Warmest March on record

[Chris]

And the heat goes on: warmest March on record
By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID (AP) – 2 days ago

WASHINGTON — And the heat goes on.

Last month was the warmest March on record worldwide, based on records back to 1880, scientists reported Thursday.

The average temperature for the month was 56.3 degrees Fahrenheit (13.5 degrees Celsius), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported.

That was 1.39 degrees F (0.77 C) above the average for the month over the 20th century.

NOAA researchers said the warmer-than-normal conditions were especially notable in northern Africa, South Asia, Tibet, Delhi, India and Canada.

Cooler-than-normal regions included Mongolia and eastern Russia, northern and western Europe, Mexico, northern Australia, western Alaska and the southeastern United States.

Contributing to the record month was El Nino, a periodic warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean that, combined with changes in winds and air pressure, can affect weather worldwide.

The Associated Press: And the heat goes on: warmest March on record

 

[elvis]

you're not convincing anyone, dumbfuck.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Good. Warm weather is good for playing golf.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.

 

[Chris]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.

That's the dumbest post ever.

CO2's greenhouse effect was proven experimentally in 1859.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

 

[Chris]

March was the warmest March ever recorded worldwide, the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported Thursday. NCDC records go back to 1880.

Another source, the University of Alabama-Huntsville, also reported that March 2010 was the warmest March since their climate records began in 1979.

According to the climate center, the combined global land and ocean average surface temperature in March was 56.3 degrees, which is 1.39 degrees above the 20th-century average of 54.9 degrees. Additionally, the worldwide ocean surface temperature was the highest for any March on record -- 1.01 degree above the 20th century average of 60.7 degrees.

This was the 34th consecutive March with global land and ocean temperatures above the 20th century average.

The warmth in northern Canada and the Arctic was also noteworthy. Temperatures there soared to as much as 15 degrees above average for the month, the University of Alabama-Huntsville noted. The UAH dataset uses satellite measurements of temperatures from the surface up to about five miles in altitude.

Report: March was Earth?s warmest on record - Science Fair: Science and Space News - USATODAY.com

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.

That's the dumbest post ever.

CO2's greenhouse effect was proven experimentally in 1859.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

It should be a slam dunk.

Take 2 tanks side by side: one Earth atmosphere, the second Earth's atmosphere plus 300PPM additional CO2.

What you linked to has nothing Nothing NOTHING to do with your hypothesis.

 

[gslack]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.

That's the dumbest post ever.

CO2's greenhouse effect was proven experimentally in 1859.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

LOL, first the OP is just an example of one area getting warmer and another getting colder more or less. Seriously it states as much. As far as overall warming 1.39 degrees above the month average for the 20th century.. WOW! OMG! we are all dead now!

Dude seriously... 1.39 degrees? How many glaciers you think melted due to that 1.39 degrees for one month? Do you really think that a place where temperatures routinely double digits below zero can melt uncontrollably over a 1.39 temp rise over a month? or even worse over a total 1.4 degrees temp rise the last 150 years? Give me a break this whole premise is just reatrded to the point of lunacy now...

And that post I quoted... Did you actually read the findings of Tyndall there in that article, or did you just take headline and run with it? Or more importantly did you just take their explanation at face value? Well from now on eat supper before you grab the desert, its healthier for you...

The findings:

Tyndall set out to find whether there was in fact any gas in the atmosphere that could trap heat rays. In 1859, his careful laboratory work identified several gases that did just that. The most important was simple water vapor (H2O). Also effective was carbon dioxide (CO2), although in the atmosphere the gas is only a few parts in ten thousand. Just as a sheet of paper will block more light than an entire pool of clear water, so the trace of CO2 altered the balance of heat radiation through the entire atmosphere.

Okay first, water was the biggest one not CO2.. yeah water vapor just like we say all the time on this, clouds contribute more to warming than CO2 and whenever we do your side tries to shout it down and post more crap about CO2.

