NASA: ‘Planetary warming does not care about the election’

[The Sage of Main Street]

NASA: ‘Planetary warming does not care about the election’
A very warm October ensures 2016 will be the hottest year by far.

NASA Land and Ocean Temperature Index (LOTI) for October.

Last month was the second-hottest October on record, NASA reported Tuesday. Combined with a record-smashing January through September — and a very warm November — this new data guarantee that 2016 will demolish the previous record for hottest year, set way back in 2015.

Of course, 2015 itself crushed the previous record for hottest year that was set in 2014 — a three-year run never seen in the 136 years of temperature records.

Dr. Gavin Schmidt, the director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, wants everyone to know that our current man-made global warming is indifferent to politics:

View image on Twitter

Follow
Gavin Schmidt @ClimateOfGavin

No surprise here, planetary warming does not care about the election. Now including October data.

Climatologists actually predicted this latest “jump” in global temperatures.

There is “a vast and growing body of research,” Climate Central explained in February 2015, indicating that “humanity is about to experience a historically unprecedented spike in temperatures.” One 2015 study concluded that we could even see Arctic warming rise an alarming 1°F (0.56°C) per decade by the next decade.

Speaking of the Arctic, look again at the top map from NASA. Large parts of the Arctic super-heated in October, as much 15.6 6°F (8.7°C) above the 1951–1980 mean temperature. No surprise, then, that last month saw the lowest October ice extent on record and that “as of November 1, sea ice volume is lowest on record.”

No, the climate doesn't give a flying fucking damn about human idiocy!

Eco-Eunuchs

Climatologists are minor-league scientists, C students jealous of A students. Dumb data grabbers instead of creative geniuses. Their mental inadequacy makes them unable to connect the dots; they can only collect the dots

Any real top scientist would know that data is plural. So the no-talent treehugger should have written "These new data guarantee."

LOL OK, little lying cocksuck, you said it, you back it up. What you are saying is that almost all the scientists in the world are frauds. You see, all the Scientific Society, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the world state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

How about you posting some articles from peer reviewed scientific journals that back your nonsense? You do know what a peer reviewed journal is?

Mutants Who Miss the Stone Age

You're so hysterically irrational and such an extremist worshiper of academic authority that your desperate rant almost looks like you're exaggerating in order to make fun of the Warmalarmies.

 

[xyz]

Mutants Who Miss the Stone Age

You're so hysterically irrational and such an extremist worshiper of academic authority that your desperate rant almost looks like you're exaggerating in order to make fun of the Warmalarmies.

You anti-science rhetoric will only convince the Walmarties.

 

[jc456]

Mutants Who Miss the Stone Age

You're so hysterically irrational and such an extremist worshiper of academic authority that your desperate rant almost looks like you're exaggerating in order to make fun of the Warmalarmies.

You anti-science rhetoric will only convince the Walmarties.

you mean their psuedoscience? LOL

 

[Weatherman2020]

No, but the cutting of all funds to NASA for climate change and actually have them explore space will get their attention.

 

[Old Rocks]

So, you mean that we abandon all earth observing satellites? And then get our hurricane and weather observations from China, Japan, the EU, and Russia?

What you really mean is the Sovietizing of science here in the US. Gotta hand it to you Stalinists, you got your man elected. So you may get your way. And the US may become a second tier nation in just four years.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You're right.............the planet doesn't care either way what we do.

However.............WE should care, because if we can't breathe, we can't live, unless we evolve another way of getting oxygen.

.............WE should care, because if we can't breathe, we can't live, unless we evolve another way of getting oxygen.

You're worried that we won't have enough oxygen?
You have an estimate on when oxygen will drop to a dangerous level?

Not so much worried that oxygen levels wil go down as much as I'm worried that the levels of other gases will go up. Up in Alaska, where the permafrost is melting, it's releasing lots of methane gas into the atmosphere.

And..............if the mix of gases that we currently breathe is changed by much, it could cause lots of problems.

Not so much worried that oxygen levels will go down

So why mention oxygen?

Up in Alaska, where the permafrost is melting, it's releasing lots of methane gas into the atmosphere.

In Alaska, what's the PPM? What level would be dangerous for us to breath?

..........if the mix of gases that we currently breathe is changed by much, it could cause lots of problems.

