Still confused about climate change...

Post Reply New Topic

It has been hotter, during Roman times, again during the middle Ages. It has been colder, in 705 the Black Sea and the Nile froze over. Then there was the little ice age.

1815 was the year without summer.

So the record does show pre industrial ups and downs, that cannot be blamed on man.

However, we are loading up the air with things that magnify the swings, and it can go both ways.

Early snow in North Dakota, followed by golf ball size hail covering a lot of eastern Colorado. Last year the Polar Vortex, the Great Lakes had record ice cover, but this year also set a lot of heat records.

So we tipped the balance, and now fire and ice are fighting it out.

The strangest period in climate history has been the last five hundred years.

The climate was moderate, stable from year to year, crops were sown, the rains fell, it dried out for harvest, life was good, and a few hundred million people became seven billion.

We have had dry years, The Dust Bowl, but the last drought started in 700 and ended in 1500.

We have had great floods, Jamestown, the Mississippi in 1927, and lately the hundred year floods happen every few years. There are thousand year floods.

A more dynamic climate, and we are toast.

It is cooling, Spring came late this year, the first snows of winter early, and we still broke heat records, and they are still going on, LA have been in a heat wave, upper 90s, in October.

The ups and downs are getting more uppity, and being bigger downers.

We depend on the crops, the pastures, and they have been having a hard time.

People have farmed for a long time, and there was a reason there were only a few hundred million.

The Vikings went south in 900, because their crops no longer ripened, and the fodder did not grow.

Cold and wet at harvest time and Ergot grew on the grain in the field, and they ate it, becase they had nothing else. It is organic LSD, and induces abortions. They still produced more people than they could feed.

Maybe we can grow grain in northern Canada, or clear the pine forests of the southeast. That will take time, good guesses, and backup crops. It might work if the climate reached a new stability, but that is in doubt.

The Romans loved the wines of Northern Scotland when they were in England. From 1100 to 1300, those vinyards were ice covered all year. Roman times were very warm.

The last 500 years lacked change. Now we have induced change into the system.

In the longer term, we can see the effects of a single volcano, or meteor strike on the climate, now our dust, smog, CO2, are building up and it will be hotter and colder, weather patterns and rainfall will change, but we cannot predict how they will change.

Not only is there a handy trendline on there showing that you are wrong, but, as has already been explained, there is no "cooling trend" if you have to use a specific start date rather than any of the surrounding years. As also already stated, in science there is something called a "valid comparison". It is not valid to compare El Nino years to La Nina years unless you are trying to demonstrate that El Nino raises the temperature. Change one thing at a time. This is science 101. Finally, 1998 isn't even the warmest year on record - 2005 and 2010 were both warmer.

What's the trend in these data?

1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 12, 17, 23, 29, 38, 32, 36, 41, 38, 39

You'd say "they increase then decrease then increase then decrease". You are overfitting the data. Data is noisy, there are always going to be a few peaks and troughs. The trend there is actually a constant increase.

There's no way to point out to someone suffering from Dunning-Kruger that they don't understand science or statistics without being a bit mean. Please, trust the scientific consensus until you have the ability to criticise it.

If you are truly interested in learning, this page may be useful for you: http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_01
As might this one: http://www.bbc.co.uk/learningzone/clips ... t/257.html

Yes, everyone acknowledges this and climate scientists are aware of it.

However, the "hot" and "cold" periods you speak of are nothing compared to the changes of today:



Source? I am only aware of vineyards in the south of England, and of course the Romans didn't conquer Scotland, so your claim seems unlikely.


We cannot predict exactly, but we can make some good guesses thanks to climate models.

*snerk*

Ummmm.....
I think you might be missing something there...

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... -nonsense/
Also see http://science.howstuffworks.com/enviro ... /printable

In other words, to claim that the earth is not warming is like claiming that summer does not exist because there was a cold day on July 14. 1998 was an anomaly like a cold day on July 14. However, since 1998 we have continued to warm up.
American Meteorological Society
??with 2005 and 2010 being the warmest two years in more than a century of global records.?
from
http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/2012climatechange.html
NASA
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
Note that the graphs show continued warming.

NOAA
?This makes August 2014 the warmest August on record for the globe since records began in 1880, beating the previous record set in 1998. Nine of the 10 warmest Augusts on record have occurred during the 21st century. Additionally, August 2014 marked the 38th consecutive August with a temperature above the 20th century average. ?
The first eight months of 2014 (January?August) were the third warmest such period on record across the world's land and ocean surfaces, with an average temperature that was 0.68°C (1.22°F) above the 20th century average of 57.3°F (14.0°C). If 2014 maintains this temperature departure from average for the remainder of the year, it will be the warmest year on record.
From
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/
Other legitimate sources,
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... e-science/
Anyway, I am tired of doing people?s homework.
I have provided the evidence that EVERY scientific organization confirms that AGW is real.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific ... ate_change
Yes, that is wiki. However, they provide links to the scientific organizations that prove that they confirm AGW.
To say that the entire scientific community?s data is wrong is to accuse them of lying. I think that if EVERY scientific organization in the world is lying, there would be no legitimate scientific data and therefore no evidence that the world is not warming. However, it is conspiracy nonsense to believe that every scientific organization in the world is falsifying data. Next topic, is Elvis still alive?

Last edited by wittgenstein on 07 Oct 2014, 1:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

First of all, that chart does not show a cooling trend. It shows a warming trend!! !
Second of all, what is your source??? Give a link! Is it Limbaugh? Glen Beck?

Disputing global cooling is like claiming the Earth is flat.

So EVERY scientific organization in the world is wrong (or are you saying that the world is flat?) and your intuition is right? Please, just a little evidence!
PS; Thanks for the graph that proved us right and you wrong.

Perhaps you should get out more. Perhaps,start with a small distance, like northern Norway. You will see that the glaciers are melting.

The Earth is not cooling. What has happened is that it isn't warming as fast as expected. The answer, it turns out, is that most of that warming went into the southern oceans, which weren't being monitored in detail during that time.

http://www.rtcc.org/2014/10/07/extra-he ... ing-pause/

Global warming denial is like a cult. It does not matter how much evidence one brings to the conversation , the cult member will keep chanting, " the world is getting cooler."
Logic and evidence are less important to a cult member than intuition.

It has been cooling since 1998. That's 16 years of cooling, and still people talk about global warming. I find it quite amusing.

Keep chanting! Most people trust EVERY scientific organization in the world more than your intuition.
Why can't you give even one piece of evidence (from a primary source,not some guy's blog) to support your position. Oh yeah, all you got is your intuition.
Can't you see that claiming that NASA, the American Meteorological Society, Royal Society, NOAA.... and EVERY scientific organization in the world is lying makes you look like an irrational fanatic?

Last edited by wittgenstein on 07 Oct 2014, 5:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Even our leaders have lost interest.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... t-meetings

So now you are claiming that the politicians are more honest about global warming than the entire world's scientific community? Actually, they overwhelmingly agree with AGW but are reluctant to interfere with the profits of international corporations that fund their campaigns.
It's also possible that they believed that an informational meeting is pointless when the facts have been established and known by any educated person.

That chart you posted to show it was cooling actually showed it was warming. It might be difficult to read accurately without the trend line but the authors put a trend line in that is clearly upward. I think you are just misunderstanding charts and other forms of evidence.