Merged Global Warming Discussion II: Heated Conversation

[CapelDodger]

"The climate was warming from the end of the little ice age and is know starting to cool, get use to it. "

Isn't that just wonderful?

Of course, it must have been negative cloud feedback which stopped the cooling. Happens every time, doncha know.

 

[aleCcowaN]

El Niño says "Hi!":

Yacyretá-Apipé Dam spillways (overflow channels) at top capacity:



Designed fifty years ago with an important overcapacity, they can manage 55,000 m3 per second (that is comparable to the joined discharge in the ocean of both Mississippi and Saint Lawrence rivers during a normal Spring season). It may be not enough to manage the floods if the climate continue to worsen in the upper Paraná basin.

Observation structures and pathways in Iguazú Falls have been swept down the river.

Taking into account the normal delays and the two-weekly forecasts, it is expected Paraná River to reach a record level of 8.20m in Corrientes City in weeks to come, with a discharge no less than 48,000 m3/s as, contrary to normal, both Paraná and Paraguay rivers are simultaneously experiencing rise.

It's almost sure now -even if the weather become dryer starting tomorrow- that it's going to surpass in Corrientes the only 4 extreme floods in the last two centuries: in 1905, in 1983, in 1992 and during 1998.

Stay tuned [Fortunately, the river is 25 miles wide in front of my city, so it'll be just a few centimetres here]

Update:

The spillway is now at 53,000 m3/second (97% top capacity). It continues to rain horribly in the upper Paraná. The discharge at Corrientes is expected to reach no less than 48,000 m3/s 61,000 m3/2 in a few days. Massive evacuations starting tomorrow. Three towns with a joined population of 50,000 are only reachable by chopper.

Take a look at these years "it's going to surpass in Corrientes the only 4 extreme floods in the last two centuries: in 1905, in 1983, in 1992 and during 1998." Remember Pinatubo happened in 1991. Take a look to this graph

http://ggweather.com/enso/oni.jpg

and got your own conclusions about today.

You may wonder why no floods during other episodes or how does it relate the flood with the index: There were, but not so strong. And the floods depends on the winter season. The worst ones occur when there's no subtropical winter in half South America. Subtropical means tropical with a winter season from 2 to 4 months that is cool and dry. Now it should be happening that, but masses of hot wet air continue to arrive from the tropical South Atlantic into the upper Paraná basin, while weaker than usual polar fronts bump into them causing catastrophic rain. In a normal season those cold fronts should be reaching lower latitudes and you should be watching the public in the world cup wearing jackets.

 

[macdoc]

Third warmest May in satellite record might portend record-setting El Niño
Date:
June 13, 2014
Source:
University of Alabama Huntsville

Summary:
May 2014 was the third warmest May in the 35-year satellite-measured global temperature record, and the warmest May that wasn't during an El Niño Pacific Ocean warming event, according to new data. The global average temperature for May was 0.33 C (about 0.59 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than seasonal norms for the month. The warmest May was in 1998, during the "El Niño of the century."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140613101544.htm

 

[Blue Mountain]

It was from climatedata dot info precipitation (twice) global, and cloned all over the web. That kind of opportunistic graphics or opportunistic exploits we have discussed here so many times.

The poster boy of these kind of graphics was this one

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=907&pictureid=6637[/qimg]

that was made and published for one of the many USA's governmental websites devoted to climate, space and science (now swept under the rug) and continue to be exploited by swarms of denialocusts up to this day.

I don't understand what you mean here. The English expression "sweep under the rug" means to hide away something that is embarrassing and would rather not discuss.

I explained the exploit here

Where?

austral spring day 2012.

What?

 

[DC]

Then you are wiser than most. I view them as bad comedy much of the time.
Except that we are seeing cooling now. When CO2 level are the highest ever.

I saw a paper that says the melting is from volcanoes and heat under the glaciers.

The temperatures in the Antarctic are still nowhere close enough to melt the glaciers. Neither are sea temperatures.

funny how you whent with the denier interpretation of that.
when you ask the lead author of this study.
https://news.vice.com/article/no-volcanoes-are-not-the-primary-cause-for-the-melting-ice-caps

he seems to interpret his own research completely different from the deniers.

https://news.vice.com/article/no-volcanoes-are-not-the-primary-cause-for-the-melting-ice-caps
according to Dustin M. Schroeder the best article on this topic.

According to Schroeder, Rignot’s paper, and another that came out in May, show that warm oceans are currently the main cause of glacier loss at the edge of the ice.

“The fastest glacial changes are happening where the ocean is warmer,” Schroeder said. “Geothermal heating is not enough by itself to have caused the observed changes.”

its best to not get your science from WUWT and similar denialist blogs.

 

[macdoc]

Bloody plague of volcanoes everywhere..

or perhaps there is a simpler explanation.

Maybe r-j is from Chile...after all there is one spot that has gotten cooler.