Second the math is just plain wrong in regards to volume of CO2 in the atmosphere. Its part per million or PPM not parts per then-thousand. And that alone shows the fact this article is fudged.

Third, this little batch of unmitigated horse shit sentence..

"Just as a sheet of paper will block more light than an entire pool of clear water, so the trace of CO2 altered the balance of heat radiation through the entire atmosphere."

WTF? what in the hell kind of pseudo-science crap is that? Dude thats like saying concrete is hard so all hard things are concrete... its just retarded..

Enough of this crap already! its nonsense and its just ignorant to try and spread it.

 

[Big Fitz]

And the heat goes on: warmest March on record
By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID (AP) – 2 days ago

WASHINGTON — And the heat goes on.

Last month was the warmest March on record worldwide, based on records back to 1880, scientists reported Thursday.

The average temperature for the month was 56.3 degrees Fahrenheit (13.5 degrees Celsius), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported.

That was 1.39 degrees F (0.77 C) above the average for the month over the 20th century.

NOAA researchers said the warmer-than-normal conditions were especially notable in northern Africa, South Asia, Tibet, Delhi, India and Canada.

Cooler-than-normal regions included Mongolia and eastern Russia, northern and western Europe, Mexico, northern Australia, western Alaska and the southeastern United States.

Contributing to the record month was El Nino, a periodic warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean that, combined with changes in winds and air pressure, can affect weather worldwide.

The Associated Press: And the heat goes on: warmest March on record

Every month is a 'record month' to someone it seems. And all of them prove Global warming.

It's too hot
it's too cold
it's too wet
it's too dry
it's too stinky
it's too bright
it's too dark
it doesn't fit right
it's not the right color
do you have this in argyle?
It's too fat
It has too many calories
it corners horribly
it's likely to explode from a rear impact
it talks to much
it's after it's expiration date
it watches Letterman
it's too loud
it's too stupid...

but lastly... and most accurately...

It's proof global warming's bullshit.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And the heat goes on: warmest March on record
By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID (AP) – 2 days ago

WASHINGTON — And the heat goes on.

Last month was the warmest March on record worldwide, based on records back to 1880, scientists reported Thursday.

The average temperature for the month was 56.3 degrees Fahrenheit (13.5 degrees Celsius), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported.

That was 1.39 degrees F (0.77 C) above the average for the month over the 20th century.

NOAA researchers said the warmer-than-normal conditions were especially notable in northern Africa, South Asia, Tibet, Delhi, India and Canada.

Cooler-than-normal regions included Mongolia and eastern Russia, northern and western Europe, Mexico, northern Australia, western Alaska and the southeastern United States.

Contributing to the record month was El Nino, a periodic warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean that, combined with changes in winds and air pressure, can affect weather worldwide.

The Associated Press: And the heat goes on: warmest March on record

And yet no increase in world wide temperatures since 1998. Go figure.

 

[konradv]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.
-------------------------------

That's untrue! It's practically trivial to show that CO2 and other gases absorb infra-red radiation on a spectrophotometer. If they do so in the lab, they'll do so in the atmosphere. Considering that conservation of energy is a basic scientific principle, where's the trapped energy going? Staistically only half would be emitted into space, while the other half goes toward heating the earth.

 

[boedicca]

They must have applied the blow torches to all of the censors located on airport tarmacs again.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.
-------------------------------

That's untrue! It's practically trivial to show that CO2 and other gases absorb infra-red radiation on a spectrophotometer. If they do so in the lab, they'll do so in the atmosphere. Considering that conservation of energy is a basic scientific principle, where's the trapped energy going? Staistically only half would be emitted into space, while the other half goes toward heating the earth.

You're as dumb as Chris and Old Rocks and the Warmers continued failure to even do the experiment ONCE shows me how full of shit you all are.

You hypothesis is NOT: CO2 is a greenhouse gas

Your hypothesis is: de minimus increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 causes immediate, cataclysmic and irreversible changes in the climate.

