Climate Deniers’ Favorite Temperature Dataset Just Confirmed Global Warming

[flacaltenn]

Third, it was so hot last month that Dr. Roy Spencer of the UAH reports, “Incredibly, land areas outside the tropics in the Northern Hemisphere were a ‘whopping’ 1.46 degrees C above average, 0.5 degrees above any previous monthly anomaly.” This is a 2.6°F warming above the 1981–2010 average — topping the previous anomaly by 0.9°F.

Yes --- big crayon dude. That was from a YEAR ago -- during the PEAK of the last El Nino.. Why are you shocked by this? Take a red, get some rest and some optometry for you font selection issues and be patient with the 2017 data.

 

[yiostheoy]

I have little doubt that the climate on Earth is warming.

But I have serious doubt that the insects, animals, and humans on it can do anything about it.

 

[yiostheoy]

Note: insects and humans are both animals.

But we normally speak of them separately.

Fishes and birds often get mentioned separately too.

Animals usually refers to mammals excluding mankind.

 

[RollingThunder]

So -- in your tiny hijacked mind, those couple of months were NOT the start of major El Nino??

Seek help.. Or get an update..

El Niño brings more of the ocean's heat energy to the surface, warming the surface waters and the atmosphere above the oceans. This contributed to the high temperature records set in 2015 and 2016, but the climate scientists say that the major factor in these increases was still global warming. 2014 was the hottest year on record (at that time) without any El Niño help. Moreover, El Niño's don't heat the land surfaces, and, as Dr. Spencer said about 2016 in that article I cited:
Third, it was so hot last month that Dr. Roy Spencer of the UAH reports, “Incredibly, land areas outside the tropics in the Northern Hemisphere were a ‘whopping’ 1.46 degrees C above average, 0.5 degrees above any previous monthly anomaly.” This is a 2.6°F warming above the 1981–2010 average — topping the previous anomaly by 0.9°F.

El Ninos change the weather WELL inland from the oceans. Largely by the heating they produce.

Actually, fecalhead, El Niño's don't "produce" heat (and La Niña's don't make heat disappear).....all they can do is speed up (or, in a La Niña, slow down) the transfer of both the already present heat energy (that came from the sun) between the surface layers and the lower layers of the ocean, and the rate of transfer of heat between the oceans and the atmosphere.

And perhaps the past months SINCE your "old news" and rediscovery of 2015/2016 El Nino HAVE been warmer. But the decadal RATE is still in the basement. We'll see.

Is that your bogus denier cult myth? That the rate of temperature increase per decade is "still in the basement"? LOLOLOLOL. In the real world, starting with the average rate of increase in global temperatures per decade since 1880, the data shows that the rate of increase since 1980 has doubled. The rate is still increasing as greenhouse gas concentrations continue to soar, and the evidence seems to indicate that the rate of temperature increase of the atmosphere, land surfaces and oceans very likely increased again in the period since 2000, given that 16 of the 17 warmest years on record occurred since 2001.

As NASA points out:
The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.

Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with 16 of the 17 warmest years on record occurring since 2001. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months. October, November, and December of 2016 were the second warmest of those months on record — in all three cases, behind records set in 2015.

Phenomena such as El Niño or La Niña, which warm or cool the upper tropical Pacific Ocean and cause corresponding variations in global wind and weather patterns, contribute to short-term variations in global average temperature. A warming El Niño event was in effect for most of 2015 and the first third of 2016. Researchers estimate the direct impact of the natural El Niño warming in the tropical Pacific increased the annual global temperature anomaly for 2016 by 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit (0.12 degrees Celsius).

 

[Olde Europe]

El Ninos change the weather WELL inland from the oceans. Largely by the heating they produce.

Actually, fecalhead, El Niño's don't "produce" heat (and La Niña's don't make heat disappear).

With all due respect, and while I usually find your contributions right on the mark and well worth reading:

"fecalhead"? That's goofy, not to mention infantile.

Moreover, flacaltenn talked about the "heating" El Niños produce. This is a matter entirely different from "producing heat". Without doubt, El Niños do produce heating, in much the same way as a radiator produces heating in a room. So, you're debating a non-issue here, and with a modicum of good will, you'd have recognized what he tried to express.

Finally, as you've been reminded several times, your large-font postings are annoying, as they represent the font-equivalent of yelling at everybody around, and I have to agree with flacaltenn on that score. Don't make me do that again, will you?

 

[Crick]

So -- in your tiny hijacked mind, those couple of months were NOT the start of major El Nino??

Seek help.. Or get an update..

I clearly said that they were.

 

[RollingThunder]

El Ninos change the weather WELL inland from the oceans. Largely by the heating they produce.

Actually, fecalhead, El Niño's don't "produce" heat (and La Niña's don't make heat disappear).....all they can do is speed up (or, in a La Niña, slow down) the transfer of both the already present heat energy (that came from the sun) between the surface layers and the lower layers of the ocean, and the rate of transfer of heat between the oceans and the atmosphere.

With all due respect, and while I usually find your contributions right on the mark and well worth reading:

"fecalhead"? That's goofy, not to mention infantile.

While I usually find your posts on environmental issues to be accurate, sane and intelligent, if somewhat milquetoast, your current post here seems kind of flaky.

Calling a particularly odious and deceitful denier cult troll 'fecalhead' is both accurate and appropriate, considering the lying bullshit he posts and the slanders and denigrations hurled by these denier cultists at the world's honest scientists, and everyone on this forum who is intelligent enough to understand science.