 

[aleCcowaN]

I don't understand what you mean here. The English expression "sweep under the rug" means to hide away something that is embarrassing and would rather not discuss.

That is what I'm saying.

Where?

In previous global warming thread page 152 or 153. Or search for Dysonia within this forum.

What?

by September 22nd, 2012.

austral spring day (first day of spring in the southern hemisphere): September 22nd, 2012
boreal spring day (first day of spring in the northern hemisphere), 2012: March 20th, 2012

 

[aleCcowaN]

Update (with something interesting):

I know this looks like the typical news. We're also used here to hear of Europe having natural catastrophes and protests, North America having natural catastrophes and shootings, East Asia having natural catastrophes and pollution and Australia having natural catastrophes, while here daily life is complex, rich and engaging. So, no matter this looks like "South America, buf, just natural catastrophes and tropical Mussolinis", this update:

Paraguay, a small country (about the area of California; or the area of Germany, The Netherlands and Belgium, together) had today 2.5% of its population evacuated (160,000 people) because of the floods.

The most interesting bit is something hardly experienced: Asunción, their capital city, on Paraguay River, had yesterday -their metropolitan area, some 3 million inhabitants- 58,300 people evacuated. And what's the important thing? That Paraguay River is not too high because it hasn't rained that much in its upper basin. Paraguay River, with a discharge larger than Rhine's and smaller than Danube's, is flooded because the wall of water coming down from the upper Paraná had formed a virtual dam blocking the normal flow of Paraguay River, so 270 km to the north, the flood is uncontrolled. It is feared that up to 7% of the metropolitan population of Asunción is going to be evacuated during the next few days.

Maybe r-j is from Chile...after all there is one spot that has gotten cooler.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-.../s720/735DEC0E-749C-4EFF-A3EDDCA469488883.jpg

Half of it is in Argentina, and mostly above ten thousand feet above sea level. I'm sending a note to Deportation for them to look for an old man trying to plant trees in barren lands among the llamas.

 

[aleCcowaN]

In order to discuss global warming properly I suggest everybody to rent Thank You for Smoking and pay attention to the dialogue between father and son, the one about ice-cream. (the bit ending with "I'm not after you. I'm after them!")

 

[macdoc]

Consequences...double whammy for the Med

Double trouble for the Mediterranean Sea: Acidification and warming threaten iconic species
Date:
June 12, 2014
Source:
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Summary:

Scientist have finalized their findings about the threat of Mediterranean Sea warming and acidification on key species and ecosystems after a 3.5 year study. They have found that this sea is warming and acidifying at unprecedented rates – the main reason is emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels. This increases the CO2 in the atmosphere causing warming of the atmosphere and the ocean as well as acidification of its waters due to uptake of CO2 by surface waters.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140612114556.htm

I wonder if ocean acidification represents the greater risk. DO we have a school of ocean acidification deniers floundering anywhere??

I DO love Barcelona

 

[Reality Check]

I point out the mean and standard deviations of precipitation do not match between observations and models.

Hilarious, CoolSceptic: You present an unattributed graph from somewhere and expect people in a skeptic forum to be taken in by it.

Then you think that that if a model outputs ANOMALIES then the proper observations to compare the output against are not anomalies !

 

[Trakar]

Yup, only first decade, then less. If you want I can look into it more precisely -give me a few days to contact some person-. If we depart from 600 ppmv in, say, 40 years and 1°C more, and stop cold turkey, some 12-15 per decade, and then less.

Please let me know when you have the chance to look at this more closely.

 

[Reality Check]

Then you think that that if a model outputs ANOMALIES then the proper observations to compare the output against are not anomalies !

Actually what is dubious is a graph plotting precipitation values instead of anomalies.
AFAIK precipitation values come from weather stations and have similar problems with the raw data as the temperature readings, e.g. a change in position = a change in reading, change in design = change in readings, gaps in data, urban effect? (rain shadows rather than urban heating?), etc. The solutions should be similar and will result in anomalies. To get absolute precipitation values you then do the unneeded step of multiplying by the baseline.

 

[Jules Galen]

When the Global Warming Models FAIL...change the story!

Seems like the AGW Alarmist crowd are trying to explain the lack of rise of Global Temperatures on “Heat” hiding in the oceans.

http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/articles/view/3130

So sad. Didn’t these people ever read the New Testamant and learn anything from Christ’s failed prediction to return during the lifetimes of his followers? I mean, if your going to predict a Global Apocalypse, then predict it to happen way out into the future so that you can’t be held accountable for the failure. Really…it’s an old lesson that the AGW Alarmists should have learned.

http://www.serenitybohon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Christ-of-the-Abyss.jpg

Edited by LashL: 

Changed hotlinked image to regular link. Please see Rule 5.

​

Jesus Hiding out in the Ocean with all the Global Warming Heat​

 

[DC]

When the Global Warming Models FAIL...change the story!

