The Climate Change thread [Archive] - Page 2

cameraman

10-12-13, 04:16 PM

What's climate change? :gomer: As I noted in a previous thread ;) they are called averages for a reason. This hurricane season is the weakest ever. Mother Nature is going through menopause. :)

While that nice dry air over the south Atlantic is doing a great job of suppressing the Atlantic hurricane season we unfortunately can't make the same statement for India. The US Navy is reporting offshore wind gusts of 186 mph as Cyclone Phailin approached Odisha and Andhra Pradesh. Luckily it dropped a little in strength before it reached land, not that 130 mph could ever be classified as good.

The US hurricane peeps were rewriting their forecasting algorithms to account for humidity changes in the areas that seem to be strongly effecting this seasons Atlantic storms. They do it every year but the additions this year include areas that they have not considered in the past. They came into play this year and pulled the rug out from under this year's forecast. Well they were working on it until they all got sent home...

dando

10-13-13, 11:14 AM

While that nice dry air over the south Atlantic is doing a great job of suppressing the Atlantic hurricane season we unfortunately can't make the same statement for India. The US Navy is reporting offshore wind gusts of 186 mph as Cyclone Phailin approached Odisha and Andhra Pradesh. Luckily it dropped a little in strength before it reached land, not that 130 mph could ever be classified as good.

The US hurricane peeps were rewriting their forecasting algorithms to account for humidity changes in the areas that seem to be strongly effecting this seasons Atlantic storms. They do it every year but the additions this year include areas that they have not considered in the past. They came into play this year and pulled the rug out from under this year's forecast. Well they were working on it until they all got sent home...

Dr. Gray can work on the forecasting. He's not a Fed. :) NOAA needs to work on updating the forecast models. The past two years, I have never seen the forecast models so out of whack. I literally cannot trust a forecast beyond 48 hours these days. :saywhat: And on being sent home, when I went to weather.gov and received a shutdown message... :irked: :mad:

Elmo T

01-02-14, 05:01 PM

It's sunny and nice out today.

;)

So why is it every time a we get the slightest thing resembling a storm storm, those who don't believe in global warming start screaming "see... we told you!!!..."??? :rolleyes:

I don't know what to believe, but I certainly won't discount the possibility of global warming because it snows in January. :saywhat:

KLang

01-02-14, 05:40 PM

;)

So why is it every time a we get the slightest thing resembling a storm storm, those who don't believe in global warming start screaming "see... we told you!!!..."??? :rolleyes:

I don't know what to believe, but I certainly won't discount the possibility of global warming because it snows in January. :saywhat:

The planet has been warming since the end of the last ice age.

gjc2

01-02-14, 07:35 PM

The planet has been warming since the end of the last ice age.

That’s what I think.
The planet will warm to some point then begin to cool again. If we’re close to the warm peak of the temperature sien wave the change will be very slight until we pass the peak and start the downward slope. I’m just assuming the Earth’s temperature cycles in a sinusoidal wave.

emjaya

01-03-14, 07:39 AM

Summary
Min 25
Max 41
Very hot. Windy.

Tomorrow's forecast for Brisbane. I don't know about the planet, but I am definitely warming up. :yuck:

Elmo T

01-03-14, 09:17 AM

Tomorrow's forecast for Brisbane. I don't know about the planet, but I am definitely warming up. :yuck:

11F after 8 inches of snow last night. ;)

That forecast in Brisbane is not going to help with the brush fires. :thumbdown:

Tifosi24

01-03-14, 09:17 AM

Tomorrow's forecast for Brisbane. I don't know about the planet, but I am definitely warming up. :yuck:

I'll trade you. If the forecast for Monday holds out, the average temperature for Minneapolis will be around -25F (-40C) and there may be wind chills at times approaching -55F (-48C). There probably won't be school anywhere in the state (I might get work canceled too) because exposed skin can freeze in 5-10 minutes with a -50F wind chill.

stroker

01-03-14, 09:33 AM

I'll trade you. If the forecast for Monday holds out, the average temperature for Minneapolis will be around -25F (-40C) and there may be wind chills at times approaching -55F (-48C). There probably won't be school anywhere in the state (I might get work canceled too) because exposed skin can freeze in 5-10 minutes with a -50F wind chill.