Moreover, flacaltenn talked about the "heating" El Niños produce. This is a matter entirely different from "producing heat".

Actually, ol' fecalhead is absolutely stupid, ignorant and clueless enough to think that El Niño's "produce" or create heat. Heat is energy, and as I pointed out, El Niño's only move already existing heat energy around from lower in the ocean, where we can't easily see or measure it, to the upper surface waters and the atmosphere, where it becomes much more obvious. This is not a trivial point.

Without doubt, El Niños do produce heating, in much the same way as a radiator produces heating in a room.

Quibbling about semantics can be kind of futile, but nevertheless, heat is energy, and El Niño's only transfer heat energy, they do not create it, or "produce" it. "Produce", BTW, is defined as "to bring into existence; to cause; to create"

Finally, as you've been reminded several times, your large-font postings are annoying, as they represent the font-equivalent of yelling at everybody around, and I have to agree with flacaltenn on that score. Don't make me do that again, will you?

Now you are just getting annoying.

I quote articles from various sources and I post them using the same standard font sizing that those articles use, numbnuts, with larger fonts for headlines and sub-heads. I also occasionally emphasize certain critical details for the 'benefit' of the denier cult dingbats who try to ignore those parts. These are examples of using differing font sizes and colors for emphasis and have nothing to do with verbally "yelling at everybody" except in your somewhat milqueoast mind. If you find larger fonts "annoying", tough shit! That is my style, and I'm not going to change it to please you.

The fact that you would go out of your way to agree on any point with a braindead cretin like fecalhead does not reflect well on you.

 

[boedicca]

Global warming is AWESOME! Just look at how human life improved during the Medieval warming period.

 

[RollingThunder]

Global warming is AWESOME! Just look at how human life improved during the Medieval warming period.

Do you deliberately try to post the most insane thing you can come up with, bowedick?

In the real world...

Science says: Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health, and environment far outweigh any positives.

Agriculture
While CO2 is essential for plant growth, all agriculture depends also on steady water supplies, and climate change is likely to disrupt those supplies through floods and droughts. It has been suggested that higher latitudes—Siberia, for example—may become productive due to global warming, but the soil in Arctic and bordering territories is very poor, and the amount of sunlight reaching the ground in summer will not change because it is governed by the tilt of the earth. Agriculture can also be disrupted by wildfires and changes in seasonal periodicity, which is already taking place, and changes to grasslands and water supplies could impact grazing and welfare of domestic livestock. Increased warming may also have a greater effect on countries whose climate is already near or at a temperature limit over which yields reduce or crops fail—in the tropics or sub-Sahara, for example.

Health
Warmer winters would mean fewer deaths, particularly among vulnerable groups like the aged. However, the same groups are also vulnerable to additional heat, and deaths attributable to heat waves are expected to be approximately five times as great as winter deaths prevented. It is widely believed that warmer climes will encourage migration of disease-bearing insects like mosquitoes and malaria is already appearing in places it hasn't been seen before.

Polar Melting
While the opening of a year-round ice free Arctic passage between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans would confer some commercial benefits, these are considerably outweighed by the negatives. Detrimental effects include loss of polar bear habitat and increased mobile ice hazards to shipping. The loss of ice albedo (the reflection of heat), causing the ocean to absorb more heat, is also a positive feedback; the warming waters increase glacier and Greenland ice cap melt, as well as raising the temperature of Arctic tundra, which then releases methane, a very potent greenhouse gas (methane is also released from the sea-bed, where it is trapped in ice-crystals called clathrates). Melting of the Antarctic ice shelves is predicted to add further to sea-level rise with no benefits accruing.

Ocean Acidification
A cause for considerable concern, there appear to be no benefits to the change in pH of the oceans. This process is caused by additional CO2 being absorbed in the water, and may have severe destabilizing effects on the entire oceanic food-chain.

Melting Glaciers
The effects of glaciers melting are largely detrimental, the principle impact being that many millions of people (one-sixth of the world's population) depend on fresh water supplied each year by natural spring melt and regrowth cycles and those water supplies—drinking water, agriculture—may fail.

Sea Level Rise
Many parts of the world are low-lying and will be severely affected by modest sea rises. Rice paddies are being inundated with salt water, which destroys the crops. Seawater is contaminating rivers as it mixes with fresh water further upstream, and aquifers are becoming polluted. Given that the IPCC did not include melt-water from the Greenland and Antarctic ice-caps due to uncertainties at that time, estimates of sea-level rise are feared to considerably underestimate the scale of the problem. There are no proposed benefits to sea-level rise.

Environmental
Positive effects of climate change may include greener rain forests and enhanced plant growth in the Amazon, increased vegetation in northern latitudes and possible increases in plankton biomass in some parts of the ocean. Negative responses may include further growth of oxygen poor ocean zones, contamination or exhaustion of fresh water, increased incidence of natural fires, extensive vegetation die-off due to droughts, increased risk of coral extinction, decline in global photo-plankton, changes in migration patterns of birds and animals, changes in seasonal periodicity, disruption to food chains and species loss.