What change would cause what problems? Any specifics?

I mentioned oxygen, because it only comprises 21 percent of the atmosphere, but it is the main gas that we breathe. If you change the composition of the atmosphere by introducing more gases other than oxygen, eventually it will become impossible to breathe for oxygen based life forms (which we are).

As far as the PPM in Alaska? Dunno, they didn't mention the exact amount that was being released, they simply showed the effect by lighting the methane that was coming out of the ground.

Drop the oxygen level in what you breathe by just a few percentage points, and see how well YOU function. Lowered oxygen levels has a bad effect on things like thinking and reflexes.

so let's say the permafrost is indeed melting, wouldn't there be plants that would grow there? Do you know what plants give off? D'OH!!!!!

Actually, after the permafrost melts, what happens is that the sea ends up eroding the shoreline, and in many cases in Alaska, entire villages have had to be moved because of the melting permafrost and resulting erosion of the shoreline.

No, there isn't enough time to grow anything that will help.

 

[jc456]

.............WE should care, because if we can't breathe, we can't live, unless we evolve another way of getting oxygen.

You're worried that we won't have enough oxygen?
You have an estimate on when oxygen will drop to a dangerous level?

Not so much worried that oxygen levels wil go down as much as I'm worried that the levels of other gases will go up. Up in Alaska, where the permafrost is melting, it's releasing lots of methane gas into the atmosphere.

And..............if the mix of gases that we currently breathe is changed by much, it could cause lots of problems.

Not so much worried that oxygen levels will go down

So why mention oxygen?

Up in Alaska, where the permafrost is melting, it's releasing lots of methane gas into the atmosphere.

In Alaska, what's the PPM? What level would be dangerous for us to breath?

..........if the mix of gases that we currently breathe is changed by much, it could cause lots of problems.

What change would cause what problems? Any specifics?

I mentioned oxygen, because it only comprises 21 percent of the atmosphere, but it is the main gas that we breathe. If you change the composition of the atmosphere by introducing more gases other than oxygen, eventually it will become impossible to breathe for oxygen based life forms (which we are).

As far as the PPM in Alaska? Dunno, they didn't mention the exact amount that was being released, they simply showed the effect by lighting the methane that was coming out of the ground.

Drop the oxygen level in what you breathe by just a few percentage points, and see how well YOU function. Lowered oxygen levels has a bad effect on things like thinking and reflexes.

so let's say the permafrost is indeed melting, wouldn't there be plants that would grow there? Do you know what plants give off? D'OH!!!!!

Actually, after the permafrost melts, what happens is that the sea ends up eroding the shoreline, and in many cases in Alaska, entire villages have had to be moved because of the melting permafrost and resulting erosion of the shoreline.

No, there isn't enough time to grow anything that will help.

so only the coastal areas is where the permafrost is thawing? hmm doesn't seem like much then, so, your argument just lost its bite. So there is no permafrost melt going on, it's more the normal function of the sea hitting the shoreline. Why don't you post us up some visual information that backs your story?

 

[Old Rocks]

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

Unexpectedly Widespread Permafrost Melting Could Set Off A Greenhouse Gas Timebomb



By Robin Andrews
28/03/2016, 21:42
Beneath much of the Arctic resides vast stores of greenhouse gases, locked up for millennia in icy soils. With this in mind, a pair of studies provides a double whammy of bad news: Not only are these frozen reservoirs thawing out more extensively than previously thought, but at this stage, there’s little that can be done about it.

Carbon dioxide and methane are indubitably the two most potent greenhouse gases. Vast reservoirs of both exist within the world’s permafrost, which is hydrated soil that has remained below the freezing point for two or more years. Remarkably, these permafrost soils hold almost twice as much carbon than that found in the atmosphere – and one study, published in Nature Geoscience, shows them thawing all across the northern hemisphere.

 

[Weatherman2020]

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

Unexpectedly Widespread Permafrost Melting Could Set Off A Greenhouse Gas Timebomb



By Robin Andrews
28/03/2016, 21:42
Beneath much of the Arctic resides vast stores of greenhouse gases, locked up for millennia in icy soils. With this in mind, a pair of studies provides a double whammy of bad news: Not only are these frozen reservoirs thawing out more extensively than previously thought, but at this stage, there’s little that can be done about it.