Sounds like I got out of there just in time. My girls and I were visiting friends in Hutchinson last weekend. Drove down to La Crosse to watch the New Year's Eve fireworks and damn near froze that night. The last three hours of the drive home to Columbia was no fun at all. Not the worst driving conditions I've ever seen but very close.

sadams

01-03-14, 11:15 AM

Stroker,
Hutchinson, MN!!!
My wife grew up in Stewart about 10 miles southwest of Hutch.
My in laws used to work for 3M in Hutch.
Been to that little city many times.

dando

01-03-14, 01:39 PM

Well it's 7 here now...latest forecast I just saw on the noon news was -14 Monday night.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DoARSlv-HU

:saywhat:

cameraman

01-03-14, 02:03 PM

31°F with smog that would do Beijing proud in Salt Lake.:yuck:

Insomniac

01-03-14, 03:17 PM

The planet has been warming since the end of the last ice age.

*mind blown* I thought it got colder after an ice age. :D

KLang

01-03-14, 03:51 PM

cameraman

01-03-14, 05:19 PM

I'll trade you. If the forecast for Monday holds out, the average temperature for Minneapolis will be around -25F (-40C) and there may be wind chills at times approaching -55F (-48C). There probably won't be school anywhere in the state (I might get work canceled too) because exposed skin can freeze in 5-10 minutes with a -50F wind chill.

All things being equal I would still prefer to sit in my house with the furnace blasting rather than trying to ride out the >120°F roasting of central Australia.

cameraman

01-06-14, 10:18 AM

How do you make global climate changes go away? Simple you cut the funding of the monitoring system that has been in place for 60 years:flaming:

I am writing as the director of the Scripps CO2 and O2 programs, which keep track of how these vital gases are changing in the atmosphere over time. The CO2 measurements include the iconic Mauna Loa record, now commonly known as the “Keeling Curve”, which was started by my father in the late 1950s.

The O2 measurements, carried out on samples from Mauna Loa and many other stations, also provide critical information about how the planet is changing. The measurements show that the world’s O2 supply is slowly decreasing, and have helped prove that the CO2 increase is caused by fossil fuel burning, but offset by natural sinks of CO2 in the land and oceans.

The need to continue these measurements has not diminished. The planet is undergoing dramatic changes, unprecedented for millions of years. This past year, our group reported that CO2 topped 400 parts per million at Mauna Loa for the first time. We also reported a shockingly large and unexpected increase in the seasonal swings in CO2 between summer and winter at high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere. The boreal forests are evidently behaving very differently than 50 years ago. Meanwhile, the oceans are acidifying, ice is melting, sea level is rising, the frequency of extreme storms seems to be increasing. Scientists from around the world are scrambling to figure out what is going on and what the future holds, as CO2 continues to rise. Others are working on ideas for adapting to these changes or mitigating their impacts on society. While we urgently need solutions to cope with these challenges, we also can’t afford to take our eyes off the planet.

The Scripps CO2 and O2 measurements now face severe funding challenges. The situation is most urgent for the O2 measurements. These measurements have been supported for decades through proposals submitted every few years to the federal agencies. The value of these measurements is not questioned, but federal funding for these programs has never been so tenuous. This is the basis for this unusual appeal to the public at large.

http://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/a-letter-of-appeal-from-ralph-keeling/

He is being far too polite, the cuts are political and the pressure is coming directly from the House.
This is the iconic dataset they are trying to defund.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Dioxide_Apr2013.svg/800px-Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Dioxide_Apr2013.svg.png

KLang

01-06-14, 11:35 AM

Sorry, 40 years of data is pretty much useless when discussing climate.

datachicane

01-06-14, 12:33 PM

Data, schmata, we've got opinions!

nrc

01-06-14, 04:53 PM

He is being far too polite, the cuts are political and the pressure is coming directly from the House.
This is the iconic dataset they are trying to defund.

