, which people already knew. Did you honestly think that the Dept. of Agriculture map supported your beliefs?

 

[brewmama]

The changes on the map. As you saw, I showed them to you. As your source says, they are overwhelmingly warmer than previously measured, but notice on the map a few tiny places in the (mostly desert) southwest, where it was recorded as cooler than before. That's the changes you were talking about. Go back and look at the map; that'he Dept. of Agriculture data.
Yep. That is the data that they used to move the hardiness zones farther north. But it's based on the survivability of various plants, which people already knew. Did you honestly think that the Dept. of Agriculture map supported your beliefs?

Actually it's not. It stated quite clearly what it's based on, and the new maps included the warmer El Nino year of 1998, while the other one didn't.
It certainly didn't support your beliefs!

 

[Barbarian]

Actually it's not. It stated quite clearly what it's based on, and the new maps included the warmer El Nino year of 1998, while the other one didn't.

Well, let's take a look again. Here's the two maps, with a third map showing the differences that took place over that time period:

Notice that the top map has reddish colors where hardiness zone numbers increased (warmer) yellow where they remained the same, and bluish where they decreased (got colder). And it's not just warmer temperatures. Tropical plants are surviving farther and farther north. And blooming times are happening earlier and earlier. Would you like to see some of that?

It certainly didn't support your beliefs!

If you think so, you got the map backwards.

 

[brewmama]

I see that it's really hard for you to get the point of things.

By the way, it has snowed all day today here. Despite all that really, really high (!) CO2.

 

[Barbarian]

I see that it's really hard for you to get the point of things.

I don't think denial is going to help you now. Explain how those hardiness zoned moved north. Liberal petunias?

By the way, it has snowed all day today here. Despite all that really, really high (!) CO2.

Look for more snow each year. Warm seas mean more water in the air, and warmer temps mean more snowfall. Around the Great Lakes, it has to be warm enough for open water to have truly massive snowfalls.

Why does it sometimes snow more when it's slightly warmer but not snow when it's very cold?
Can it be too cold to snow? People from warm climates might be forgiven for thinking that's a crazy question. After all, it only snows when it's cold, so the colder it is, the snowier it must be. Right? Wrong. Arctic climates often get surprisingly little snow. Barrow, Alaska, for example, gets less snow than Chicago in an average year, despite having winters that average 39°F (22°C) colder. So does that mean it can be too cold to snow? Well, people from cold climates might be forgiven for thinking it can, since they have lived through a lot of cold winters and may have noticed that the coldest weather of any given year has never been associated with snow. That isn't really because it's too cold to snow, but because it's too dry. (The coldest weather is almost always associated with very high pressure and very dry air.) The truth is that it can never be too cold for snow, barring a drop in temperature all the way to absolute zero (-460°F or -273°C), in which case snow or lack thereof should be the least of your concerns. But even at balmier temperatures than absolute zero, below, say, -20°F (-29°C), it can be too cold for a lot of snow to fall.

Let's consider an illustration of why cold doesn't always mean snowy. Balmy Nashville in Tennessee (where the cotton blooms and blows), gets more snow in an average year than the frigid South Pole. Nashville gets about 11 inches a year and the South Pole gets between two and nine (my sources vary, perhaps because accumulations can be hard to measure there with the extreme blowing and drifting). So why isn't there a two-mile-thick glacier covering the Grand Ole Opry? As great a boon to civilization as that might be, snow in Tennessee melts. "But where are the snows of yesteryear?" Villon asked. In the case of the South Pole, the snows of yesteryear are just now settling in and making themselves comfortable. A few inches a year may not sound like much, but when it doesn't melt it really starts to add up. So far it sums to 9,000 feet, the depth of ice at the nether pole.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2051/does-it-ever-get-too-cold-to-snow

 

[brewmama]

How to have any weather at all mean "global warming"

winters warmer
April 15, 2015 by admin
“It is consistent with the climate change message. It is exactly what we expect winters to be like – warmer and wetter”, said Wayne Elliott, Met Office meteorologist.
BBC News, 27 Feb 2007
winters colder
April 15, 2015 by admin
Britain’s winters are getting colder because of melting Arctic ice, the Government’s forecaster said yesterday. Mety Office chief scientist Julia Slingo said climate change was “loading the dice” towards freezing drier weather – and called publicly for the first time for an urgent investigation.
The Sun (UK), 11 Apr 2013
……………………….
Snowdon going downhill
February 14, 2015 by admin
The data collected by experts from the (Bangor) university suggests that a white Christmas on Snowdon – the tallest mountain in England and Wales – may one day become no more than a memory. The figures indicated that this winter Snowdon is on track to have less snow than any of the last 10 years.The results appear to back the growing body of evidence to support climate change.
BBC News 20 Dec 2004
Snowdon going uphill
February 14, 2015 by admin
Snowdon Mountain Railway will be shut over the Easter weekend after it was hit by 30ft (9.1m) snow drifts. Alan Kendall, general manager of Snowdon Mountain Railway, said: “It’s the worst I’ve experienced in the 11 years I’ve been here.”
BBC News North West Wales, 28 Mar 2013