Carbon dioxide and methane are indubitably the two most potent greenhouse gases. Vast reservoirs of both exist within the world’s permafrost, which is hydrated soil that has remained below the freezing point for two or more years. Remarkably, these permafrost soils hold almost twice as much carbon than that found in the atmosphere – and one study, published in Nature Geoscience, shows them thawing all across the northern hemisphere.

Great news. Since most weather related deaths are due to cold and the melting of ice opens up millions of acres for farming, millions of lives will be saved. We should do everything possible to accelerate this process.

 

[jc456]

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

Unexpectedly Widespread Permafrost Melting Could Set Off A Greenhouse Gas Timebomb



By Robin Andrews
28/03/2016, 21:42
Beneath much of the Arctic resides vast stores of greenhouse gases, locked up for millennia in icy soils. With this in mind, a pair of studies provides a double whammy of bad news: Not only are these frozen reservoirs thawing out more extensively than previously thought, but at this stage, there’s little that can be done about it.

Carbon dioxide and methane are indubitably the two most potent greenhouse gases. Vast reservoirs of both exist within the world’s permafrost, which is hydrated soil that has remained below the freezing point for two or more years. Remarkably, these permafrost soils hold almost twice as much carbon than that found in the atmosphere – and one study, published in Nature Geoscience, shows them thawing all across the northern hemisphere.

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

dude, if more vegetation grows, then there is more oxygen. You know this right? you know plants spew oxygen. please tell me you do.

BTW, where does more CO2 come from? Why would the ground have permafrost and CO2?

 

[jc456]

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

Unexpectedly Widespread Permafrost Melting Could Set Off A Greenhouse Gas Timebomb



By Robin Andrews
28/03/2016, 21:42
Beneath much of the Arctic resides vast stores of greenhouse gases, locked up for millennia in icy soils. With this in mind, a pair of studies provides a double whammy of bad news: Not only are these frozen reservoirs thawing out more extensively than previously thought, but at this stage, there’s little that can be done about it.

Carbon dioxide and methane are indubitably the two most potent greenhouse gases. Vast reservoirs of both exist within the world’s permafrost, which is hydrated soil that has remained below the freezing point for two or more years. Remarkably, these permafrost soils hold almost twice as much carbon than that found in the atmosphere – and one study, published in Nature Geoscience, shows them thawing all across the northern hemisphere.

Great news. Since most weather related deaths are due to cold and the melting of ice opens up millions of acres for farming, millions of lives will be saved. We should do everything possible to accelerate this process.

as well as more oxygen.

 

[Old Rocks]

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

Unexpectedly Widespread Permafrost Melting Could Set Off A Greenhouse Gas Timebomb



By Robin Andrews
28/03/2016, 21:42
Beneath much of the Arctic resides vast stores of greenhouse gases, locked up for millennia in icy soils. With this in mind, a pair of studies provides a double whammy of bad news: Not only are these frozen reservoirs thawing out more extensively than previously thought, but at this stage, there’s little that can be done about it.

Carbon dioxide and methane are indubitably the two most potent greenhouse gases. Vast reservoirs of both exist within the world’s permafrost, which is hydrated soil that has remained below the freezing point for two or more years. Remarkably, these permafrost soils hold almost twice as much carbon than that found in the atmosphere – and one study, published in Nature Geoscience, shows them thawing all across the northern hemisphere.

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

dude, if more vegetation grows, then there is more oxygen. You know this right? you know plants spew oxygen. please tell me you do.

BTW, where does more CO2 come from? Why would the ground have permafrost and CO2?

jc, you are a fucking moron. Read the article, and learn what permafrost is composed of.

 

[jc456]

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

Unexpectedly Widespread Permafrost Melting Could Set Off A Greenhouse Gas Timebomb



By Robin Andrews
28/03/2016, 21:42
Beneath much of the Arctic resides vast stores of greenhouse gases, locked up for millennia in icy soils. With this in mind, a pair of studies provides a double whammy of bad news: Not only are these frozen reservoirs thawing out more extensively than previously thought, but at this stage, there’s little that can be done about it.