Economic
The economic impacts of climate change may be catastrophic, while there have been very few benefits projected at all. The Stern report made clear the overall pattern of economic distress, and while the specific numbers may be contested, the costs of climate change were far in excess of the costs of preventing it. Certain scenarios projected in the IPCC AR4 report would witness massive migration as low-lying countries were flooded. Disruptions to global trade, transport, energy supplies and labour markets, banking and finance, investment and insurance, would all wreak havoc on the stability of both developed and developing nations. Markets would endure increased volatility and institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies would experience considerable difficulty.

Developing countries, some of which are already embroiled in military conflict, may be drawn into larger and more protracted disputes over water, energy supplies or food, all of which may disrupt economic growth at a time when developing countries are beset by more egregious manifestations of climate change. It is widely accepted that the detrimental effects of climate change will be visited largely on the countries least equipped to adapt, socially or economically.
(Source)

 

[Olde Europe]

Calling a particularly odious and deceitful denier cult troll 'fecalhead' is both accurate and appropriate, considering the lying bullshit he posts and the slanders and denigrations hurled by these denier cultists at the world's honest scientists, and everyone on this forum who is intelligent enough to understand science.

So, you can see how that silly slander and denigrations, let alone the stupid, infantile name-calling, reflect on those resorting to such abuse. That's good to know.

 

[flacaltenn]

El Ninos change the weather WELL inland from the oceans. Largely by the heating they produce.

Actually, fecalhead, El Niño's don't "produce" heat (and La Niña's don't make heat disappear).....all they can do is speed up (or, in a La Niña, slow down) the transfer of both the already present heat energy (that came from the sun) between the surface layers and the lower layers of the ocean, and the rate of transfer of heat between the oceans and the atmosphere.

With all due respect, and while I usually find your contributions right on the mark and well worth reading:

"fecalhead"? That's goofy, not to mention infantile.

While I usually find your posts on environmental issues to be accurate, sane and intelligent, if somewhat milquetoast, your current post here seems kind of flaky.

Calling a particularly odious and deceitful denier cult troll 'fecalhead' is both accurate and appropriate, considering the lying bullshit he posts and the slanders and denigrations hurled by these denier cultists at the world's honest scientists, and everyone on this forum who is intelligent enough to understand science.

Moreover, flacaltenn talked about the "heating" El Niños produce. This is a matter entirely different from "producing heat".

Actually, ol' fecalhead is absolutely stupid, ignorant and clueless enough to think that El Niño's "produce" or create heat. Heat is energy, and as I pointed out, El Niño's only move already existing heat energy around from lower in the ocean, where we can't easily see or measure it, to the upper surface waters and the atmosphere, where it becomes much more obvious. This is not a trivial point.

Without doubt, El Niños do produce heating, in much the same way as a radiator produces heating in a room.

Quibbling about semantics can be kind of futile, but nevertheless, heat is energy, and El Niño's only transfer heat energy, they do not create it, or "produce" it. "Produce", BTW, is defined as "to bring into existence; to cause; to create"

Finally, as you've been reminded several times, your large-font postings are annoying, as they represent the font-equivalent of yelling at everybody around, and I have to agree with flacaltenn on that score. Don't make me do that again, will you?

Now you are just getting annoying.

I quote articles from various sources and I post them using the same standard font sizing that those articles use, numbnuts, with larger fonts for headlines and sub-heads. I also occasionally emphasize certain critical details for the 'benefit' of the denier cult dingbats who try to ignore those parts. These are examples of using differing font sizes and colors for emphasis and have nothing to do with verbally "yelling at everybody" except in your somewhat milqueoast mind. If you find larger fonts "annoying", tough shit! That is my style, and I'm not going to change it to please you.

The fact that you would go out of your way to agree on any point with a braindead cretin like fecalhead does not reflect well on you.

Hey Blunderbust. You know all that heat that's STORED in the oceans? STORED means not available to the atmospheric thermal system. Trenberth calls El Ninos' "the safety valve" for stored ocean heat. So when it OPENS -- it contributes LOADS of heat into the atmospheric system. TEMPORARILY !!!! Which is a clue as how quickly that "forcing" is compensated for -- ISN'T IT?

OR -- maybe a reasonable fraction of the released heat "hangs around" for a decade or two. And seems to pump the GMAST up by a bit.

Stop hanging out at skepshitscience and all your confusion will gradually resolve.

 

[boedicca]

Global warming is AWESOME! Just look at how human life improved during the Medieval warming period.

Do you deliberately try to post the most insane thing you can come up with, bowedick?

In the real world...

Science says: Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health, and environment far outweigh any positives.

Agriculture
While CO2 is essential for plant growth, all agriculture depends also on steady water supplies, and climate change is likely to disrupt those supplies through floods and droughts. It has been suggested that higher latitudes—Siberia, for example—may become productive due to global warming, but the soil in Arctic and bordering territories is very poor, and the amount of sunlight reaching the ground in summer will not change because it is governed by the tilt of the earth. Agriculture can also be disrupted by wildfires and changes in seasonal periodicity, which is already taking place, and changes to grasslands and water supplies could impact grazing and welfare of domestic livestock. Increased warming may also have a greater effect on countries whose climate is already near or at a temperature limit over which yields reduce or crops fail—in the tropics or sub-Sahara, for example.

Health
Warmer winters would mean fewer deaths, particularly among vulnerable groups like the aged. However, the same groups are also vulnerable to additional heat, and deaths attributable to heat waves are expected to be approximately five times as great as winter deaths prevented. It is widely believed that warmer climes will encourage migration of disease-bearing insects like mosquitoes and malaria is already appearing in places it hasn't been seen before.

