Climate Change - The Simple Argument

[Old Rocks]

LOL. The fools here believe that having 11 of the hottest years on record in the last 13 years is a sign of cooling.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

I hope you who believe the AGW is a myth concocted by thousands of climatologists, glaciologists, geologists, and biologists for what purpose? - I don't know - are right. I really hope so, cause if you're not, then we're all screwed.

 

[Old Rocks]

I hope you who believe the AGW is a myth concocted by thousands of climatologists, glaciologists, geologists, and biologists for what purpose? - I don't know - are right. I really hope so, cause if you're not, then we're all screwed.

You know, I have been trying to make that point for a number of years. I really do wish that the GHGs that we have put in the atmosphere were having no affects. But reality in the form of known physical laws and real time observations just keep getting in the way of that belief. Science is about reality, not political ideology or the "way things ought to be".

 

[KittenKoder]

How is trying to change something we can't change better than trying to survive it?

 

[FactFinder]

DailyTech - Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

Blog: Science
Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling


World Temperatures according to the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction. Note the steep drop over the last year.Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.
No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

World Temperatures according to the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction. Note the steep drop over the last year.

 

[FactFinder]

Personally I wish that global warming was correct and at the same time that people realized there is nothing man could do about it. So a few people at the coast may all have to move inland. More CO2 and warmer temperatures would likely wipe out world hunger.

 

[edthecynic]

DailyTech - Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

Blog: Science
Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling


World Temperatures according to the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction. Note the steep drop over the last year.Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.
No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

World Temperatures according to the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction. Note the steep drop over the last year.

Again, the chart is the TROPOSPHERE and not the surface temp!!!

Here is a graph of SERFACE temp anomalies for the whole globe for 2008:

 

[Coloradomtnman]

How is trying to change something we can't change better than trying to survive it?

And how do you know we can't change it? So should we just not try?

 

[FactFinder]

Arctic Sea Ice Extent

 

[Old Rocks]

Interesting. Sea ice extant for 4April2000. For present extant, here;

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

 

[edthecynic]

Arctic Sea Ice Extent

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

 

[FactFinder]

OK, You want surface temperature. You got it.

I hate posting GISS data as long as "cook the books" Hansen is there but they admit that 2008 was the coolest since 2000. 2009 is shaping up to be even cooler.

GISS Surface Temperature Analysis
Global Temperature Trends: 2008 Annual Summation
Originally posted Dec. 16, 2008, with meteorological year data. Updated Jan. 13, 2009, with calendar year data.

Calendar year 2008 was the coolest year since 2000, according to the Goddard Institute for Space Studies analysis [see ref. 1] of surface air temperature measurements.

They will further down state that it is the ninth warmest on record but of course that is the case when one is just declining from a solar maximum peak.

 

[KittenKoder]

How is trying to change something we can't change better than trying to survive it?

And how do you know we can't change it? So should we just not try?

It's a matter of weighing what is truly important:

Insuring that nothing ever changes (thus going against the natural course of evolution) or learning to survive that which there is no solid evidence to demonstrate we cannot while wasting time and money that could be used to prepare us as a species for the inevitable.

Ever stop to think, nature creates situations for mass extinction as a way to create a new stronger collection of species capable of withstanding even more than the previous ones. It does not set an automatic system for protecting weaker species, but instead creates species that are capable of helping prune such through evolution. We are a naturally evolved species within this system and are a result of many other mass extinctions. We either prove ourselves worthy of that place by surviving anything that can be thrown at us, or prove we are a wasted evolutionary line and thus nature creates a new one to replace us, as it did with the dinosaurs. Speaking of dinosaurs they are the perfect example. They were created by nature with one trait that would create environmental devastation, which they did. Many species did not survive, including themselves, but that's what was created through evolution.The raptors had a chance of being the first "human" species (not getting into specifics here on that) but because they were unable to adapt to their own flaws they went extinct as well. Adaptation of a species is more than just being able to survive in the ideal situation, nature knows this (as much as a non-intelligent force could) and tests all dominant species the same way. All have failed, and if the envirocon artists continue to get their way, we will fail as well.