Seems like the AGW Alarmist crowd are trying to explain the lack of rise of Global Temperatures on “Heat” hiding in the oceans.

http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/articles/view/3130

So sad. Didn’t these people ever read the New Testamant and learn anything from Christ’s failed prediction to return during the lifetimes of his followers? I mean, if your going to predict a Global Apocalypse, then predict it to happen way out into the future so that you can’t be held accountable for the failure. Really…it’s an old lesson that the AGW Alarmists should have learned.

[qimg]http://www.serenitybohon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Christ-of-the-Abyss.jpg[/qimg]

Jesus Hiding out in the Ocean with all the Global Warming Heat
​

if you only knew as much about science as you seem to know about religion.

got any science?
got any evidence contradicting the missing heat being in the oceans?

 

[Jules Galen]

if you only knew as much about science as you seem to know about religion.

got any science?
got any evidence contradicting the missing heat being in the oceans?

Do YOU have a model that works?

Listen...I am not the one claiming AGW is going to be a problem, so I don't have to show anything. It's the people who claim to have knowledge that have to prove their point - this is how Science works.

Also, I don't have to show anything contradicting the claim that the missing Heat is hiding in the oceans - However....YOU HAVE TO SHOW IT BECAUSE YOU CLAIM TO KNOW IT. Again...that's the way Science works.

http://thealewife.typepad.com/weblog/images/2007/11/26/richardlindzen1.jpg

Edited by LashL: 

Changed hotlinked image to regular link. Please see Rule 5.

​

DENIER!​

 

[DC]

Do YOU have a model that works?

Listen...I am not the one claiming AGW is going to be a problem, so I don't have to show anything. It's the people who claim to have knowledge that have to prove their point - this is how Science works.

Also, I don't have to show anything contradicting the claim that the missing Heat is hiding in the oceans - However....YOU HAVE TO SHOW IT BECAUSE YOU CLAIM TO KNOW IT. Again...that's the way Science works.

[qimg]http://thealewife.typepad.com/weblog/images/2007/11/26/richardlindzen1.jpg[/qimg]

DENIER!​

no I don't have any climate model. but several modelling teams have working models. very useful tools.

the evidence has been presented. what about it was not good enough for you?
what evidence exactly are you rejecting?

 

[Jules Galen]

no I don0t have any climate model. but several modelling teams have working models. very useful tools.

Useful tools? Useful...for what?

I mean, these models consistently fail to model reality. As a result, it indicates these people don't know what the hell they are doing - and this crap has been going on for over 20 years!

As a result, I am an AGW Science Denier - and I'm very proud that I am a DENIER. You see, I love science. In fact, I love science so much that when I see something like AGW come along and pretend that the "Science is Settled", then it really irks me for they are busting the cardinal rule of Science: If ya' can't show it, then ya' don't know it!.

In short, the AGW Alarmist Crowd are busting a cardinal rule of Science and, as a result, they are no longer engaged in Science - they are engaged in Mysticism. And...that's why I call myself a DENIER, for I DENY what the AGW Crowd is doing is Science.

 

[DC]

Useful tools? Useful...for what?

I mean, these models consistently fail to model reality. As a result, it indicates these people don't know what the hell they are doing - and this crap has been going on for over 20 years!

As a result, I am an AGW Science Denier - and I'm very proud that I am a DENIER. You see, I love science. In fact, I love science so much that when I see something like AGW come along and pretend that the "Science is Settled", then it really irks me for they are busting the cardinal rule of Science: If ya' can't show it, then ya' don't know it!.

In short, the AGW Alarmist Crowd are busting a cardinal rule of Science and, as a result, they are no longer engaged in Science - they are engaged in Mysticism. And...that's why I call myself a DENIER, for I DENY what the AGW Crowd is doing is Science.

the models have been used over and over again to model past climate changes. they are also use to make useful projections.

when you love science so much, I guess you know that the way Spencer and the WUWT cult compares projections to observations is a very dishonest way?
for example Spencer constantly uses the Satellite data to compare to model projections. nor does he account for the differences of projections and what the forcings were in reality.

have you ever seen how real scientists compare the model projections to observations?

and why did you not address my other points?
what evidence do you have objections to?


ETA: So the MIT, Yale, Oxford, MPI, ETHZ etc are all into Mysticism? cute.....
got any evidence for your accusations?

 

[Jules Galen]

the models have been used over and over again to model past climate changes...

Modeling a known is not the same as modeling the unknown: and it is a fundamental scientific mistake to think it is. I've heard this argument time and time again from the AGW Crowd and it time-and-time again proves that what they are engaged in is not Science.

Until these models can make accurate predictions about future climate, then we'll have to assume that the AGW Crowd doesn't understand the Science.

http://www.ostrichheadinsand.com/images/ostrich-head-in-sand.jpg

Edited by LashL: 

Changed hotlinked image to regular link. Please see Rule 5.

​

Climate Modeler​