This article from 2010 shows that losing funding is not a new problem for this program. It's redundant with an NOAA program.

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/does-the-keeling-curve-still-need-a-keeling/?_r=0

nrc

01-06-14, 05:08 PM

Sorry, 40 years of data is pretty much useless when discussing climate.

That's true to some degree but having measured data instead of estimates based on observations is a good thing. You have to start somewhere. I just don't think we need to be funding two duplicate data sets.

Just remember, short term weather events don't prove anything about climate change unless they happen to be a weather event that might just be created by climate change.

http://science.time.com/2014/01/06/climate-change-driving-cold-weather/

cameraman

01-06-14, 07:52 PM

This article from 2010 shows that losing funding is not a new problem for this program. It's redundant with an NOAA program.

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/does-the-keeling-curve-still-need-a-keeling/?_r=0

It isn't redundant it is duplicate. The last thing you want in your baseline data set is n = 1.

Andrew Longman

01-06-14, 08:22 PM

It isn't redundant it is duplicate. The last thing you want in your baseline data set is n = 1.That is a useless argument for those (not NRC) who has contempt before investigation and has no interest in actually solving anything real or imagined.

nrc

01-07-14, 03:23 AM

It isn't redundant it is duplicate. The last thing you want in your baseline data set is n = 1.

There are other datasets. They don't have to be nearly exact duplicates. If the planet is counting on that specific data set then someone else on the planet can fund it.

datachicane

01-07-14, 01:22 PM

If the planet is counting on that specific data set then someone else on the planet can fund it.

:eek:

Elmo T

01-07-14, 03:57 PM

Just remember, short term weather events don't prove anything about climate change unless they happen to be a weather event that might just be created by climate change.

So says another learned group - the folks at Scientific American:

What Is This “Polar Vortex” That Is Freezing the U.S.? (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2014/01/06/what-is-this-polar-vortex-that-is-freezing-the-u-s/?fb_action_ids=655321094525132&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=[624568307580688]&action_type_map=[%22og.likes%22]&action_ref_map=[])

More and more Arctic sea ice is melting during summer months. The more ice that melts, the more the Arctic Ocean warms. The ocean radiates much of that excess heat back to the atmosphere in winter, which disrupts the polar vortex. Data taken over the past decade indicate that when a lot of Arctic sea ice disappears in the summer, the vortex has a tendency to weaken over the subsequent winter, if related atmospheric conditions prevail over the northern Atlantic Ocean.

cameraman

01-24-14, 07:15 PM

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bex9kjECUAA4kny.png:large

Dvdb

01-24-14, 10:21 PM

Hey, I resent that cartoon.

We know it gets cold here, just as we know we will hit 100 a few times in the summer.

Of course, I am leaving for Florida in three weeks................

gjc2

01-25-14, 07:37 AM

Now what?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/24/solar-lull-little-ice-age-sun-scientists_n_4645248.html?utm_hp_ref=science

cameraman

04-08-14, 06:32 PM

Hmmmm. Grumble.

So I saw some banner headlines on Facebook (the source of all scientific information dontyaknow) today on how El Nino is going to kick our collective asses this year. Death, doom, destruction. Wide spread famine, yada, yada, yada. So I wandered over to the National weather Service's Climate Prediction Center and took a look at the El Nino/Southern Oscillation Diagnostic Discussion (http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/ensodisc.html) to see what they has to say. Now granted this was on March 6th but still...

If westerly winds continue to emerge in the western equatorial Pacific, the development of El Niño would become more likely. However, the lower forecast skill during the spring and overall propensity for cooler conditions over the last decade still justify significant probabilities for ENSO-neutral. The consensus forecast is for ENSO-neutral to continue through the Northern Hemisphere spring 2014, with about a 50% chance of El Niño developing during the summer or fall

So the odds of Armageddon are 50:50

That did not come across in the banner headlines I just saw:mad:

Not gonna link to the sky is falling crew.

You look at the graph and it does make you go hmmmmm but I ain't stocking up on ammo just yet.

http://iri.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/figure1.gif

KLang

04-08-14, 07:09 PM

Hmmmm. Grumble.