Polar Melting
While the opening of a year-round ice free Arctic passage between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans would confer some commercial benefits, these are considerably outweighed by the negatives. Detrimental effects include loss of polar bear habitat and increased mobile ice hazards to shipping. The loss of ice albedo (the reflection of heat), causing the ocean to absorb more heat, is also a positive feedback; the warming waters increase glacier and Greenland ice cap melt, as well as raising the temperature of Arctic tundra, which then releases methane, a very potent greenhouse gas (methane is also released from the sea-bed, where it is trapped in ice-crystals called clathrates). Melting of the Antarctic ice shelves is predicted to add further to sea-level rise with no benefits accruing.

Ocean Acidification
A cause for considerable concern, there appear to be no benefits to the change in pH of the oceans. This process is caused by additional CO2 being absorbed in the water, and may have severe destabilizing effects on the entire oceanic food-chain.

Melting Glaciers
The effects of glaciers melting are largely detrimental, the principle impact being that many millions of people (one-sixth of the world's population) depend on fresh water supplied each year by natural spring melt and regrowth cycles and those water supplies—drinking water, agriculture—may fail.

Sea Level Rise
Many parts of the world are low-lying and will be severely affected by modest sea rises. Rice paddies are being inundated with salt water, which destroys the crops. Seawater is contaminating rivers as it mixes with fresh water further upstream, and aquifers are becoming polluted. Given that the IPCC did not include melt-water from the Greenland and Antarctic ice-caps due to uncertainties at that time, estimates of sea-level rise are feared to considerably underestimate the scale of the problem. There are no proposed benefits to sea-level rise.

Environmental
Positive effects of climate change may include greener rain forests and enhanced plant growth in the Amazon, increased vegetation in northern latitudes and possible increases in plankton biomass in some parts of the ocean. Negative responses may include further growth of oxygen poor ocean zones, contamination or exhaustion of fresh water, increased incidence of natural fires, extensive vegetation die-off due to droughts, increased risk of coral extinction, decline in global photo-plankton, changes in migration patterns of birds and animals, changes in seasonal periodicity, disruption to food chains and species loss.

Economic
The economic impacts of climate change may be catastrophic, while there have been very few benefits projected at all. The Stern report made clear the overall pattern of economic distress, and while the specific numbers may be contested, the costs of climate change were far in excess of the costs of preventing it. Certain scenarios projected in the IPCC AR4 report would witness massive migration as low-lying countries were flooded. Disruptions to global trade, transport, energy supplies and labour markets, banking and finance, investment and insurance, would all wreak havoc on the stability of both developed and developing nations. Markets would endure increased volatility and institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies would experience considerable difficulty.

Developing countries, some of which are already embroiled in military conflict, may be drawn into larger and more protracted disputes over water, energy supplies or food, all of which may disrupt economic growth at a time when developing countries are beset by more egregious manifestations of climate change. It is widely accepted that the detrimental effects of climate change will be visited largely on the countries least equipped to adapt, socially or economically.
(Source)

Those things aren't going to happen.

If you loons stopped worrying about people exhaling PLANT FOOD, and focused on actual pollution, the environment would be much better off.

For example, in third world countries which you wish to deny access to efficient fossil fueled electricity, wood and dung are burned for cooking and heating...resulting in horrible air pollution. The water in such countries is appallingly dirty and unhealthy.

Development is good for humans and the environment. If you don't accept this, then you are a huge hypocrite for using 'lectricity and computers and electric lights, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning and all the Advanced Economy Energy Consuming things that make your First World life healthier and comfortable.

 

[RollingThunder]

Global warming is AWESOME! Just look at how human life improved during the Medieval warming period.

Do you deliberately try to post the most insane thing you can come up with, bowedick?

In the real world...

Science says: Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health, and environment far outweigh any positives.

Agriculture
While CO2 is essential for plant growth, all agriculture depends also on steady water supplies, and climate change is likely to disrupt those supplies through floods and droughts. It has been suggested that higher latitudes—Siberia, for example—may become productive due to global warming, but the soil in Arctic and bordering territories is very poor, and the amount of sunlight reaching the ground in summer will not change because it is governed by the tilt of the earth. Agriculture can also be disrupted by wildfires and changes in seasonal periodicity, which is already taking place, and changes to grasslands and water supplies could impact grazing and welfare of domestic livestock. Increased warming may also have a greater effect on countries whose climate is already near or at a temperature limit over which yields reduce or crops fail—in the tropics or sub-Sahara, for example.

Health
Warmer winters would mean fewer deaths, particularly among vulnerable groups like the aged. However, the same groups are also vulnerable to additional heat, and deaths attributable to heat waves are expected to be approximately five times as great as winter deaths prevented. It is widely believed that warmer climes will encourage migration of disease-bearing insects like mosquitoes and malaria is already appearing in places it hasn't been seen before.

Polar Melting
While the opening of a year-round ice free Arctic passage between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans would confer some commercial benefits, these are considerably outweighed by the negatives. Detrimental effects include loss of polar bear habitat and increased mobile ice hazards to shipping. The loss of ice albedo (the reflection of heat), causing the ocean to absorb more heat, is also a positive feedback; the warming waters increase glacier and Greenland ice cap melt, as well as raising the temperature of Arctic tundra, which then releases methane, a very potent greenhouse gas (methane is also released from the sea-bed, where it is trapped in ice-crystals called clathrates). Melting of the Antarctic ice shelves is predicted to add further to sea-level rise with no benefits accruing.