………………………………….

less rain
January 29, 2015 by admin
“So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that’s a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we’re going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation” – Interview with Professor Tim Flannery
ABC News (Australia) Landline, 11 Feb 2007

more rain
January 29, 2015 by admin
Climate change ”cannot be ruled out” as a factor in recent heavy rainfalls, such as the flash flooding in Sydney on March 8, the wettest March day for more than 25 years, a report by the federal government’s Climate Commission says. The chief commissioner, Tim Flannery, said NSW was highly vulnerable to climate change.
Sydney Morning Herald, Environment, 14 May 2012
………………………………….

less summer rain
January 25, 2015 by admin
A change in the North Atlantic current could lead to the end of the soggy British summers, researchers have claimed….. A decline in its speed, however, could cool the North Atlantic and put an end to the pattern, bringing colder but drier summer weather to Britain in future, experts explained.
The Telegraph (UK) 19 Jan 2014

more summer rain
January 25, 2015 by admin
Extreme summer rainfall may become more frequent in the UK due to climate change, according to new research led by the Met Office in collaboration with Newcastle University.
Met Office press release 2 Jun 2014
………………………………….

Scottish ski industry decreases
January 21, 2015 by admin
With the pace of global warming increasing, some climate change experts predict that the Scottish ski industry will cease to exist within 20 years.“Unfortunately, it’s just getting too hot for the Scottish ski industry.” said David Viner, Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia
The Guardian, 14 Feb 2004

Scottish ski industry increases
January 21, 2015 by admin
As snow conditions have improved in Scotland in recent years, so have the facilities in its ski centres. We round up what they offer, from the best pistes to where to stay and the best stop for a nice post-piste cake. (Note: pistes = a marked ski run)
The Guardian 2 Feb 2014
………………………………….

The Earth is doomed!
January 22, 2015 by admin
“The climate centres around the world, which are the equivalent of the pathology lab of a hospital, have reported the Earth’s physical condition, and the climate specialists see it as seriously ill, and soon to pass into a morbid fever that may last as long as 100,000 years.”
James Lovelock, The Independent Thursday 16 January 2006

The Earth is not doomed!
January 22, 2015 by admin

Environmental scientist James Lovelock, renowned for his terrifying predictions of climate change’s deadly impact on the planet, has gone back on his previous claims, admitting they were ‘alarmist’.

“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing.We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear cut, but it hasn’t happened”.

He added that other environmental commentators, such as former vice president Al Gore, are also guilty of exaggerating their arguments.
The Daily Mail (Australia) 24 April 2012

I could go on and on...

 

[brewmama]

Another take on those long term temp records...

"When the cool layer of air near the surface is disturbed, warmer air aloft is drawn down to the surface. All of those cause real changes in the local climate, raising local surface temperatures, especially at night, by amounts large enough to be noticed both by weather station thermometers and by people living in some of those areas.

But none of those changes has anything to do with widespread climate change in the deep atmosphere over large areas of the globe, such as might be seen if caused by increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

“Over time this might look like warming or an accumulation of heat in the temperature record, but this temperature change is only caused by the redistribution of warmer air that has always been there, just not at the surface,” said Richard McNider, a distinguished professor of science at UAH.

So how can climatologists use existing long-term surface temperature records to accurately track the potential effects of enhanced CO2? Take the nighttime boundary layer (and all of the things we do to interfere with it) out of play, say Christy and McNider...

And lo and behold, then you get:
The new temperature datasets extend the existing climatology for three regions of interior Alabama (around Montgomery, Birmingham and Huntsville) by a dozen summers, all the way back to 1883. Summers in Alabama have been cooling, especially since 1954. Interior Alabama’s ten coolest summers were after 1960, with most of those after 1990. As might be expected given that cooling, climate models individually and in groups do a poor job of modeling the state’s long-term temperature and rainfall changes since 1883.

The researchers conclude the models — the same models widely used to forecast climate change — show “no skill” in explaining long-term changes since 1883. Because they don't do the more accurate method!
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/29/tracking-climate-change-use-the-daily-highs/

 

[Barbarian]

How to have any weather at all mean "global warming"

Cherry-pick by finding someone, somewhere with contrary opinions, and pretend they represent a consensus. It's an old game, and no one is really fooled by it.

