Global warming discussion III

[bit_pattern]

Wind strengths are up I understand.

That'll be one to watch here in Aus in relation to increase bushfire risks. it's always been a bit of an unknown quantity in regards to the changing climate but well known as the critical factor in bushfire severity.

 

[macdoc]

There was an article on northern Atlantic storms becoming stronger ..see if I can find it ..

Met Office report spells out climate change link to UK storms and flooding

http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/201...te-change-link-to-uk-flooding-in-four-graphs/

Makes sense.
I was riding in West Virginia and the day started at 30 degrees F and 7 hours later it was 86 F.

It was a clear day but the winds were intense.
you can see lenticular clouds downwind of the mountains

I know stronger winds have a role in the Antarctic as well.

 

[macdoc]

I have no clue how that would potentially effect satellite data, if at all. But it certainly has an effect on climate when over a large enough area.

The satellites I think are measuring sea surface temps as a gauge of change. So evaporative cooling would always be in play.

Land it would vary all over the place but indeed faster evaporation is causing salt issues to name one.

 

[RedPillNeo]

On a trade-specific forum, I'm in the midst of the annual "It's cold here, global warming is bunk, Al Gore invented the internet yuk yuk" thread as the lone scientific mind. Someone just cut/pasted a gish gallop by Geoffry Pouhantas "completely debunking global warming" and meticulously filled with supporting links... to blogs, wikipedia, the Daily Mail, denier sites, etc.

One exasperated person said something unintentionally hilarious, that I had to share here...

You keep screaming "climate" not weather. How long do us little folks have to wait until your climate turns to weather? 10yrs, 100yrs 1000yrs? Maybe if you libs would shut your traps once in a while, you won't get all that hot air heating it up where you live.

 

[macdoc]

How long do us little folks have to wait until your climate turns to weather?

wal....if you happen to be in the midwest...that would be about now.....I hear 50 degree F temperature drops in some regions tomorrow.

Polar Vortex to Blast 200 Million People With Arctic Air
www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/polar-vortex-to.../36890008
November 8, 2014; 12:10 PM ET. Share |. Arctic air associated with the polar vortex will lunge into the North Central United States early next week and will ...

but they won't get that it's AGW influence.

 

[Arnold Martin]

On a trade-specific forum, I'm in the midst of the annual "It's cold here, global warming is bunk, Al Gore invented the internet yuk yuk" thread as the lone scientific mind. Someone just cut/pasted a gish gallop by Geoffry Pouhantas "completely debunking global warming" and meticulously filled with supporting links... to blogs, wikipedia, the Daily Mail, denier sites, etc.

One exasperated person said something unintentionally hilarious, that I had to share here...

Getting lonely are you ?

How much longer will it take your scientific mind to realize the planet will not obey the "climate models"

Darn planet anyway. It must be reading The Daily Mail again

 

[Haig]

wal....if you happen to be in the midwest...that would be about now.....I hear 50 degree F temperature drops in some regions tomorrow.



but they won't get that it's AGW SOLAR influence.

Fixed that for you mac

The Coming Solar Cycle(s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0DcpRAPk_w&feature=share

 

[Reality Check]

Fixed that for you mac

The Coming Solar Cycle(s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0DcpRAPk_w&feature=share

Fixed that for you Haig !
Is this you citing a YouTube video by someone on the internet totally ignorant about the Sun and its effects on climate?
If that person knew anything about climate science then they would know that the Sun's output has been at least constant (and maybe decreased a little) in the last 35 years and so cannot have caused any global warming during that period.
This is climate myth number 2: Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions
If that person knew anything about climate science then they would know what the effects of a hypothetical Maunder Minimum happening now would have on climate (not much!).
This is the Are we heading into a new Ice Age? climate myth.

This science has been pointed out to you a few times without apparently being understood, Haig.

 

