Russian heat wave, climate change or weather?

[westwall]

Turns out it is weather, more specifically the Jet Stream.

Frozen jet stream links Pakistan floods, Russian fires - environment - 10 August 2010 - New Scientist

So is GW responisible for the blocking events? Probably not. There is no link detected. However there is a correlation between solar activity and the blocking events in Europe. Correlation is not causation but it is worthy of a look if you must waste money down that road.

"So what is the root cause of all of this? Meteorologists are unsure. Climate change models predict that rising greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere will drive up the number of extreme heat events. Whether this is because greenhouse gas concentrations are linked to blocking events or because of some other mechanism entirely is impossible to say. Gerald Meehl of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado – who has done much of this modelling himself – points out that the resolution in climate models is too low to reproduce atmospheric patterns like blocking events. So they cannot say anything about whether or not their frequency will change.

There is some tentative evidence that the sun may be involved. Earlier this year astrophysicist Mike Lockwood of the University of Reading, UK, showed that winter blocking events were more likely to happen over Europe when solar activity is low – triggering freezing winters (New Scientist, 17 April, p 6)."

 

[Old Rocks]

Right now, the events fit the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change. Proof? No. But each year that the weather is in an abnormal pattern, and that pattern becomes more extreme each year and decade, the more that the hypothesis in climate change is confirmed.

 

[westwall]

But what happens if the "unusual weather patterns" stop after one or two years? That would tend to confirm the hypothesis wrong wouldn't it?

 

[daveman]

Right now, the events fit the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change. Proof? No. But each year that the weather is in an abnormal pattern, and that pattern becomes more extreme each year and decade, the more that the hypothesis in climate change is confirmed.

Right now, EVERYTHING fits the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change.

That's intentional.

 

[onecut39]

Right now, the events fit the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change. Proof? No. But each year that the weather is in an abnormal pattern, and that pattern becomes more extreme each year and decade, the more that the hypothesis in climate change is confirmed.

Right now, EVERYTHING fits the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change.

That's intentional.

Whatever else we may know we do know the physics of greenhouse gasses. Any high school student can produce the procedure and effect.

Greenhouse gasses have NEVER been this high. The "magic number" was about 350 ppm. That was the point on no return, where effects would become manifest and reversal would become difficult.

The number is now a lot higher than that.

 

[westwall]

Right now, the events fit the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change. Proof? No. But each year that the weather is in an abnormal pattern, and that pattern becomes more extreme each year and decade, the more that the hypothesis in climate change is confirmed.

Right now, EVERYTHING fits the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change.

That's intentional.

Whatever else we may know we do know the physics of greenhouse gasses. Any high school student can produce the procedure and effect.

Greenhouse gasses have NEVER been this high. The "magic number" was about 350 ppm. That was the point on no return, where effects would become manifest and reversal would become difficult.

The number is now a lot higher than that.

I hate to tell you but you are a little uninformed. CO2 has been up to 20 times higher in the past and even when the CO2 was that high the temps were only around 7 to 10 degrees warmer than now. This is well documented in many paleoclimate reports.
Additionally when it has been MUCH WARMER In the recent past the planet has been far richer in all living things. Plants, animals and people have been far better off. Once again this is well documented in written history from both the Roman Warming Period and the Medieval Warming Period.

 

[daveman]

Right now, the events fit the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change. Proof? No. But each year that the weather is in an abnormal pattern, and that pattern becomes more extreme each year and decade, the more that the hypothesis in climate change is confirmed.

Right now, EVERYTHING fits the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change.

That's intentional.

Whatever else we may know we do know the physics of greenhouse gasses. Any high school student can produce the procedure and effect.

And if that was the only factor in play, there might be something to be worried about.

In case you haven't noticed, the world is a little more complex than a high school science lab.

Greenhouse gasses have NEVER been this high. The "magic number" was about 350 ppm. That was the point on no return, where effects would become manifest and reversal would become difficult.

The number is now a lot higher than that.

Wrong.

 

[Old Rocks]

Right now, EVERYTHING fits the predictions of the preliminary events involved in a climate change.

That's intentional.

Whatever else we may know we do know the physics of greenhouse gasses. Any high school student can produce the procedure and effect.

Greenhouse gasses have NEVER been this high. The "magic number" was about 350 ppm. That was the point on no return, where effects would become manifest and reversal would become difficult.

The number is now a lot higher than that.

