2020 Ties for Hottest Year on Record, NASA Says (Nullfying 10,000 "it's cold this morning" posts here)

About 615,000,000 results (0.30 seconds)
Search Results
Web results


How We Know Today's Climate Change Is Not Natural
https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2017/04/.../how-we-know-climate-change-is-not-natural/Apr 4, 2017 - Last week, the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, chaired by climate contrarian Lamar Smith, R-Texas, held a hearing on ...

How do we know global warming is not a natural cycle? | Climate ...
www.climatecentral.org/library/faqs/how_do_we_know_it_is_not_a_natural_cycleNov 7, 2009 - Answer. If the Earth's temperature had been steady for millions of years and only started rising in the past half century or so, the answer would ...

How do we know? - Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of ...
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. ...Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up .... the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the ...

Human fingerprints on climate change rule out natural cycles
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-natural-cycle.htmHowever, internal forces do not cause climate change. ... and oceanic emissions of CO2 and know that they are small compared to anthropogenic emissions, but ...
[.....]
How Do We Know Humans Are Causing Climate Change? | Climate ...
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/.../how-do-we-know-humans-are-causing-climat...Feb 1, 2019 - Yes, we know humans are responsible for the climate changewe see ... as if we're wrapping another, not-so-natural blanket around the Earth.

Global warming isn't just a natural cycle » Yale Climate Connections
https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/.../global-warming-isnt-just-a-natural-cycle/Sep 18, 2018 - Here's how we know that. ... Global warming isn't just anatural cycle. By Sara Peach on Sep ... The earth's temperature changesnaturally over time. Variations ... Earth's warming: How scientists know it'snot the sun. From Yale ...

How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global ...
https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science.../human-contribution-to-gw-faq.htmlJump to Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as ...- Natural climate drivers include the energy ... in snow and ice cover thatchange how much ... if it were not for these human-made and natural tiny particles.

[.....]
Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.



1632186412722.png


Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha
 
Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.



1632186412722.png


Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha

You've posted that stupid denier paper many times. (Connoly/Soon)
The overwhelming majority of scientists and ALL the world's scientific orgs acknowledge AGW.


It's rather funny in that:

Among the many problems in the infamous POS paper/authors are:

1. It only deals with the Northern Hemisphere, Not GW. :^)

2. The Lockwood paper referenced by Connolly doesn't support what he is saying.

3. The most cited person BY FAR in the Connolly Soon Paper is... Soon himself. 149 Times!

who is he?
Wiki:
“Willie Wei-Hock Soon

Soon is a climate change denier,[4][6] disputing the scientific understanding of climate change, and contends that most global warming is caused by solar variation rather than by human activity.[7][8] He co-wrote a paper whose methodology was widely criticised by the scientific community.[9] Climate scientists such as Gavin Schmidt of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies have Refuted Soon's arguments, and the Smithsonian does not support his conclusions. He is nonetheless frequently cited by politicians opposed to climate-change legislation.[4][6]
[.....]​
From 2005 to 2015, Soon had received over $1.2 million from the fossil fuel industry, while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his work”

Wiki:
Opposing (The AGW Consensus)

Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[29] NO national or international scientific body any longer rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.".."[28][30]..



Little TrollTwerp Ding tried more than one line with his worn out, Refuted, and renegade paper.
Busted.

.
 
Last edited:
You've posted that stupid denier paper many times. (Connoly/Soon)
The overwhelming majority of scientists and ALL the world's scientific orgs acknowledge AGW.


It's rather funny in that:

Among the many problems in the infamous POS paper/authors are:

1. It only deals with the Northern Hemisphere, Not GW. :^)

2. The Lockwood paper referenced by Connolly doesn't support what he is saying.

3. The most cited person BY FAR in the Connolly Soon Paper is... Soon himself. 149 Times!

who is he?
Wiki:
“Willie Wei-Hock Soon

Soon is a climate change denier,[4][6] disputing the scientific understanding of climate change, and contends that most global warming is caused by solar variation rather than by human activity.[7][8] He co-wrote a paper whose methodology was widely criticised by the scientific community.[9] Climate scientists such as Gavin Schmidt of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies have Refuted Soon's arguments, and the Smithsonian does not support his conclusions. He is nonetheless frequently cited by politicians opposed to climate-change legislation.[4][6]
[.....]​
From 2005 to 2015, Soon had received over $1.2 million from the fossil fuel industry, while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his work”

Wiki:
Opposing (The AGW Consensus)

Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[29] NO national or international scientific body any longer rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.".."[28][30]..



