Global warming discussion IV

[aleCcowaN]

I just want to know why he prefers this presentation instead of the mainstream scientific evidences, data, analyses and understandings?

I like this game of thinking that Haig has done something else than grabbing random stuff that seems to support his "view", or better, that seems in Haig's perception to be irritant to us.

He collects random stuff; if some kind elicit many replies, he acknowledges that fact and he looks for similar stuff. That's why he has never really replied to any question posed to him. The model is:

quote for another member asking Haig something + patronizing bit from Haig to make it look he's somewhat addressing what he was asked + random unrelated stuff he wants to promote, doubled if he has detected it stirs the thread.

and there's not nothing else in it ... really; but I like -I think you and the rest of the guys too- to reply those random bits as Haig saves us the work of looking for that stuff in the dark alleys of the Internet. I hope he doesn't misunderstood the situation as being "about him".

 

[Reality Check]

I just want to know why he prefers this presentation instead of the mainstream scientific evidences, data, analyses and understandings?

We can only speculate, Trakar.
In other threads, Haig has shown himself to be a follower of the Thunderbolts of the Gods "cult", e.g. by blindly linking to YouTube videos of another follower (the economist Ben Davidson). This is a neo-Velikovsky group who believe among other things that Venus erupted from Jupiter in recent times, stopped the Earth from spinning, restarted Earth spinning at the same rate a day later and dropped manna to Moses. At least one of the Thunderbolts "prophets" Wal Thornhill could be a source of Haig's continuing fantasy that the Sun is causing the current global warming, e.g. read the lies in Global Warming in a Climate of Ignorance from 2007. Or the idiocy presented about climate in their 2015 conference which was full of cranks, Bruce Leybourne: Earth as a Stellar Transformer — Climate Change Revealed | EU2015

 

[Trakar]

I like this game of thinking that Haig has done something else than grabbing random stuff that seems to support his "view", or better, that seems in Haig's perception to be irritant to us.

He collects random stuff; if some kind elicit many replies, he acknowledges that fact and he looks for similar stuff. That's why he has never really replied to any question posed to him. The model is:

quote for another member asking Haig something + patronizing bit from Haig to make it look he's somewhat addressing what he was asked + random unrelated stuff he wants to promote, doubled if he has detected it stirs the thread.

and there's not nothing else in it ... really; but I like -I think you and the rest of the guys too- to reply those random bits as Haig saves us the work of looking for that stuff in the dark alleys of the Internet. I hope he doesn't misunderstood the situation as being "about him".

Absent clarification from Haig, you may well be correct. It is the contradictions between the different positions of the pieces he posts that make them (at best) a strange-bedfellows argument against mainstream climate science.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Absent clarification from Haig, you may well be correct. It is the contradictions between the different positions of the pieces he posts that make them (at best) a strange-bedfellows argument against mainstream climate science.

Haig's posts don't need to be internally consistent. It should be obvious by now he is, and has been for quite some time, simply tossing out anything that goes against climate science and seeing if anything sticks at all. It is painfully obvious he doesn't even understand the greatest % of what he posts anyway.

 

[macdoc]

UK rains broke river flow record and climate change is to blame

More water flowed out of UK rivers into the ocean during one day last month than ever before.

As Storm Desmond drenched northern England on 5 December, rivers across the country discharged a third more water than the previous maximum, according to new data released by the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH).

The news comes a day after a study found that unusually high rainfall was made between 50 and 75 per cent more likely by climate change.

Three major storms – Desmond, Eva and Frank – tracked across Britain during December, creating what CEH called “extraordinary” hydrological conditions. They were largely responsible for the country’s wettest month since records began in 1910.

On Honiston Pass in Cumbria, Desmond delivered more rain in 24 hours than ever previously seen anywhere in the country – 34.1 centimetres. As a result, many large river catchments in northern Britain recorded their highest every peak flows, says Jamie Hannaford, who heads hydrology monitoring at the CEH.