Carbon dioxide and methane are indubitably the two most potent greenhouse gases. Vast reservoirs of both exist within the world’s permafrost, which is hydrated soil that has remained below the freezing point for two or more years. Remarkably, these permafrost soils hold almost twice as much carbon than that found in the atmosphere – and one study, published in Nature Geoscience, shows them thawing all across the northern hemisphere.

As the permafrost melts, more vegatation does grow. Which darkens the ground, leads to more absorption of energy from sunlight, which leads to deeper permafrost melt. And if the vegatation is forest, you get what is called 'drunken forests'. You also get increased, greatly increased, emissions of CO2 and CH4. And we are seeing these effects over the whole of the Arctic.

dude, if more vegetation grows, then there is more oxygen. You know this right? you know plants spew oxygen. please tell me you do.

BTW, where does more CO2 come from? Why would the ground have permafrost and CO2?

jc, you are a fucking moron. Read the article, and learn what permafrost is composed of.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140108102441.htm

"Global carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise -- in 2012 alone, 35.7 billion tons of this greenhouse gas entered the atmosphere. Some of it is absorbed by the oceans, plants and soil. They provide a significant reservoir of carbon. Scientists have now discovered how organic carbon is stored in soil: The carbon only binds to certain soil structures. This means that soil's capacity to absorb CO2 needs to be re-assessed and incorporated into today's climate models."

 

[Old Rocks]

That is the standard soil that we see around us. Permafrost has vast stores of organic matter in it, and it is presently frozen. If it thaws, and dries out, as this organic matter decomposes, it will emit CO2. If it is under water, which is often the case in permafrost, it will be decomposed by organisms that create CH4.

Why did you look up soil, and not permafrost? Are you simply that stupid, or are you purposely trying to make a dishonest arguement?

 

[jc456]

That is the standard soil that we see around us. Permafrost has vast stores of organic matter in it, and it is presently frozen. If it thaws, and dries out, as this organic matter decomposes, it will emit CO2. If it is under water, which is often the case in permafrost, it will be decomposed by organisms that create CH4.

Why did you look up soil, and not permafrost? Are you simply that stupid, or are you purposely trying to make a dishonest arguement?

I guess it is you that doesn't know what permafrost is. you should look it up.

here's what i found in wikipedia.

"In geology, permafrost is ground,[1] including rock or (cryotic) soil, at or below the freezing point of water 0 °C (32 °F) for two or more years."

Says rock and soil. So what did I state inaccurately?

 

[ErikViking]

Cheap EnergyTechnology will be invented that will get us off it in the not too distant furture.
In the meantime we are all Ok. We all arent going to burn up.
We are getting there real fast.

I think you're right. But we need to adjust also, we can chill and still reduce our impact. (It's already happening)

Any obsessive behaviour, crazy over-the-top unilateral bravado won't have any effect. Carefully, minute steps is the way to go. Also, put those intentions into trade.
"No, we are not buying cheap Chinese goods just yet - produce them with care" sort of thiking. I.e. global treaties.

so you know the safe levels of CO2?

Well, above 5% can render you unconscious. It's not an inert gas, but it will deprive you of oxygen. I have never felt it myself, but people I know describes an highly anxious feeling.

 

[Crick]

Suffocation they call it.

 

[skookerasbil]

I continue to be amazed how these types of threads SOMEHOW end up coming back to a dialogue about the science.

The election is, in fact, everything. Even before the election, the "consensus" science just was not mattering in the real world. Not one single member of the AGW religion is able to post up single link to dispute it.

You dumbasses think you are going to win the debate in this forum and suddenly the science is going to matter.

NO................IT ISNT!! None of the debate in here has mattered in the last 8 years and now, with the Paris Treaty set to be torn up by the Trump administration, you bozo's have never been in such a state of fucked.

Even the Sierra Club is saying its a whole new ballgame!!!

Election Could Reverse Decades-Long Environmental Trend | RealClearPolitics


You environmental crazies still don't get it.....10 days ago, you got the double eye poke Three Stooges style. But you go right on debating the science.....

 

[Crick]

Re the science, NOTHING has changed. You really are a complete waste dude.

 

[skookerasbil]

Re the science, NOTHING has changed. You really are a complete waste dude.

But on the side of the winners!!!


Because nobody is caring about the science!! Not a single AGW guy can post up even a single link to display for us where the science is mattering in the real world!!