Just do one (1, uno, um) one single fucking repeatable experiment that demonstrates that.

Take a control tank with 280PPM CO2 then take another one with 600PPM and fuck, go apeshit and have a third tank with 1,000 PPM! And lets see if there is any discernible differences in temperature in the tanks.

CAN YA DO THAT EVEN ONE TIME??????

 

[Chris]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.
-------------------------------

That's untrue! It's practically trivial to show that CO2 and other gases absorb infra-red radiation on a spectrophotometer. If they do so in the lab, they'll do so in the atmosphere. Considering that conservation of energy is a basic scientific principle, where's the trapped energy going? Staistically only half would be emitted into space, while the other half goes toward heating the earth.

You're as dumb as Chris and Old Rocks and the Warmers continued failure to even do the experiment ONCE shows me how full of shit you all are.

You hypothesis is NOT: CO2 is a greenhouse gas

Your hypothesis is: de minimus increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 causes immediate, cataclysmic and irreversible changes in the climate.

Just do one (1, uno, um) one single fucking repeatable experiment that demonstrates that.

Take a control tank with 280PPM CO2 then take another one with 600PPM and fuck, go apeshit and have a third tank with 1,000 PPM! And lets see if there is any discernible differences in temperature in the tanks.

CAN YA DO THAT EVEN ONE TIME??????

Those experiments have been performed many times.

I know you don't read these links, but here it is again...

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

 

[gslack]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.
-------------------------------

That's untrue! It's practically trivial to show that CO2 and other gases absorb infra-red radiation on a spectrophotometer. If they do so in the lab, they'll do so in the atmosphere. Considering that conservation of energy is a basic scientific principle, where's the trapped energy going? Staistically only half would be emitted into space, while the other half goes toward heating the earth.

You're as dumb as Chris and Old Rocks and the Warmers continued failure to even do the experiment ONCE shows me how full of shit you all are.

You hypothesis is NOT: CO2 is a greenhouse gas

Your hypothesis is: de minimus increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 causes immediate, cataclysmic and irreversible changes in the climate.

Just do one (1, uno, um) one single fucking repeatable experiment that demonstrates that.

Take a control tank with 280PPM CO2 then take another one with 600PPM and fuck, go apeshit and have a third tank with 1,000 PPM! And lets see if there is any discernible differences in temperature in the tanks.

CAN YA DO THAT EVEN ONE TIME??????

Those experiments have been performed many times.

I know you don't read these links, but here it is again...

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

YOU need to read replies to your posts.... I already covered the fallacy in that link page in my last post you ignored....

Its fudged from start to finish, I laid all this out for you in that post. So why don't you address that post instead of pretending it wasn't there and repeating the BS...

 

[gslack]

And the Warmers still can't come up with a single repeatable laboratory experiment to justify their hypothesis.

That's the dumbest post ever.

CO2's greenhouse effect was proven experimentally in 1859.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

LOL, first the OP is just an example of one area getting warmer and another getting colder more or less. Seriously it states as much. As far as overall warming 1.39 degrees above the month average for the 20th century.. WOW! OMG! we are all dead now!

Dude seriously... 1.39 degrees? How many glaciers you think melted due to that 1.39 degrees for one month? Do you really think that a place where temperatures are routinely double digits below zero can melt uncontrollably over a 1.39 temp rise over a month? or even worse over a total 1.4 degrees temp rise the last 150 years? Give me a break this whole premise is just retarded to the point of lunacy now...

And that post I quoted... Did you actually read the findings of Tyndall there in that article, or did you just take headline and run with it? Or more importantly did you just take their explanation at face value? Well from now on eat supper before you grab the desert, its healthier for you...