Little TrollTwerp Ding tried more than one line with his worn out, Refuted, and renegade paper.
Busted.

.
There have been many reviews and articles published that reached the conclusion that much of the global warming since the mid-20th century and earlier could be explained in terms of solar variability.

For example:
Soon et al. (1996); Hoyt & Schatten (1997); Svensmark & Friis-Christensen (1997); Soon et al. (2000b,a); Bond et al. (2001); Willson & Mordvinov (2003); Maasch et al. (2005); Soon (2005); Scafetta & West (2006a,b); Scafetta & West (2008a,b); Svensmark (2007); Courtillot et al. (2007, 2008); Singer & Avery (2008); Shaviv (2008); Scafetta (2009, 2011); Le Mouel et al. ¨ (2008, 2010); Kossobokov et al. (2010); Le Mouel et al. ¨ (2011); Humlum et al. (2011); Ziskin & Shaviv (2012); Solheim et al. (2012); Courtillot et al. (2013); Solheim (2013); Scafetta & Willson (2014); Harde (2014); Luning & Vahrenholt ¨ (2015, 2016); Soon et al. (2015); Svensmark et al. (2016, 2017); Harde (2017); Scafetta et al. (2019); Le Mouel¨ et al. (2019a, 2020a); Morner et al. ¨ (2020); Ludecke et al. ¨ (2020)).
 
Rising temperatures last year capped the world’s warmest decade in modern times, federal climate scientists said Thursday.

In a new climate study, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration ranked 2020 in a dead heat with 2016 as the warmest year since official record-keeping began in 1880. The record-tying warmth came despite a cooling La Niña Pacific Ocean current, which tamped down global temperatures slightly in December.

In a separate assessment released at the same time, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which relies on slightly different temperature records and methods, calculated that the globally averaged temperature last year was the second highest to date—just 0.04 degrees Fahrenheit shy of tying the record set in 2016. -
“These long-term trends are very, very clear,” said Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. “This is another piece of evidence that tells us the planet is warming decade by decade by decade.”

NASA and NOAA scientists labeled 2020 a year of extremes, driven by rising levels of Greenhouse Gases such as carbon dioxide and methane that trap heat in the atmosphere. - At times last year, the Arctic averaged 12 degrees Fahrenheit above normal, with some spots hitting temperatures of up to 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Record wildfires in the U.S. and Australia burned millions of acres and spewed smoke plumes high into the stratosphere. There were more named Atlantic storms than ever before. Heat building up...

The Iguanas are freezing and falling out of the trees in Florida---
And the idiot libs think it is warm?
 
Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.



1632186412722.png


Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha
It's God having some fun with us. Fricking hot, then cold, then too hot, then too cold... lol
 
It's God having some fun with us. Fricking hot, then cold, then too hot, then too cold... lol
It wouldn't surprise me if you really believed that. After all... you believe that a 120 ppm increase in CO2 will reverse a 3 million year trend of the planet cooling, right?
 
It wouldn't surprise me if you really believed that. After all... you believe that a 120 ppm increase in CO2 will reverse a 3 million year trend of the planet cooling, right?
Since I have no idea wtf you're on about, that would be a "no".
 
Rising temperatures last year capped the world’s warmest decade in modern times, federal climate scientists said Thursday.

In a new climate study, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration ranked 2020 in a dead heat with 2016 as the warmest year since official record-keeping began in 1880. The record-tying warmth came despite a cooling La Niña Pacific Ocean current, which tamped down global temperatures slightly in December.