[Haig]

~~~ snip usual RC stuff ~~~

Fixed that for you RC !
Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions but NOT when the Hale cycle is used i.e. the 22 year magnetic solar cycle, then Sun & climate: moving in same directions

This science has been pointed out to you a few times without apparently being understood, RC.

 

[macdoc]

How much longer will it take your scientific mind to realize the planet will not obey the "climate models"

According to you it doesn't obey physics either....except MEASUREMENTS those same things you fly with says you are wrong.
Has not one thing to to with model.
The same physics that dictate your flights dictate the role of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Deny that and you might as well proclaim it's fairies wut spins your blades up and lifts you off.
Same level of ridiculous.

Meanwhile people that understand the physics of the atmosphere move the body of knowledge forward.

These are MEASUREMENTS..not models.

Ocean primed for more El Niño, experts say
Date:
November 13, 2014
Source:
Australian National University
Summary:
Salinity and temperature records from corals in a remote Pacific island in Kiribati show the ocean has warmed over the last sixty years and has set up the conditions for stronger El Niño weather events, which could significantly affect Australian weather.

more
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141113123159.htm

WHat is warming the oceans Arnold??? Leprechauns????

Measurements Arnold

more of those pesky measurements

Got a physics reason for them Arnold????

It's really simple at the heart of it all....even Exxon acknowledges it...

Use of fossil fuels is warming the planet.

Get over the crap denialism and move on to policy solutions.

 

[Reality Check]

This science has been pointed out to you a few times without apparently being understood, RC.

Wrong, Haig: You quote what looks like a delusion from some random place without any science.

This science has been pointed out to you a few times and you still cannot understood it, Haig:

If that person knew anything about climate science then they would know that the Sun's output has been at least constant (and maybe decreased a little) in the last 35 years and so cannot have caused any global warming during that period.
This is climate myth number 2: Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions
If that person knew anything about climate science then they would know what the effects of a hypothetical Maunder Minimum happening now would have on climate (not much!).
This is the Are we heading into a new Ice Age? climate myth.

One more time, Haig, it is really simple:
The climate is driven by the heat from the Sun. The heat from the Sun has been constant for the last 35 years. Global temperatures have risen over the last 35 years. Thus some other factor caused that warming and has been identified as the CO2 that we have emitted.

 

[macdoc]

Yup - over and over he flogs the same dead horse. There is a clear signal in the sun cycle that shows the influence of the sun's out put and it remains a magnitude below that of GHG.
Just one more red herring.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

It's really simple at the heart of it all....even Exxon acknowledges it...

Use of fossil fuels (and Deterioration of the ecosystems ability to replace that CO2 into soil) is warming the planet.

Get over the crap denialism and move on to policy solutions.

FTFY Always remember it's a cycle Mac. Increased emissions would be OK, just as long as there was an equally large increase in sequestration. They would balance. But what we humans have done is increase emissions and decrease ecosystems' ability for sequestration simultaneously.

 

[macdoc]

Don't modify my comments - that is grounds to be reported.
Neither Exxon or myself made that statement.

The planet IS WARMING due to fossil fuel use in the main regardless of the ecosystem.

Other aspects are secondary....conflating the two is foolish. Land use is another driver and not by any means the primary one.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Don't modify my comments - that is grounds to be reported.
Neither Exxon or myself made that statement.

The planet IS WARMING due to fossil fuel use in the main regardless of the ecosystem.

Other aspects are secondary....conflating the two is foolish. Land use is another driver and not by any means the primary one.

Reported for what? I didn't improperly modify your statement, I added to it in parenthesis to denote my words and notated that I did that part below with FTFY. If there is another way to accomplish this sort of thing that I am unaware of, please tell me.

And you are wrong Mac. It is always a cycle and this is the main problem most denialists have with AGW. Emissions are too small by themselves to cause AGW. It's only when we have emissions AND loss of ecosystem services like carbon sequestration, that we end up with skyrocketing CO2 and AGW. You can never talk about one without the other. They are inextricably linked. With the damages we have made to ecosystems function, the emissions (though relatively small) become a huge problem.

It's analogous to filling a bucket with holes in the bottom. No matter how much you add, it never gets full, just pours out the bottom. But plug the holes and it fills up quickly.

We are plugging up the holes in the bucket (deteriorating ecosystem services) AND have started filling the same bucket (Fossil fuel and other emissions). That's why the atmosphere is filling up with CO2. Until the climate scientists drive this point home correctly, there is no hope to ever convince AGW deniers and politicians fighting against the various policy and infrastructure changes required to fix this huge problem.

 

[Dancing David]

RBF, proper etiquette is to modify it outside the quote box, not in the quote box and it has been infracted in the past

simply taking the macdoc attribution is sufficient

Use of fossil fuels (and Deterioration of the ecosystems ability to replace that CO2 into soil) is warming the planet.

FTFY

 

[Red Baron Farms]

RBF, proper etiquette is to modify it outside the quote box, not in the quote box and it has been infracted in the past

simply taking the macdoc attribution is sufficient

Use of fossil fuels (and Deterioration of the ecosystems ability to replace that CO2 into soil) is warming the planet.

FTFY

Thank you Dancing David. I get it now. Apologies to Mac for doing it wrong.

 

[Fudbucker]

Global Warming Hiatus Over?

This last Summer was the hottest on record (globally). Same with August, September, and now October: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...h-on-record-as-ocean-temperatures-top-charts/

When/if 2014 clocks in as the hottest year on record, will the warming "hiatus" officially be over? Or will 2014 have to the be the hottest year by a certain margin?

 

[GodMark2]

According to who?

According to the scientists that actually study the climate, the past few years have been within expected statistical deviations of the temperature extrapolation when including human-caused excess warming. In other words: there never was any 'hiatus'.

According to the loonies that want to wish away the repercussions of any of their or their father's past choices and pretend that the way we wanted things to be is the way they must have been, this past year will simply be ignored as bad data, possibly having been altered or simply made up by the cabal of scientists as an unrealistic portrayal of life created by the liberal media-elite.

 

[lionking]

According to who?

According to the scientists that actually study the climate, the past few years have been within expected statistical deviations of the temperature extrapolation when including human-caused excess warming. In other words: there never was any 'hiatus'.

According to the loonies that want to wish away the repercussions of any of their or their father's past choices and pretend that the way we wanted things to be is the way they must have been, this past year will simply be ignored as bad data, possibly having been altered or simply made up by the cabal of scientists as an unrealistic portrayal of life created by the liberal media-elite.

Correct. The so-called "hiatus" has been a crutch for deniers. The underlying warming trend has been apparent for many years.