The findings:

Tyndall set out to find whether there was in fact any gas in the atmosphere that could trap heat rays. In 1859, his careful laboratory work identified several gases that did just that. The most important was simple water vapor (H2O). Also effective was carbon dioxide (CO2), although in the atmosphere the gas is only a few parts in ten thousand. Just as a sheet of paper will block more light than an entire pool of clear water, so the trace of CO2 altered the balance of heat radiation through the entire atmosphere.

Okay first, water was the biggest one not CO2.. yeah water vapor just like we say all the time on this, clouds contribute more to warming than CO2 and whenever we do your side tries to shout it down and post more crap about CO2.

Second the math is just plain wrong in regards to volume of CO2 in the atmosphere. Its part per million or PPM not parts per then-thousand. And that alone shows the fact this article is fudged.

Third, this little batch of unmitigated horse shit sentence..

"Just as a sheet of paper will block more light than an entire pool of clear water, so the trace of CO2 altered the balance of heat radiation through the entire atmosphere."

WTF? what in the hell kind of pseudo-science crap is that? Dude thats like saying concrete is hard so all hard things are concrete... its just retarded..

Enough of this crap already! its nonsense and its just ignorant to try and spread it.

RE-POST to get a response....

 

[konradv]

Okay first, water was the biggest one not CO2.. yeah water vapor just like we say all the time on this, clouds contribute more to warming than CO2 and whenever we do your side tries to shout it down and post more crap about CO2.
--------------------------------------

While that may be true, is it relevant? There's ALWAYS water vapor. AGW is concerned with the ADDED gases contributed by man. Besides, more heat would mean more vapor, therefore, more heat, therefore, more vapor, etc. etc., etc., illustrating the possible magnification of the effects of small amounts of other gases on the total global temperature.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Okay first, water was the biggest one not CO2.. yeah water vapor just like we say all the time on this, clouds contribute more to warming than CO2 and whenever we do your side tries to shout it down and post more crap about CO2.
--------------------------------------

While that may be true, is it relevant? There's ALWAYS water vapor. AGW is concerned with the ADDED gases contributed by man. Besides, more heat would mean more vapor, therefore, more heat, therefore, more vapor, etc. etc., etc., illustrating the possible magnification of the effects of small amounts of other gases on the total global temperature.

So it should be easy to duplicate your "Small amounts" of CO2 hypothesis in a lab, no?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You're as dumb as Chris and Old Rocks and the Warmers continued failure to even do the experiment ONCE shows me how full of shit you all are.

You hypothesis is NOT: CO2 is a greenhouse gas

Your hypothesis is: de minimus increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 causes immediate, cataclysmic and irreversible changes in the climate.

Just do one (1, uno, um) one single fucking repeatable experiment that demonstrates that.

Take a control tank with 280PPM CO2 then take another one with 600PPM and fuck, go apeshit and have a third tank with 1,000 PPM! And lets see if there is any discernible differences in temperature in the tanks.

CAN YA DO THAT EVEN ONE TIME??????

Those experiments have been performed many times.

I know you don't read these links, but here it is again...

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

YOU need to read replies to your posts.... I already covered the fallacy in that link page in my last post you ignored....

Its fudged from start to finish, I laid all this out for you in that post. So why don't you address that post instead of pretending it wasn't there and repeating the BS...

It is unimportant. There has been NO, I REPEAT, NO Increase in world wide temperatures since 1998. At that time the world temperature had registered an increase of a little over 1 Degree from 1900. Of course NOW temperatures will be higher then prior most of it not all of the 1900's, ONCE AGAIN, the temperature across the planet rose by a little over 1 degree from 1900.

Even a simpleton can grasp these concepts. Making me wonder what IQ ratings are for the Warmers?

Notice Chris, Old Rocks and the new fellow have NOT addressed the SCIENTIFIC FACT that world wide Temperatures have not risen since the end of 1998.

 

[Old Rocks]

Why? We have raised the level of CO2 in our atmosphere by 40% and now are seeing a steady increase in temperature. Seems that we have done a pretty definative experiment.