Throughout December, several major rivers exceeded previous record flows. The peak records flows on the Tyne, Lune and Eden during Storm Desmond, each at around 1700 cubic metres a second, were the three highest flows ever recorded on rivers in England and Wales, and more than 30 times the rivers’ respective average flows, says the CEH. As these and other rivers breached their banks, some 16,000 properties flooded.

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...r-flow-record-and-climate-change-is-to-blame/

 

[macdoc]

And the heat really goes on ....deeper and warmer - fortunate we are a waterworld

World's oceans warming at increasingly faster rate, new study finds
Ocean water has absorbed more than 90% of the excess heat and nearly 30% of the carbon dioxide generated by human consumption of fossil fuels

The vast Southern Ocean sucked up 1.2bn tonnes of carbon in 2011 alone – which is roughly equivalent to the European Union’s annual carbon output. Photograph: Peter Barritt/Alamy


The world’s oceans are warming at a quickening rate, with the past 20 years accounting for half of the increase in ocean heat content that has occurred since pre-industrial times, a new study has found.

US scientists discovered that much of the extra heat in the ocean is buried deep underwater, with 35% of the additional warmth found at depths below 700 meters. This means far more heat is present in the far reaches of the ocean than 20 years ago, when it contained just 20% of the extra heat produced from the release of greenhouse gases since the industrial revolution.

The paper, published in Nature Climate Change, sheds further light on the vast quantities of heat being absorbed by the world’s oceans.

Ocean water, which has a much higher heat capacity than air, has absorbed more than 90% of the excess heat and nearly 30% of the carbon dioxide generated by human consumption of fossil fuels. The vast Southern Ocean sucked up 1.2bn tonnes of carbon in 2011 alone – which is roughly equivalent to the European Union’s annual carbon output.

Scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, working with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, analyzed heat content changes in varying depths of the world’s oceans using data and models stretching back to 1865.

For the upper reaches of the ocean, above 700m, the data went back to the HMS Challenger expedition, a pioneering effort in oceanography which took place in the 1870s. The heat content of the upper ocean has increased by a factor of 32 since fossil fuel use became widespread.

More recent, and consistent, information has come from the network of 3,000 Argo floats that dot the globe’s oceans. New “Deep Argo” robots, capable of measuring heat at far greater depths than the standard surface-dwelling devices, gave scientists the best idea so far of how much warmth is buried deep underwater.

The deepwater heat content has increased by “several tenths of a degree” since the industrial revolution when averaged out across the globe, according to Peter Gleckler, lead author of the paper. Gleckler said that while this is less than the 0.5C warming averaged across the upper reaches of the ocean, it is still a “huge increase” and is gaining pace.

“When we discuss global warming, the most familiar way we do that is talk about temperature changes on the surface – but it’s clear that the oceans are doing the bulk of the work in terms of absorbing the heat in the system,” he said. “And if we want to really understand how much heat is being trapped, we can’t just look at the upper ocean anymore, we need to look deeper.

more

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ns-warming-faster-rate-new-study-fossil-fuels

 

[Pixel42]

NOAA's annual state of the climate report is up:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/

•During 2015, the average temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.62°F (0.90°C) above the 20th century average. This was the highest among all 136 years in the 1880–2015 record, surpassing the previous record set last year by 0.29°F (0.16°C) and marking the fourth time a global temperature record has been set this century. This is also the largest margin by which the annual global temperature record has been broken. Ten months had record high temperatures for their respective months during the year. The five highest monthly departures from average for any month on record all occurred during 2015.

 

[aleCcowaN]

And the heat really goes on ....deeper and warmer - fortunate we are a waterworld

The deepwater heat content has increased by “several tenths hundredths of a degree” since the industrial revolution when averaged out across the globe, according to Peter Gleckler, lead author of the paper.

more

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ns-warming-faster-rate-new-study-fossil-fuels

FTFY

Another nasty hardly scientific article brought here by you.