I hate to tell you but you are a little uninformed. CO2 has been up to 20 times higher in the past and even when the CO2 was that high the temps were only around 7 to 10 degrees warmer than now.

Now that is true. In deep geological history, the CO2 level has been far higher than today. And the TSI was also lower.

This is well documented in many paleoclimate reports.
Additionally when it has been MUCH WARMER In the recent past the planet has been far richer in all living things.

Not so. Many of the times that the CO2 was higher, the interiors of the continents were deserts. Much variability depending on the positions of the continental plates.

And the times of very rapid increases in CO2 and CH4 were times of extinctions.

Plants, animals and people have been far better off. Once again this is well documented in written history from both the Roman Warming Period and the Medieval Warming Period.

MWP, a regional event, and the amount of warming in the RWP cannot be confirmed as of yet, more than likely a regional event, also.

Global temperature change ? PNAS

Abstract
Global surface temperature has increased ≈0.2°C per decade in the past 30 years, similar to the warming rate predicted in the 1980s in initial global climate model simulations with transient greenhouse gas changes. Warming is larger in the Western Equatorial Pacific than in the Eastern Equatorial Pacific over the past century, and we suggest that the increased West–East temperature gradient may have increased the likelihood of strong El Niños, such as those of 1983 and 1998. Comparison of measured sea surface temperatures in the Western Pacific with paleoclimate data suggests that this critical ocean region, and probably the planet as a whole, is approximately as warm now as at the Holocene maximum and within ≈1°C of the maximum temperature of the past million years. We conclude that global warming of more than ≈1°C, relative to 2000, will constitute “dangerous” climate change as judged from likely effects on sea level and extermination of species.

 

[westwall]

Whatever else we may know we do know the physics of greenhouse gasses. Any high school student can produce the procedure and effect.

Greenhouse gasses have NEVER been this high. The "magic number" was about 350 ppm. That was the point on no return, where effects would become manifest and reversal would become difficult.

The number is now a lot higher than that.

I hate to tell you but you are a little uninformed. CO2 has been up to 20 times higher in the past and even when the CO2 was that high the temps were only around 7 to 10 degrees warmer than now.

Now that is true. In deep geological history, the CO2 level has been far higher than today. And the TSI was also lower.

This is well documented in many paleoclimate reports.
Additionally when it has been MUCH WARMER In the recent past the planet has been far richer in all living things.

Not so. Many of the times that the CO2 was higher, the interiors of the continents were deserts. Much variability depending on the positions of the continental plates.

And the times of very rapid increases in CO2 and CH4 were times of extinctions.

Plants, animals and people have been far better off. Once again this is well documented in written history from both the Roman Warming Period and the Medieval Warming Period.

MWP, a regional event, and the amount of warming in the RWP cannot be confirmed as of yet, more than likely a regional event, also.

Global temperature change ? PNAS

Abstract
Global surface temperature has increased ≈0.2°C per decade in the past 30 years, similar to the warming rate predicted in the 1980s in initial global climate model simulations with transient greenhouse gas changes. Warming is larger in the Western Equatorial Pacific than in the Eastern Equatorial Pacific over the past century, and we suggest that the increased West–East temperature gradient may have increased the likelihood of strong El Niños, such as those of 1983 and 1998. Comparison of measured sea surface temperatures in the Western Pacific with paleoclimate data suggests that this critical ocean region, and probably the planet as a whole, is approximately as warm now as at the Holocene maximum and within ≈1°C of the maximum temperature of the past million years. We conclude that global warming of more than ≈1°C, relative to 2000, will constitute “dangerous” climate change as judged from likely effects on sea level and extermination of species.

Ahh yes PNAS, now the presumed best source for silly science.

Roger Pielke Jr.'s Blog: Silly Science

 

[Old Rocks]

Pielke is one fucking dumb bastard. There are several studies done by military intelligence that state that the refugee problem created by a climate change is one of the primary dangers of such a change.

Publiications of the National Academies of Science is on of the premier sources of real sceintific information on this planet. The fact that Pielke has to resort of blogs, cannot get his nonsense published in peer reviewed journals, states the quality of his science.

Climate Challenge | Military leaders join chorus warning of climate change | Seattle Times Newspaper


Military leaders join chorus warning of climate change
By Frank Davies

San Jose Mercury News

WASHINGTON — Massive refugee migrations, bloody conflicts over water and other essential resources, and the U.S. military called in for huge relief efforts or as peacekeepers — this is one global prediction if governments don't curb greenhouse-gas emissions.