As you learned, more snow is a consequence of warmer winters. But as the models show, not every place is going to be affected the same way. As you may have noticed, some places will get wetter. Some, like the American west, are getting drier. And, yes, there's a possibility of England getting colder if the world warms up, because major melting of ice in the Arctic could cause a cold current southward that would interfer with the Gulf Stream that presently warms the British Isles.

Were you honestly fooled by those stories?

The new temperature datasets extend the existing climatology for three regions of interior Alabama (around Montgomery, Birmingham and Huntsville) by a dozen summers, all the way back to 1883. Summers in Alabama have been cooling, especially since 1954. Interior Alabama’s ten coolest summers were after 1960, with most of those after 1990. As might be expected given that cooling, climate models individually and in groups do a poor job of modeling the state’s long-term temperature and rainfall changes since 1883.

The researchers conclude the models — the same models widely used to forecast climate change — show “no skill” in explaining long-term changes since 1883. Because they don't do the more accurate method!

Well, let's take a look...

The summer of 2010 was a record-breaker in Alabama. Two major cities broke all-time records for the
number of consecutive 90 degree days with 50 days at Birmingham and 56 days at Montgomery.
http://coolweather.net/statetemperature/alabama-temperature.htm

Sounds like someone's not telling you the truth, um?

 

[brewmama]

Cherry-pick by finding someone, somewhere with contrary opinions, and pretend they represent a consensus. It's an old game, and no one is really fooled by it.

As you learned, more snow is a consequence of warmer winters. But as the models show, not every place is going to be affected the same way. As you may have noticed, some places will get wetter. Some, like the American west, are getting drier. And, yes, there's a possibility of England getting colder if the world warms up, because major melting of ice in the Arctic could cause a cold current southward that would interfer with the Gulf Stream that presently warms the British Isles.
Were you honestly fooled by those stories?
Well, let's take a look...
The summer of 2010 was a record-breaker in Alabama. Two major cities broke all-time records for the
number of consecutive 90 degree days with 50 days at Birmingham and 56 days at Montgomery.
http://coolweather.net/statetemperature/alabama-temperature.htm
Sounds like someone's not telling you the truth, um?

Once again, you didn't bother to read and/or understand the links/point. It really is pointless to try and discuss things with someone who does that. However, at least other people reading this will understand it better than you.

 

[Barbarian]

Once again, you didn't bother to read and/or understand the links/point. It really is pointless to try and discuss things with someone who does that.

You're hoping your links will be able to argue for you over the parts you don't understand. But as you see, your links have it wrong. How is it possible for Alabama to be cooling off, when it has record-breaking temperatures? C'mon. You surely see that the facts don't support your beliefs.

And as you also learned, warmer winters will always have more snow, because very cold air doesn't have enough moisture to produce snow, and warmer seas mean warmer air masses, with more moisture, to produce more snow.

It's not rocket science. If you spent a little time on it, you would understand.

In the U.S., the amount of rain or snow falling in the heaviest one percent of storms has increased nationally over the last half century—with the largest increases in the Northeast, Great Plains, Midwest, and Southeast. The Third National Climate Assessment shows that some regions of the country have seen as much as a 71 percent increase in the amount of rain or snow falling in the heaviest storms between 1958 and 2012.


Global warming is also causing warmer spring weather to arrive earlier than it used to. Overall, spring weather is already arriving 10 days earlier than it used to. A recent study estimated that the median onset of plant growth in spring will happen three weeks earlier over the next century, as a result of rising global temperatures. In California's Sierra Nevada, the onset of spring has already been happening three weeks earlier than historical records, with an immense amount of variability—meaning it is hard to plan for the average earlier spring onset.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/cold-snow-climate-change.html

 

[brewmama]

You're hoping your links will be able to argue for you over the parts you don't understand. But as you see, your links have it wrong. How is it possible for Alabama to be cooling off, when it has record-breaking temperatures? C'mon. You surely see that the facts don't support your beliefs.

I show the fallacy in using long-term surface temperature data and why, and in response...you quote long-term surface data! Genius!

You really aren't putting much effort in, are you?

 

[Barbarian]

I show the fallacy in using long-term surface temperature data

That's the irony. If you abandon long-term data, you can't measure climate at all. And your short-term fixation falls apart with the fact that 2010 was hotter in Alabama than anything else on record. If things have been cooling for years, one wouldn't have record temps in this decade. But there it is.

You really aren't putting much effort in, are you?

Yer makin' it easy, kid.