In a separate assessment released at the same time, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which relies on slightly different temperature records and methods, calculated that the globally averaged temperature last year was the second highest to date—just 0.04 degrees Fahrenheit shy of tying the record set in 2016. -
“These long-term trends are very, very clear,” said Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. “This is another piece of evidence that tells us the planet is warming decade by decade by decade.”

NASA and NOAA scientists labeled 2020 a year of extremes, driven by rising levels of Greenhouse Gases such as carbon dioxide and methane that trap heat in the atmosphere. - At times last year, the Arctic averaged 12 degrees Fahrenheit above normal, with some spots hitting temperatures of up to 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Record wildfires in the U.S. and Australia burned millions of acres and spewed smoke plumes high into the stratosphere. There were more named Atlantic storms than ever before. Heat building up...

of course NASA is going to say such bullshit while a progressive is in charge of the Senate, House and Presidency, because where do they get their funding? Yeah, Congress with the approval of the Senate and President, so NASA will say whatever it is supposed to say. While intelligent people with their own eyes see shit happening that just doesnt conform with the religious zealotry of you left wing radicals so ready to freeze to death because of your stupidity. Just do it, remove yourselves from the world, thus creating less CO2 and when there arent any of you left, then global warming goes away.

Midweek winter storm to wreak havoc for 2,000 miles from the Rockies to the Northeast
Another week, another big winter storm for the U.S.
This week's storm will target a 2,000-mile swath of the nation from the Rockies to the Northeast with a nasty mix of snow, ice and rain from later Tuesday through Friday.
Cities such as Denver, Oklahoma City, St. Louis, Kansas City, Chicago, Indianapolis and Detroit are in the path of the system.

hqdefault.jpg
 
of course NASA is going to say such bullshit while a progressive is in charge of the Senate, House and Presidency, because where do they get their funding? Yeah, Congress with the approval of the Senate and President, so NASA will say whatever it is supposed to say. While intelligent people with their own eyes see shit happening that just doesnt conform with the religious zealotry of you left wing radicals so ready to freeze to death because of your stupidity. Just do it, remove yourselves from the world, thus creating less CO2 and when there arent any of you left, then global warming goes away.

Midweek winter storm to wreak havoc for 2,000 miles from the Rockies to the Northeast

View attachment 595642
You deny NASA and repace Climate with a WEATHER EVENT you IDIOT!
A snow storm in winter is SHORT TERM WEATHER.


`
 
You deny NASA and repace Climate with a WEATHER EVENT you IDIOT!
A snow storm in winter is SHORT TERM WEATHER.


`
Yeah and a hot day in the summertime, by you stupid fucks "Is just proof that the Earth is warming", while it is just a short term weather event. Go look a the Acrtic circle where the supposed ice is melting(over 32 degrees) and look at the upper midwest where the temperatures are ranging below zero. You just cant admit that you are being fooled, by your prog masters while they steal you money in taxing your CO2. Such stupid people who vote Dimitocrap.
Oh and i deny NASA, FBI , CIA and any other government agency because of their corruption.
Binet-Simon_scale.jpg
 
Yeah and a hot day in the summertime, by you stupid fucks "Is just proof that the Earth is warming", while it is just a short term weather event. Go look a the Acrtic circle where the supposed ice is melting(over 32 degrees) and look at the upper midwest where the temperatures are ranging below zero. You just cant admit that you are being fooled, by your prog masters while they steal you money in taxing your CO2. Such stupid people who vote Dimitocrap.
Oh and i deny NASA, FBI , CIA and any other government agency because of their corruption.
View attachment 595713
There is a Nine YEAR Running thread Skookerassbil's "Proof the skeptics are winning" that is virtually all WEATHER.
Most OF the weather threads are by Warming deniers saying it's cold in Denver/my backyard today.
You were just the latest fallacious CLOWN.
`
 
NASA, along with NOAA, got caught fabricating data during the Worthless Negro's administration. They have no credibility, especially with that dishonest Democrat moron clown Bill Nelson running the organization.
 

Forum List

Back
Top