Ocean Acidification
A cause for considerable concern, there appear to be no benefits to the change in pH of the oceans. This process is caused by additional CO2 being absorbed in the water, and may have severe destabilizing effects on the entire oceanic food-chain.

Melting Glaciers
The effects of glaciers melting are largely detrimental, the principle impact being that many millions of people (one-sixth of the world's population) depend on fresh water supplied each year by natural spring melt and regrowth cycles and those water supplies—drinking water, agriculture—may fail.

Sea Level Rise
Many parts of the world are low-lying and will be severely affected by modest sea rises. Rice paddies are being inundated with salt water, which destroys the crops. Seawater is contaminating rivers as it mixes with fresh water further upstream, and aquifers are becoming polluted. Given that the IPCC did not include melt-water from the Greenland and Antarctic ice-caps due to uncertainties at that time, estimates of sea-level rise are feared to considerably underestimate the scale of the problem. There are no proposed benefits to sea-level rise.

Environmental
Positive effects of climate change may include greener rain forests and enhanced plant growth in the Amazon, increased vegetation in northern latitudes and possible increases in plankton biomass in some parts of the ocean. Negative responses may include further growth of oxygen poor ocean zones, contamination or exhaustion of fresh water, increased incidence of natural fires, extensive vegetation die-off due to droughts, increased risk of coral extinction, decline in global photo-plankton, changes in migration patterns of birds and animals, changes in seasonal periodicity, disruption to food chains and species loss.

Economic
The economic impacts of climate change may be catastrophic, while there have been very few benefits projected at all. The Stern report made clear the overall pattern of economic distress, and while the specific numbers may be contested, the costs of climate change were far in excess of the costs of preventing it. Certain scenarios projected in the IPCC AR4 report would witness massive migration as low-lying countries were flooded. Disruptions to global trade, transport, energy supplies and labour markets, banking and finance, investment and insurance, would all wreak havoc on the stability of both developed and developing nations. Markets would endure increased volatility and institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies would experience considerable difficulty.

Developing countries, some of which are already embroiled in military conflict, may be drawn into larger and more protracted disputes over water, energy supplies or food, all of which may disrupt economic growth at a time when developing countries are beset by more egregious manifestations of climate change. It is widely accepted that the detrimental effects of climate change will be visited largely on the countries least equipped to adapt, socially or economically.
(Source)

Those things aren't going to happen.

Just more of your deluded denial of reality, bowedick.

"Those things", like negative effects on agriculture and human health, polar melting, ocean acidification, melting glaciers, sea level rise, and negative environmental and economic impacts are already happening and will only get worse as the planet continues to heat up.

Your clueless denials mean nothing.

Development is good for humans and the environment. If you don't accept this, then you are a huge hypocrite for using 'lectricity and computers and electric lights, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning and all the Advanced Economy Energy Consuming things that make your First World life healthier and comfortable.

Just more of your crackpot denier cult mythology.

In the real world, transitioning from very dirty fossil fuel generated energy to clean renewable energy sources is part of rational "development" and making "electricity, lights, computers, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning, etc." available to people in Third World countries.....NOT preventing them from getting those things.

It is only the fact that you are a stooge for the fossil fuel industry that makes you say otherwise.

 

[boedicca]

Global warming is AWESOME! Just look at how human life improved during the Medieval warming period.

Do you deliberately try to post the most insane thing you can come up with, bowedick?

In the real world...

Science says: Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health, and environment far outweigh any positives.

Agriculture
While CO2 is essential for plant growth, all agriculture depends also on steady water supplies, and climate change is likely to disrupt those supplies through floods and droughts. It has been suggested that higher latitudes—Siberia, for example—may become productive due to global warming, but the soil in Arctic and bordering territories is very poor, and the amount of sunlight reaching the ground in summer will not change because it is governed by the tilt of the earth. Agriculture can also be disrupted by wildfires and changes in seasonal periodicity, which is already taking place, and changes to grasslands and water supplies could impact grazing and welfare of domestic livestock. Increased warming may also have a greater effect on countries whose climate is already near or at a temperature limit over which yields reduce or crops fail—in the tropics or sub-Sahara, for example.

Health
Warmer winters would mean fewer deaths, particularly among vulnerable groups like the aged. However, the same groups are also vulnerable to additional heat, and deaths attributable to heat waves are expected to be approximately five times as great as winter deaths prevented. It is widely believed that warmer climes will encourage migration of disease-bearing insects like mosquitoes and malaria is already appearing in places it hasn't been seen before.

Polar Melting
While the opening of a year-round ice free Arctic passage between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans would confer some commercial benefits, these are considerably outweighed by the negatives. Detrimental effects include loss of polar bear habitat and increased mobile ice hazards to shipping. The loss of ice albedo (the reflection of heat), causing the ocean to absorb more heat, is also a positive feedback; the warming waters increase glacier and Greenland ice cap melt, as well as raising the temperature of Arctic tundra, which then releases methane, a very potent greenhouse gas (methane is also released from the sea-bed, where it is trapped in ice-crystals called clathrates). Melting of the Antarctic ice shelves is predicted to add further to sea-level rise with no benefits accruing.

Ocean Acidification
A cause for considerable concern, there appear to be no benefits to the change in pH of the oceans. This process is caused by additional CO2 being absorbed in the water, and may have severe destabilizing effects on the entire oceanic food-chain.