So I saw some banner headlines on Facebook

Maybe you should stay away from Facebook? :confused:

cameraman

04-22-14, 01:41 PM

Aaaaaaaand a month later an the answer is... maybe, maybe not.

http://iri.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/figure1.gif

The model predictions of ENSO for this summer and beyond are indicating an increased likelihood of El Niño this year compared with last month. Most of the models indicate that ENSO-neutral (Niño-3.4 index between -0.5oC and 0.5oC) will persist through much of the remainder of the Northern Hemisphere spring 2014 (Fig. 6), with many models predicting the development of El Niño sometime during the summer or fall. Despite this greater model consensus, there remains considerable uncertainty as to when El Niño will develop and how strong it may become. This uncertainty is amplified by the inherently lower forecast skill of the models for forecasts made in the spring. While ENSO-neutral is favored for Northern Hemisphere spring, the chances of El Niño increase during the remainder of the year, and exceed 50% by the summer.

If you would like you can pick a model to fit any preconceived notions you may have...

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/figure6.gif

This is where amplified uncertainty comes from...

That said I really hope the folks at FSU are wrong.

Also if you look at the March vs the April graphs it seems the entire chart gets recalculated with the addition of each month's data.

Tifosi24

04-22-14, 04:03 PM

How do the forecasts trend between March and April? I can't tell if FSU is anomalous without additional data points, and you appear to be more in tune with this stuff than others.

For those wondering, the FSU forecast at the end of the graph (November, December, January [NDJ]) has only been that high in actual terms three times since 1950 (I have data at work I just checked). The El Ninos of 1997-1998, 1982-1983, and 1972-1973 all had positive numbers (El Nino) at that level.

Aaaaaaaand a month later an the answer is... maybe, maybe not.

http://iri.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/figure1.gif

If you would like you can pick a model to fit any preconceived notions you may have...

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/figure6.gif

This is where amplified uncertainty comes from...

That said I really hope the folks at FSU are wrong.

Also if you look at the March vs the April graphs it seems the entire chart gets recalculated with the addition of each month's data.

cameraman

04-22-14, 05:40 PM

Historically the FSU model isn't so great at 8.5 months out.

http://eoas.fsu.edu/sites/default/files/u12/elnino/elnino3Apr2014.gif

So I reserve the right to hope that they are wrong.

Tifosi24

04-23-14, 09:37 AM

Based on a cursory review of the 8.5 month forecast, I would put little, or no, faith in the FSU forecast. They have completely missed several oscillations over the past 10 years. The consensus forecasts would suggest a very minor El Nino. Bummer for me, I was hoping for a near guarantee of a non-brutal winter after this past heating season. Now, at least at this point, all bets are off.

cameraman

04-28-14, 05:55 PM

Good Lord. Are we going to have to see "CLIMATE CHANGE!!!!" after every single weather event from here on out? I'm all about climate change, CO2, ocean acidification, ad infinitum but J.H.C. on a pogo stick you can't blame every single thunderhead on climate change.

datachicane

04-28-14, 07:28 PM

Why not? Simplistic answers to complex problems are practically an American birthright.

WickerBill

04-28-14, 07:51 PM

04-29-14, 01:54 PM

This is where amplified uncertainty comes from...

That said I really hope the folks at FSU are wrong.

Curious, I know that El Ninyo brings certain weather patterns, many of which are bad, but why the foreshadowing of doom?

El Ninos happen. We've had some really strong ones lately. Is that the concern?

Genuinely curious, and I'd rather ask cameraman (and the OC family) than open up facebook. :p

cameraman

04-29-14, 03:34 PM

It really depends on where you live. Southern Utah often does quite well in terms of rainfall so they would welcome a strong el Nino. In northern Utah it is much more of a mixed bag. It can cause a dry spell which is the absolute last thing that we need around here. If you head to the southeast US you can end up with very wet weather, too wet if you happen to farm soybeans in Mississippi. Generally is can act as an amplifier, a lot wetter or a lot drier or few storms, all depending on where you happen to be. I'm just not a fan of a really strong anything as it usually causes some kind of disruption for somebody. Mild/moderate el nino/la nina are well, normal and that's all fine & good but really strong ones, not so much. The idea of the STRONGEST EVAR!!!, well that's what I'm hoping is wrong.

cameraman

05-26-14, 01:09 PM

Ya know that mid 1970's piece in Newsweek about the onset of global cooling that is forever being cited by the non-fans of global warming? He is a rather long piece written by that same writer about the whole thing. It's a long read but a good one.