Because that warning is coming from a growing number of retired generals and security experts, the notion that dealing with global warming is a national-security imperative that requires international cooperation is gaining currency as Congress debates legislative remedies.

Using the military's risk-assessment practices, 11 retired generals and admirals issued a recent report saying that climate change is a "threat multiplier" that makes instability worse in Asia, the Middle East and Africa, and could spark a greater refugee flow into Europe.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.dni.gov/testimonies/20080625_testimony.pdf

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
House Select Committee on Energy Independence and
Global Warming
25 June 2008
National Intelligence Assessment on the National
Security Implications of Global Climate Change to 2030

 

[Old Rocks]

http://securityandclimate.cna.org/report/National Security and the Threat of Climate Change.pdf

In the national and international security
environment, climate change threatens to add
new hostile and stressing factors. On the
simplest level, it has the potential to create
sustained natural and humanitarian disasters
on a scale far beyond those we see today. The
consequences will likely foster political instability
where societal demands exceed the capacity of
governments to cope.
Climate change acts as a threat multiplier
for instability in some of the most volatile
regions of the world. Projected climate change
will seriously exacerbate already marginal living
standards in many Asian, African, and Middle
Eastern nations, causing widespread political
instability and the likelihood of failed states.

 

[daveman]

The fact that Pielke has to resort of blogs, cannot get his nonsense published in peer reviewed journals, states the quality of his science.

No, it shows the peer-review process is corrupted by the AGW cult.

 

[Old Rocks]

The fact that Pielke has to resort of blogs, cannot get his nonsense published in peer reviewed journals, states the quality of his science.

No, it shows the peer-review process is corrupted by the AGW cult.

Dumbass Dave, when are you going to floor us all and say something that actually has some intelligence in it?

 

[westwall]

Pielke is one fucking dumb bastard. There are several studies done by military intelligence that state that the refugee problem created by a climate change is one of the primary dangers of such a change.

Publiications of the National Academies of Science is on of the premier sources of real sceintific information on this planet. The fact that Pielke has to resort of blogs, cannot get his nonsense published in peer reviewed journals, states the quality of his science.

Climate Challenge | Military leaders join chorus warning of climate change | Seattle Times Newspaper


Military leaders join chorus warning of climate change
By Frank Davies

San Jose Mercury News

WASHINGTON — Massive refugee migrations, bloody conflicts over water and other essential resources, and the U.S. military called in for huge relief efforts or as peacekeepers — this is one global prediction if governments don't curb greenhouse-gas emissions.

Because that warning is coming from a growing number of retired generals and security experts, the notion that dealing with global warming is a national-security imperative that requires international cooperation is gaining currency as Congress debates legislative remedies.

Using the military's risk-assessment practices, 11 retired generals and admirals issued a recent report saying that climate change is a "threat multiplier" that makes instability worse in Asia, the Middle East and Africa, and could spark a greater refugee flow into Europe.

Now old fraud....you know... you can't have it both ways. First you make the claim that Military Intelligence is an oxymoron then you run to the military's tender embrace when it is reported that they modelled one of THOUSANDS of different scenario's they work through every year. Did you know that they also have scenarios dealing with an invasion by Mexico, and Russia, and a Chinese attack from Chinese controlled ports on the west coast of the US?

Oh yes they work on all sorts of scenarios....that doesn't mean they actually believe it will occur. That's why they ARE intelligent...unlike you you cheap slut you!.

 

[westwall]

The fact that Pielke has to resort of blogs, cannot get his nonsense published in peer reviewed journals, states the quality of his science.

No, it shows the peer-review process is corrupted by the AGW cult.

Dumbass Dave, when are you going to floor us all and say something that actually has some intelligence in it?

When are you going to develop some ethics? At least the corporate suits who are polluting the world are doing it for big money. You on the other hand pollute your neighborhood, poison your neighbors, and all for a mere pittance. You, sad little man, are just a cheap whore.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, no, I have never stated on this board that military intelligence was an oxymoron. And have a few freinds that served in that capacity. They are among the most intelligent people that I know.

 

[daveman]

The fact that Pielke has to resort of blogs, cannot get his nonsense published in peer reviewed journals, states the quality of his science.

No, it shows the peer-review process is corrupted by the AGW cult.

Dumbass Dave, when are you going to floor us all and say something that actually has some intelligence in it?

Your absolute failure to recognize intelligence is no responsibility of mine.

You can lead a leftist to reason...but you can't make him think.