Melting Glaciers
The effects of glaciers melting are largely detrimental, the principle impact being that many millions of people (one-sixth of the world's population) depend on fresh water supplied each year by natural spring melt and regrowth cycles and those water supplies—drinking water, agriculture—may fail.

Sea Level Rise
Many parts of the world are low-lying and will be severely affected by modest sea rises. Rice paddies are being inundated with salt water, which destroys the crops. Seawater is contaminating rivers as it mixes with fresh water further upstream, and aquifers are becoming polluted. Given that the IPCC did not include melt-water from the Greenland and Antarctic ice-caps due to uncertainties at that time, estimates of sea-level rise are feared to considerably underestimate the scale of the problem. There are no proposed benefits to sea-level rise.

Environmental
Positive effects of climate change may include greener rain forests and enhanced plant growth in the Amazon, increased vegetation in northern latitudes and possible increases in plankton biomass in some parts of the ocean. Negative responses may include further growth of oxygen poor ocean zones, contamination or exhaustion of fresh water, increased incidence of natural fires, extensive vegetation die-off due to droughts, increased risk of coral extinction, decline in global photo-plankton, changes in migration patterns of birds and animals, changes in seasonal periodicity, disruption to food chains and species loss.

Economic
The economic impacts of climate change may be catastrophic, while there have been very few benefits projected at all. The Stern report made clear the overall pattern of economic distress, and while the specific numbers may be contested, the costs of climate change were far in excess of the costs of preventing it. Certain scenarios projected in the IPCC AR4 report would witness massive migration as low-lying countries were flooded. Disruptions to global trade, transport, energy supplies and labour markets, banking and finance, investment and insurance, would all wreak havoc on the stability of both developed and developing nations. Markets would endure increased volatility and institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies would experience considerable difficulty.

Developing countries, some of which are already embroiled in military conflict, may be drawn into larger and more protracted disputes over water, energy supplies or food, all of which may disrupt economic growth at a time when developing countries are beset by more egregious manifestations of climate change. It is widely accepted that the detrimental effects of climate change will be visited largely on the countries least equipped to adapt, socially or economically.
(Source)

Those things aren't going to happen.

Just more of your deluded denial of reality, bowedick.

"Those things", like negative effects on agriculture and human health, polar melting, ocean acidification, melting glaciers, sea level rise, and negative environmental and economic impacts are already happening and will only get worse as the planet continues to heat up.

Your clueless denials mean nothing.

Development is good for humans and the environment. If you don't accept this, then you are a huge hypocrite for using 'lectricity and computers and electric lights, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning and all the Advanced Economy Energy Consuming things that make your First World life healthier and comfortable.

Just more of your crackpot denier cult mythology.

In the real world, transitioning from very dirty fossil fuel generated energy to clean renewable energy sources is part of rational "development" and making "electricity, lights, computers, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning, etc." available to people in Third World countries.....NOT preventing them from getting those things.

It is only the fact that you are a stooge for the fossil fuel industry that makes you say otherwise.

It's all Chicken Little Sky Is Falling Crying Wolf one too many times nonsense.

 

[RollingThunder]

Global warming is AWESOME! Just look at how human life improved during the Medieval warming period.

Do you deliberately try to post the most insane thing you can come up with, bowedick?

In the real world...

Science says: Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health, and environment far outweigh any positives.

Agriculture
While CO2 is essential for plant growth, all agriculture depends also on steady water supplies, and climate change is likely to disrupt those supplies through floods and droughts. It has been suggested that higher latitudes—Siberia, for example—may become productive due to global warming, but the soil in Arctic and bordering territories is very poor, and the amount of sunlight reaching the ground in summer will not change because it is governed by the tilt of the earth. Agriculture can also be disrupted by wildfires and changes in seasonal periodicity, which is already taking place, and changes to grasslands and water supplies could impact grazing and welfare of domestic livestock. Increased warming may also have a greater effect on countries whose climate is already near or at a temperature limit over which yields reduce or crops fail—in the tropics or sub-Sahara, for example.

Health
Warmer winters would mean fewer deaths, particularly among vulnerable groups like the aged. However, the same groups are also vulnerable to additional heat, and deaths attributable to heat waves are expected to be approximately five times as great as winter deaths prevented. It is widely believed that warmer climes will encourage migration of disease-bearing insects like mosquitoes and malaria is already appearing in places it hasn't been seen before.

Polar Melting
While the opening of a year-round ice free Arctic passage between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans would confer some commercial benefits, these are considerably outweighed by the negatives. Detrimental effects include loss of polar bear habitat and increased mobile ice hazards to shipping. The loss of ice albedo (the reflection of heat), causing the ocean to absorb more heat, is also a positive feedback; the warming waters increase glacier and Greenland ice cap melt, as well as raising the temperature of Arctic tundra, which then releases methane, a very potent greenhouse gas (methane is also released from the sea-bed, where it is trapped in ice-crystals called clathrates). Melting of the Antarctic ice shelves is predicted to add further to sea-level rise with no benefits accruing.

Ocean Acidification
A cause for considerable concern, there appear to be no benefits to the change in pH of the oceans. This process is caused by additional CO2 being absorbed in the water, and may have severe destabilizing effects on the entire oceanic food-chain.