The money required to study this phenomenon called global warming is not even where the largest amount of money is being wasted, a massive amount of money is being funneled into the "Gore Inc" companies, often by force (which is becoming more common each new study they publish). The fact that this isn't a red flag to people like you is enough reason to see why the human race should not survive, however I would hope that more will get wiser to this soon enough. We instead shift the finances into finding a way to survive without the crutch of what is being destroyed then as a species we will have survived a common and truly difficult evolutionary trial. If we do not and nothing can be changed we will fail as well no matter if we are the basic cause or not, it's in motion and clearly there is no way to stop it. Nothing we have done has made a dent in the change, nothing we have tried. There are no definitive answers to any of it and therefore no specific ways to stop it. The CO2 thing is all bull, it's a straw being grasped. All living land animals and many aquatic ones as well exhale CO2, in massive amounts. If this is the ultimate cause there is absolutely NO WAY to correct it, not unless we kill off most of the life on the planet anyway. So why waste our efforts to change something that simply cannot be changed, instead of using them wisely on surviving it and proving nature made a wise choice in allowing us to be the dominant species?

 

[FactFinder]

The sea ice is younger, thinner and more expansive than last year. Less was lost last year than 2007. It has started its recovery phase for the last 2 years.

Denver Weather Examiner: Arctic sea ice returns to 1979 levels

Back in September it was reported with great zeal that Arctic sea ice was melting at an alarming rate and that there was the danger of most all sea ice melting. Concern over the ice even prompted United States government officials to list the polar bear as a threatened species.

Three months removed from that panic, the latest satellite analysis from the University of Illinois Arctic Climate Research Center now shows there was no cause for concern as sea ice levels rebounded at near record levels and in fact returned to levels not seen in almost 30 years. Each year with the change of seasons the amount of sea ice fluctuates as it melts and refreezes. Colder temperatures invaded the region and winds that hamper ice growth have been lower thus allowing the sea ice to return to the new levels.

 

[Old Rocks]

You are posting more bullshit, Finder. Here is the real data on the present state of the Arctic Ice;




Sea ice young and thin as melt season begins

How vulnerable is the ice cover as we go into the summer melt season? To answer this question, scientists also need information about ice thickness. Indications of winter ice thickness, commonly derived from ice age estimates, reveal that the ice is thinner than average, suggesting that it is more susceptible to melting away during the coming summer.

As the melt season begins, the Arctic Ocean is covered mostly by first-year ice, which formed this winter, and second-year ice, which formed during the winter of 2007 to 2008. First-year ice in particular is thinner and more prone to melting away than thicker, older, multi-year ice. This year, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10% of the ice cover at the end of February. From 1981 through 2000, such older ice made up an average of 30% of the total sea ice cover at this time of the year.

While ice older than two years reached record lows, the fraction of second-year sea ice increased compared to last winter. Some of this second-year ice will survive the summer melt season to replenish the Arctic's store of older ice; however, in recent years less young ice has made it through the summer. To restore the amount of older ice to pre-2000 levels, large amounts of this young ice would need to endure through summer for several years in a row.

But conditions may not always favor the survival of second-year and older ice. Each winter, winds and ocean currents move some sea ice out of the Arctic ocean. This winter, some second-year ice survived the 2008 melt season only to be pushed out of the Arctic by strong winter winds. Based on sea ice age data from Jim Maslanik and Chuck Fowler at the University of Colorado, since the end of September 2008, 390,000 square kilometers (150,000 square miles) of second-year ice and 190,000 square kilometers (73,000 square miles) of older (more than two years old) ice moved out of the Arctic. View animation (1.1 MB).
Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

 

[edthecynic]

OK, You want surface temperature. You got it.

I hate posting GISS data as long as "cook the books" Hansen is there but they admit that 2008 was the coolest since 2000. 2009 is shaping up to be even cooler.

GISS Surface Temperature Analysis
Global Temperature Trends: 2008 Annual Summation
Originally posted Dec. 16, 2008, with meteorological year data. Updated Jan. 13, 2009, with calendar year data.

Calendar year 2008 was the coolest year since 2000, according to the Goddard Institute for Space Studies analysis [see ref. 1] of surface air temperature measurements.

They will further down state that it is the ninth warmest on record but of course that is the case when one is just declining from a solar maximum peak.

Coldest year since 2000 is NOT "record setting cold."

NCDC: Climate of 2009 - February

Boreal Winter (December - February) Winter Global Temperature Highlights

The combined global land and ocean surface temperature for boreal winter (December-February) was 54.72 degrees F, 0.92 degree F above the 20th century mean of 53.8 degrees F and ranking eighth warmest.

Separately, the global land surface temperature was 39.31 degrees F, 1.51 degrees F above the 20th century mean of 37.8 degrees F, ranking as ninth warmest on record.

The global ocean surface temperature of 61.20 degrees F ranked as seventh warmest on record and was 0.70 degree F above the 20th century mean of 60.5 degrees F.