Any person who checks this kind of articles knows that the world oceans need to absorb above 5 x 10E24 Joules in order to warm 1°C. That's one and a half year worth of total shortwave radiation the Earth gets from the Sun -and doesn't reflect onto space as shortwave radiation-, so, make your own check, as the energy imbalance has grown a lot recently but it's still 0.3% of the incoming rate.

 

[macdoc]

I'm glad you are doing your job Alec.
You want to pick an argument....deal with the authors ...you've been told enough times and been provided with email addresses....all you want to do is posture.

Keep up the personal commentary and see where it gets you.
You have a history - I'll be glad to point it out. I really don't give FF about your juvenile rants

••••

The Guardian is committed to keeping the public informed on climate change issues...go write for them, sign up as a editor ....whatever.....

Climate change: why the Guardian is putting threat to Earth front and centre
As global warming argument moves on to politics and business, Alan Rusbridger explains the thinking behind our major series on the climate crisis

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ange-guardian-threat-to-earth-alan-rusbridger

••••••

You don't like Robert Scribbler because of his name ......

.....how charming .......you don't like this, that or other thing that you won't take the AUTHORS up on .....no one cares Alec and you just look foolish.
But if that floats your boat ....by all means you'll earn the dismissive laughter.

••••

NASA, NOAA — 2015 Was Hottest Year on Record By a Significant Margin. 2016 May be Even Hotter.

2015 was a historic year for global temperatures. A massive accumulation of greenhouse gasses pushing above 400 parts per million CO2 (and hitting in the range of 485 ppm CO2e) combined with one of the strongest El Ninos on record to spike global temperatures in every major climate monitor well beyond the 1 C above 1880s threshold. This marks the first time in the history of human civilization that temperatures have been so hot globally. A severe departure that moves our current world decisively out of the Holocene context and into hitherto uncharted territory.

Global Land Ocean Temperature Index

(NASA Land-Ocean Temperature Index shows a historic record hot year for 2015. A trend line that speaks volumes for how much human-forced warming through fossil fuel burning has altered the world’s climate. Image source: NASA GISS.)

In the NASA monitor, 2015 beat out previous record hot year 2014 by a significant 0.13 C margin. A measure 0.87 C above the 1950-to-1981 NASA 20th Century base-line and fully 1.09 C above 1880s averages. Just one look at the graph above tells a stark story of raging global temperature increases — especially since 1980 where the average decadal increase is now solidly above 0.15 C every ten years.

NOAA’s own monitor tells a similar story with 2015 coming in at 0.90 C above the 20th Century average or about 1.12 C above 1880s averages. That’s just 0.38 C below the increasingly dangerous 1.5 C threshold and just 0.88 C below the very dangerous 2 C mark. If the current rapid warming trend in the global temperature graph were to merely continue, we’d pass the 1.5 C mark in less than two decades time and hit the 2 C mark within just 4-5 decades. That said, if an analysis by Dr. Michael Mann is correct, we could hit the 2 C mark by as early as the middle 2030s if we continue fossil fuel burning at such a ridiculously rapid rate.

Most Heat Concentrated Northward

Though 2015 was the hottest year on record, not all of that heat was evenly distributed. Though practically all of the globe experienced above average temperatures for the year, there were noted exceptions. Greatest above average temperature departures concentrated in the upper Latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. Alaska, Western Canada, the Beaufort Sea, the High Arctic north of Svalbard, the Barents and Laptev Seas and most of Northern Continental Asia experienced extreme temperature departures in the range of 3 to 3.6 degrees Celsius above average. Exceptional heat in the range of 2-3 degrees Celsius above average also held sway over the Western United States and an area of warmth in the Northeastern Pacific dubbed the hot blob.

more
http://robertscribbler.com/2016/01/...a-significant-margin-2016-may-be-even-hotter/

 

[aleCcowaN]

NOAA's annual state of the climate report is up:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/

But the most amazing bit were the records during last December:

global temperature: 1.11°C above 20th century's average
global land temperature: +1.89°C
global ocean temperature: +0.83°C

North Hemisphere land temperature: +2.13°C (+3.83°F)

Let's hope it's the peak of this episode.