Melting Glaciers
The effects of glaciers melting are largely detrimental, the principle impact being that many millions of people (one-sixth of the world's population) depend on fresh water supplied each year by natural spring melt and regrowth cycles and those water supplies—drinking water, agriculture—may fail.

Sea Level Rise
Many parts of the world are low-lying and will be severely affected by modest sea rises. Rice paddies are being inundated with salt water, which destroys the crops. Seawater is contaminating rivers as it mixes with fresh water further upstream, and aquifers are becoming polluted. Given that the IPCC did not include melt-water from the Greenland and Antarctic ice-caps due to uncertainties at that time, estimates of sea-level rise are feared to considerably underestimate the scale of the problem. There are no proposed benefits to sea-level rise.

Environmental
Positive effects of climate change may include greener rain forests and enhanced plant growth in the Amazon, increased vegetation in northern latitudes and possible increases in plankton biomass in some parts of the ocean. Negative responses may include further growth of oxygen poor ocean zones, contamination or exhaustion of fresh water, increased incidence of natural fires, extensive vegetation die-off due to droughts, increased risk of coral extinction, decline in global photo-plankton, changes in migration patterns of birds and animals, changes in seasonal periodicity, disruption to food chains and species loss.

Economic
The economic impacts of climate change may be catastrophic, while there have been very few benefits projected at all. The Stern report made clear the overall pattern of economic distress, and while the specific numbers may be contested, the costs of climate change were far in excess of the costs of preventing it. Certain scenarios projected in the IPCC AR4 report would witness massive migration as low-lying countries were flooded. Disruptions to global trade, transport, energy supplies and labour markets, banking and finance, investment and insurance, would all wreak havoc on the stability of both developed and developing nations. Markets would endure increased volatility and institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies would experience considerable difficulty.

Developing countries, some of which are already embroiled in military conflict, may be drawn into larger and more protracted disputes over water, energy supplies or food, all of which may disrupt economic growth at a time when developing countries are beset by more egregious manifestations of climate change. It is widely accepted that the detrimental effects of climate change will be visited largely on the countries least equipped to adapt, socially or economically.
(Source)

Those things aren't going to happen.

Just more of your deluded denial of reality, bowedick.

"Those things", like negative effects on agriculture and human health, polar melting, ocean acidification, melting glaciers, sea level rise, and negative environmental and economic impacts are already happening and will only get worse as the planet continues to heat up.

Your clueless denials mean nothing.

Development is good for humans and the environment. If you don't accept this, then you are a huge hypocrite for using 'lectricity and computers and electric lights, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning and all the Advanced Economy Energy Consuming things that make your First World life healthier and comfortable.

Just more of your crackpot denier cult mythology.

In the real world, transitioning from very dirty fossil fuel generated energy to clean renewable energy sources is part of rational "development" and making "electricity, lights, computers, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning, etc." available to people in Third World countries.....NOT preventing them from getting those things.

It is only the fact that you are a stooge for the fossil fuel industry that makes you say otherwise.

It's all Chicken Little Sky Is Falling Crying Wolf one too many times nonsense.

Your posts are all braindead denial of science and reality.....and they all get debunked by the science that you are too stupid and brainwashed to accept.

 

[boedicca]

Global warming is AWESOME! Just look at how human life improved during the Medieval warming period.

Do you deliberately try to post the most insane thing you can come up with, bowedick?

In the real world...

Science says: Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health, and environment far outweigh any positives.

Agriculture
While CO2 is essential for plant growth, all agriculture depends also on steady water supplies, and climate change is likely to disrupt those supplies through floods and droughts. It has been suggested that higher latitudes—Siberia, for example—may become productive due to global warming, but the soil in Arctic and bordering territories is very poor, and the amount of sunlight reaching the ground in summer will not change because it is governed by the tilt of the earth. Agriculture can also be disrupted by wildfires and changes in seasonal periodicity, which is already taking place, and changes to grasslands and water supplies could impact grazing and welfare of domestic livestock. Increased warming may also have a greater effect on countries whose climate is already near or at a temperature limit over which yields reduce or crops fail—in the tropics or sub-Sahara, for example.

Health
Warmer winters would mean fewer deaths, particularly among vulnerable groups like the aged. However, the same groups are also vulnerable to additional heat, and deaths attributable to heat waves are expected to be approximately five times as great as winter deaths prevented. It is widely believed that warmer climes will encourage migration of disease-bearing insects like mosquitoes and malaria is already appearing in places it hasn't been seen before.

Polar Melting
While the opening of a year-round ice free Arctic passage between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans would confer some commercial benefits, these are considerably outweighed by the negatives. Detrimental effects include loss of polar bear habitat and increased mobile ice hazards to shipping. The loss of ice albedo (the reflection of heat), causing the ocean to absorb more heat, is also a positive feedback; the warming waters increase glacier and Greenland ice cap melt, as well as raising the temperature of Arctic tundra, which then releases methane, a very potent greenhouse gas (methane is also released from the sea-bed, where it is trapped in ice-crystals called clathrates). Melting of the Antarctic ice shelves is predicted to add further to sea-level rise with no benefits accruing.

Ocean Acidification
A cause for considerable concern, there appear to be no benefits to the change in pH of the oceans. This process is caused by additional CO2 being absorbed in the water, and may have severe destabilizing effects on the entire oceanic food-chain.