 

[FactFinder]

Arctic Sea Ice Extent Sep 2007 and Sep 2008.

We are cooling and the Arctic is recovering

 

[code1211]

Again you are dishonestly using Troposphere data, and outdated at that![/QUOTE]

............

All of the data tracks seem to mirror each other interms of anomoly from a baseline. Whether it is the tropospheric data or the ground station data. The satelite data automatically averages for the globe while the ground station data must be adjusted, averaged and massaged until the raw data no longer exists.

The "Blink Comparrisons" of ground station data is interesting in that every adjustment made is always upward. I find this to be interesting when the heat island effect should be producing higher temperatures in any event and yet the raw data is still adjusted upward.

Kind of makes you wonder what the upward adjustments are based on, doesn't it?

 

[Meister]

You are posting more bullshit, Finder. Here is the real data on the present state of the Arctic Ice;




Sea ice young and thin as melt season begins

How vulnerable is the ice cover as we go into the summer melt season? To answer this question, scientists also need information about ice thickness. Indications of winter ice thickness, commonly derived from ice age estimates, reveal that the ice is thinner than average, suggesting that it is more susceptible to melting away during the coming summer.

As the melt season begins, the Arctic Ocean is covered mostly by first-year ice, which formed this winter, and second-year ice, which formed during the winter of 2007 to 2008. First-year ice in particular is thinner and more prone to melting away than thicker, older, multi-year ice. This year, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10% of the ice cover at the end of February. From 1981 through 2000, such older ice made up an average of 30% of the total sea ice cover at this time of the year.

While ice older than two years reached record lows, the fraction of second-year sea ice increased compared to last winter. Some of this second-year ice will survive the summer melt season to replenish the Arctic's store of older ice; however, in recent years less young ice has made it through the summer. To restore the amount of older ice to pre-2000 levels, large amounts of this young ice would need to endure through summer for several years in a row.

But conditions may not always favor the survival of second-year and older ice. Each winter, winds and ocean currents move some sea ice out of the Arctic ocean. This winter, some second-year ice survived the 2008 melt season only to be pushed out of the Arctic by strong winter winds. Based on sea ice age data from Jim Maslanik and Chuck Fowler at the University of Colorado, since the end of September 2008, 390,000 square kilometers (150,000 square miles) of second-year ice and 190,000 square kilometers (73,000 square miles) of older (more than two years old) ice moved out of the Arctic. View animation (1.1 MB).
Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

Maybe your source is just bullshit, Old Rocks, and Fact Finder is spot on??
With the BS you print...I'm putting my money on Fact Finder. In fact...I'm going to rep him for the good job.

 

[elvis]

You are posting more bullshit, Finder. Here is the real data on the present state of the Arctic Ice;




Sea ice young and thin as melt season begins

How vulnerable is the ice cover as we go into the summer melt season? To answer this question, scientists also need information about ice thickness. Indications of winter ice thickness, commonly derived from ice age estimates, reveal that the ice is thinner than average, suggesting that it is more susceptible to melting away during the coming summer.

As the melt season begins, the Arctic Ocean is covered mostly by first-year ice, which formed this winter, and second-year ice, which formed during the winter of 2007 to 2008. First-year ice in particular is thinner and more prone to melting away than thicker, older, multi-year ice. This year, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10% of the ice cover at the end of February. From 1981 through 2000, such older ice made up an average of 30% of the total sea ice cover at this time of the year.

While ice older than two years reached record lows, the fraction of second-year sea ice increased compared to last winter. Some of this second-year ice will survive the summer melt season to replenish the Arctic's store of older ice; however, in recent years less young ice has made it through the summer. To restore the amount of older ice to pre-2000 levels, large amounts of this young ice would need to endure through summer for several years in a row.

But conditions may not always favor the survival of second-year and older ice. Each winter, winds and ocean currents move some sea ice out of the Arctic ocean. This winter, some second-year ice survived the 2008 melt season only to be pushed out of the Arctic by strong winter winds. Based on sea ice age data from Jim Maslanik and Chuck Fowler at the University of Colorado, since the end of September 2008, 390,000 square kilometers (150,000 square miles) of second-year ice and 190,000 square kilometers (73,000 square miles) of older (more than two years old) ice moved out of the Arctic. View animation (1.1 MB).
Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

Maybe your source is just bullshit, Old Rocks, and Fact Finder is spot on??
With the BS you print...I'm putting my money on Fact Finder. In fact...I'm going to rep him for the good job.

Factfinder refuses to fellate the Left and Old Rockhead can't tolerate that.