"The central fact is that, after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the Earth seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century." – Newsweek: April 28, 1975 (http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf)

That's an excerpt from a story I wrote about climate science that appeared almost 40 years ago. Titled "The Cooling World," it was remarkably popular; in fact it might be the only decades-old magazine story about science ever carried onto the set of a late-night TV talk show. Now, as the author of that story, after decades of scientific advances, let me say this: while the hypotheses described in that original story seemed right at the time, climate scientists now know that they were seriously incomplete. Our climate is warming -- not cooling, as the original story suggested.

Nevertheless, certain websites and individuals that dispute, disparage and deny the science that shows that humans are causing the Earth to warm continue to quote my article. Their message: how can we believe climatologists who tell us that the Earth's atmosphere is warming when their colleagues asserted that it's actually cooling?

Well, yes, we should trust them, despite the views of detractors such as comedian Dennis Miller, who brought my story to The Tonight Show in 2006. Several atmospheric scientists did indeed believe in global cooling, as I reported in the April 28, 1975 issue of Newsweek. But that was then.
In the 39 years since, biotechnology has flowered from a promising academic topic to a major global industry, the first test-tube baby has been born and become a mother herself, cosmologists have learned that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate rather than slowing down, and particle physicists have detected the Higgs boson, an entity once regarded as only a theoretical concept. Seven presidents have served most of 11 terms. And Newsweek has become a shadow of its former self.

And on the climate front? The vast majority of climatologists now assure us that Earth's atmosphere is not cooling. Rather it's warming up. And the main responsibility for the phenomenon lies with human activity.

"There's no serious dispute any more about whether the globe is warming, whether humans are responsible, and whether we will see large and dangerous changes in the future – in the words of the National Academy of Sciences – which we didn't know in the 1970s," said Michael Mann, a climatologist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park. He added that nearly every U.S. scientific society has assessed the evidence and come to the same conclusion...

It is quite a long piece but well put together.

My 1975 'Cooling World' Story Doesn't Make Today's Climate Scientists Wrong (http://www.insidescience.org/content/my-1975-cooling-world-story-doesnt-make-todays-climate-scientists-wrong/1640)

nrc

05-27-14, 03:46 AM

"There's no serious dispute any more about whether the globe is warming, whether humans are responsible, and whether we will see large and dangerous changes in the future – in the words of the National Academy of Sciences – which we didn't know in the 1970s," said Michael Mann, a climatologist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park. He added that nearly every U.S. scientific society has assessed the evidence and come to the same conclusion...

The press knows that they can always count on a Mann for a suitably certain quote. Lately Mann has taken on the role of Climatollah - declaring fatwas against any scientists who dares to dance in public with deniers or express any doubt about the one true climate religion.

datachicane

05-29-14, 05:05 PM

The press knows that they can always count on a Mann for a suitably certain quote. Lately Mann has taken on the role of Climatollah - declaring fatwas against any scientists who dares to dance in public with deniers or express any doubt about the one true climate religion.

</satireisdead>

cameraman

07-13-14, 01:19 AM

Ya know that polar vortex that froze the midwest last winter? Well it is back to make your summer pleasant. Too bad it will make the Northwest miserable at the same time…

http://www.motherjones.com/files/PV1b.jpg

cameraman

09-09-14, 03:23 PM

Tifosi24

09-09-14, 09:33 PM

I have been tracking the El Nino forecast at work. I was hoping for an El Nino after last winter and the current state of natural gas storage, but it doesn't look like we will be getting it. It seems unlikely that we will have a repeat of last winter, but, if we do, I would expect natural gas prices to go up quite a bit.

indyfan31

09-10-14, 11:26 AM

Aaaaaand poof the el nino "threat" has up and gone away...