 

[aleCcowaN]

I'm glad you are doing your job Alec.
You want to pick an argument....deal with the authors ...you've been told enough times and been provided with email addresses....all you want to do is posture.

Keep up the personal commentary and see where it gets you.
You have a history - I'll be glad to point it out. I really don't give FF about your juvenile rants

••••

The Guardian is committed to keeping the public informed on climate change issues...go write for them, sign up as a editor ....whatever.....


http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ange-guardian-threat-to-earth-alan-rusbridger

••••••

You don't like Robert Scribbler because of his name ......

.....how charming .......you don't like this, that or other thing that you won't take the AUTHORS up on .....no one cares Alec and you just look foolish.
But if that floats your boat ....by all means you'll earn the dismissive laughter.

••••

It's a pity you resource to laughing dogs to cover your mistakes.

Always the same lame bit of yours "discuss it with the authors". It was The Guardian the one who was sloppy and it was you who swallowed their mistake hook, line and sinker, showing by that you ignore quite elementary matters on this subject.

You are always bothering others posting here -most of the time off-topically- the ocean heat content graph, here from you own "pen":

picture ,,,1,000 words n'all

if course the interesting times aspect just now is how that interchange between air and ocean is playing out in extreme weather in various and sundry places.

You should have noticed that if the oceans need +5 10²⁴ J to raise their temperature 1°C, a heat gain way below a tenth of that couldn't have raised 0.5°C the upper ocean and "several tenths of degree (SIC, your quote, their and your mistake)" the deeper ocean.

We have tons of poster here on a regular basis, who don't understand reasons and reply posts with a neener neener to add assorted links on different topics to support the conclusion they prefer to believe. With your post above you did the same -and this is not an isolated instance-.

I ask you again: stop posting random elements just because they have an appearance of legitimacy. And stop criticizing who point your mistakes. You slipped badly with this pedestrian source of yours (The Guardian ... please! ) with their sloppy mistakes and edits to say whatever it comes -as the public don't understand a iota- and snipped to tell an enthusiastic and apparently relevant story when that is for sure not what was said during the interview.

ScienceDirect is generally as crappy as this. Learn it for once an all. Aim higher next time instead of buying pret-a-porter warmerism that helps nobody and explains nothing.

 

[macdoc]

Attribution....

Assessing the impact of human-induced climate change
Scientists apply new method to determine whether specific climate impacts can be traced to human-caused emissions
Date:
January 20, 2016
Source:
DOE/Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Summary:
A new method is being applied to determine whether specific climate impacts can be traced to human-caused emissions. The past century has seen a 0.8°C (1.4°F) increase in average global temperature, and the overwhelming source of this increase has been emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants from human activities, they say

more

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/01/160120091756.htm

snip

heir analysis revealed that almost two-thirds of the listed impacts related specifically to the warming over land and near the surface of the ocean could confidently be attributed to human-generated emissions. However, the researchers could not find the same kind of link for trends in precipitation.

Surprised at the precipitation changes uncertainty, given the scale of events in the UK and observed increases in rainfall intensities....that it could not be tracked in the same way as a consequence of AGW

 

[macdoc]

Good read on evaluating global temperatures..."thoroughly explored" as Ars likes to do

Thorough, not thoroughly fabricated: The truth about global temperature data
How thermometer and satellite data is adjusted and why it must be done.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2016...ated-the-truth-about-global-temperature-data/

 

[Warmer1]

Our Rising Oceans (VICE on HBO: Season 3, Episode 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp6_sDiup6U

"VICE founder Shane Smith travels to the bottom of the world to investigate the instability of the West Antarctic ice sheet and to see first hand how the continent is melting -- and VICE follows the rising oceans to Bangladesh for a glimpse into the world's underwater future. From the UN Climate conference to the People's Climate March to the forces that deny the science of global climate change, this special extended episode covers all sides of the issue and all corners of the globe, ending with a special interview with Vice President Joe Biden."

 

[Arnold Martin]

.

I am a helicopter pilot and we are proud to do our part to save the planet.