Melting Glaciers
The effects of glaciers melting are largely detrimental, the principle impact being that many millions of people (one-sixth of the world's population) depend on fresh water supplied each year by natural spring melt and regrowth cycles and those water supplies—drinking water, agriculture—may fail.

Sea Level Rise
Many parts of the world are low-lying and will be severely affected by modest sea rises. Rice paddies are being inundated with salt water, which destroys the crops. Seawater is contaminating rivers as it mixes with fresh water further upstream, and aquifers are becoming polluted. Given that the IPCC did not include melt-water from the Greenland and Antarctic ice-caps due to uncertainties at that time, estimates of sea-level rise are feared to considerably underestimate the scale of the problem. There are no proposed benefits to sea-level rise.

Environmental
Positive effects of climate change may include greener rain forests and enhanced plant growth in the Amazon, increased vegetation in northern latitudes and possible increases in plankton biomass in some parts of the ocean. Negative responses may include further growth of oxygen poor ocean zones, contamination or exhaustion of fresh water, increased incidence of natural fires, extensive vegetation die-off due to droughts, increased risk of coral extinction, decline in global photo-plankton, changes in migration patterns of birds and animals, changes in seasonal periodicity, disruption to food chains and species loss.

Economic
The economic impacts of climate change may be catastrophic, while there have been very few benefits projected at all. The Stern report made clear the overall pattern of economic distress, and while the specific numbers may be contested, the costs of climate change were far in excess of the costs of preventing it. Certain scenarios projected in the IPCC AR4 report would witness massive migration as low-lying countries were flooded. Disruptions to global trade, transport, energy supplies and labour markets, banking and finance, investment and insurance, would all wreak havoc on the stability of both developed and developing nations. Markets would endure increased volatility and institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies would experience considerable difficulty.

Developing countries, some of which are already embroiled in military conflict, may be drawn into larger and more protracted disputes over water, energy supplies or food, all of which may disrupt economic growth at a time when developing countries are beset by more egregious manifestations of climate change. It is widely accepted that the detrimental effects of climate change will be visited largely on the countries least equipped to adapt, socially or economically.
(Source)

Those things aren't going to happen.

Just more of your deluded denial of reality, bowedick.

"Those things", like negative effects on agriculture and human health, polar melting, ocean acidification, melting glaciers, sea level rise, and negative environmental and economic impacts are already happening and will only get worse as the planet continues to heat up.

Your clueless denials mean nothing.

Development is good for humans and the environment. If you don't accept this, then you are a huge hypocrite for using 'lectricity and computers and electric lights, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning and all the Advanced Economy Energy Consuming things that make your First World life healthier and comfortable.

Just more of your crackpot denier cult mythology.

In the real world, transitioning from very dirty fossil fuel generated energy to clean renewable energy sources is part of rational "development" and making "electricity, lights, computers, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning, etc." available to people in Third World countries.....NOT preventing them from getting those things.

It is only the fact that you are a stooge for the fossil fuel industry that makes you say otherwise.

It's all Chicken Little Sky Is Falling Crying Wolf one too many times nonsense.

Your posts are all braindead denial of science and reality.....and they all get debunked by the science that you are too stupid and brainwashed to accept.

Here's a novel idea: how about you post some real science instead of the Climate Change Religious Dogma you generally spew?

 

[RollingThunder]

Your posts are all braindead denial of science and reality.....and they all get debunked by the science that you are too stupid and brainwashed to accept.

Here's a novel idea: how about you post some real science instead of the Climate Change Religious Dogma you generally spew?

LOLOLOLOL....see the OP for lots of that (since you obviously didn't actually read it), you little clueless retard.

Here's another "novel idea": how about you post, for the very first time, ANY actual scientific evidence that would support the fraudulent Denier Cult Dogmas that you continually post without ever even trying to provide any evidence for them at all......always just your bald pronouncement of demented drivel, ex cathedra from your belly button. Are you the secret 'Pope' of your cult of reality denial?

 

[boedicca]

Your posts are all braindead denial of science and reality.....and they all get debunked by the science that you are too stupid and brainwashed to accept.

Here's a novel idea: how about you post some real science instead of the Climate Change Religious Dogma you generally spew?

LOLOLOLOL....see the OP for lots of that (since you obviously didn't actually read it), you little clueless retard.

Here's another "novel idea": how about you post, for the very first time, ANY actual scientific evidence that would support the fraudulent Denier Cult Dogmas that you continually post without ever even trying to provide any evidence for them at all......always just your bald pronouncement of demented drivel, ex cathedra from your belly button.

Just because you found linkety links on the interwebs featuring Colorful Graphs and science-like phrases that sounds all impressive and stuff doesn't mean they are Actual Real Science.

 

[Crick]

I think they are. Yours? Not so much.

Go to www.ipcc.ch. Find "The Physical Science Basis". Read.

 

[RollingThunder]

Just because you found linkety links on the interwebs featuring Colorful Graphs and science-like phrases that sounds all impressive and stuff doesn't mean they are Actual Real Science.

That's pretty funny....'cause you have made it crystal clear to everyone (other than your fellow cultists, who are, as always, utterly clueless) that you wouldn't recognize "Actual Real Science" if it bit you, you poor anti-science retard.

And the fact that you never even try to provide any actual scientific evidence to support your demented Denier Cult Dogmas (partly because there isn't any) is a strong indication that you are moronically confused and baffled by "linkety links on the interwebs".....and just more evidence of your severe retardation.