Wind towers do not turn half the time and they tend to freeze up the rest of the time so we came up with a brilliant solution.
--- We use Diesel fuel in a big truck to haul water to the location
--- And another diesel powered truck hauling home heating oil to location
--- And another diesel powered truck hauling a boiler to heat the water
--- Then we use a kerosene powered helicopter to sling up the warm water and melt the ice on the wind turbine.
--- Works great (getting the ice off) but we can only do the procedure when it is not very windy , otherwise the warm water would blow away in the wind.
--- So because it is not windy the turbine does not start up after we are done.
--- Often the wind turbine sits idle until it gets all covered in ice again.
--- No problem because all we do is fuel up the helicopter every once in a while and scout around to check them .
--- If they are iced up we haul all our equipment back there and repeat the procedure.
--- Great job and we love the feelings that we get by saving the planet
--- There is a denier in the financial office who pays our fuel bill and she insists we are using much more fuel than energy produced by the wind tower
--- When she calls we try not to answer the phone or tell her we are busy flying and cant talk.
--- After all a pilot should not do helicopter sling work in windy conditions or talk on the phone while flying

She imprinted a stupid slogan on the picture but just ignore it.

.

 

[Trakar]

She imprinted a stupid slogan on the picture but just ignore it.

.

Actually the quote is the lonely authentic issue raised. The stupidity of the engineers who designed the systems to operate under these conditions, and the corporate managers who think helicopter inspections and defrosting crews are more cost effective and efficient than embedded sensors and cameras, drone inspection systems, and installed de-icing systems. That profit first mentality is what made the fossil fuel industries so short-sighted and criminally corrupt.

 

[macdoc]

No worry - gonna be too warm up there to be concern

Warm Arctic Storms Aim to Unfreeze the North Pole Again — That’s 55 Degrees (F) Above Normal For January
It’s worth re-stating. The Starks were wrong. Winter isn’t coming. Winter, as we know it, is dying. Dying one tenth of a degree of global oceanic and atmospheric warming at a time. Steadily dying with each ton of heat-trapping greenhouse gasses emitted through our vastly irresponsible and terrifyingly massive burning of fossil fuels.

******

According to UCAR reanalysis, it’s something that’s only happened three times during December in the entire temperature record for the North Pole since the late 1940s. Four times now that a record warm surge of air hit that highest point of Northern Hemisphere Latitude during late December of 2015. An event that was influenced by the very destructive Winter Storm Frank. A combination of weather variables that, by themselves, was odd and rare enough. But what may be about to happen next week is even more rare. Because we’ve never, not once, seen this kind of heat set up at the North Pole during January.

(UCAR’s North Pole temperature data record since 1948 per Bob Henson shows no above freezing days at the North Pole during January through late April. But it could happen next week.)

Disturbingly, what we’re seeing now starting to take shape is another warm air invasion of the Arctic with the potential to bring above-freezing temperatures to the North Pole during the long polar night. An odd and highly abnormal event that may again take place this Winter in just a few more days. If it does happen it will be yet another case of a never-before-seen warming event occurring in a record hot world.

more

http://robertscribbler.com/2016/01/...-thats-55-degrees-f-above-normal-for-january/

 

[CapelDodger]

I see Arnold Martin responded to the cry of "Squirrel!" from the WUWT pit. There's been a severe shortage of those recently. This one is two years old, the turbine was experimental, and the location was Sweden, where operating wind-turbines normally have heating elements - Swedes not being culturally unaware of the effects of deep cold.

This squirrel is dead. Bereft of life it rests in peace. If it hadn't been frozen in place it would have fallen off its perch.

 

[lomiller]

Tamino dissects climate change denier claims that “the pause” is climate and record temperatures this year are “just weather”

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/01/24/weather-and-climate/

 

[Arnold Martin]

.

Polar Bears - Fat - Happy - Cold

-40* C Near Churchill Manitoba Canada

-40* Celsius equals -40* Fahrenheit

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/polar-bear-photos-daisy-gilardini-1.3419627

.