On the bright side, the La Nina threat seems to be following suit. Still doesn't look good for the South West.

Gnam

09-27-14, 01:57 AM

I know they say weather isn't climate, but Monday was the first day of Fall and today 1" of hail fell on my backyard. 5 hours later it's still there. :saywhat:

As they say on the internet, "That escalated quickly."

gjc2

09-27-14, 06:30 AM

Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get.

Mark Twain

cameraman

11-06-14, 12:16 PM

Aaaaaand poof the el nino "threat" has up and gone away...

http://iri.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/figure1.gif

your greens and reds have switched position from the April forecast...

http://iri.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/figure1.gif

And now we have flatlined directly on "I dunno"...

http://iri.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/figure1.gif

The Pacific is playing her cards close.

That really is one of the most statistically rigorous "we have no idea" results that I have ever seen.

dando

11-06-14, 01:27 PM

cameraman

11-06-14, 01:33 PM

Last week our forecast for the next two weeks by a local Wx guy legend was for Indian Summer for the first two weeks of November. Current forecast for next Wed...a high of 38. :saywhat: Ummm, yeah. :shakehead:

How do you know he wasn't talking about Inuits?

TravelGal

11-06-14, 02:26 PM

dando

11-12-14, 03:24 PM

China trying to assist with US weather forecasts...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/chinese-hack-us-weather-systems-satellite-network/2014/11/12/bef1206a-68e9-11e4-b053-65cea7903f2e_story.html

:saywhat:

Gnam

11-18-14, 07:57 PM

Buffalo rhymes with snow.
70"? No, thank you.

http://s28.postimg.org/50vvlqy25/B2wf_Kn_WIAAEd_Apl.jpg

http://s2.postimg.org/aaygd6gg9/B2v_00_PCQAAXC3_D.jpg

http://s30.postimg.org/b3fgbm7o1/B2vhgc_LCIAEUMGI.png

TKGAngel

11-18-14, 09:40 PM

The band in question was supposed to move throughout the metro Buffalo area during the day, but it instead camped out in one area. The not-so-funny part of all this? We're supposed to be in the 50s for the weekend.

My house? Currently has just a dusting of snow.

Gnam

11-19-14, 12:23 AM

http://s9.postimg.org/m9c5imvgf/B2we_Ivp_Ig_AELva3.jpg

http://s4.postimg.org/vpt0kb2hp/B2x_T_Lu_IIAER5_To.jpg

http://s28.postimg.org/yzssf0g31/1389129_783973484995544_1870842966_a.jpg

TKGAngel

11-19-14, 07:29 AM

OMG. I used to work with the mom of the little boy in the first photo. Worlds colliding!

Five deaths attributable to the storm so far (three shoveling, two cars), people have been trapped on the I-90 for over 30+ hours in some cases and the hardest hit areas could get another 12"-24" by late Thursday night. :saywhat:

Gnam

11-19-14, 03:33 PM

twitter comment: Remember, Winter starts in 5 weeks!

http://s16.postimg.org/6kgb266yt/B2z2_Mv_BCIAA_w_RU.jpg

Transit Road
http://s3.postimg.org/spjraigsj/B2wx_IGx_Cc_AA75_Ol.jpg

Gnam

11-20-14, 05:39 PM

Is this considered good driving etiquette in snow states? :p

http://s24.postimg.org/i8gltw3cl/B26ju9_EIg_AAko_O.jpg

dando

11-20-14, 06:48 PM

Wisconsin has their cheese heads...Buffalo has this. :gomer: :saywhat:

cameraman

01-10-15, 01:18 AM

Wow the global weather pattern is just wonky right now.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B66P6q8IAAAhuvS.jpg

It is a unique scale, it shows the difference from long term average for the date so white areas are right at long term average for the day. Those are some huge swings.

TravelGal

01-10-15, 11:05 AM

Great graphic. Agents have noticed for the last 3-4 years that it is getting harder and harder to answer the question "When is the best time to go" due to the dramatic variants from norm.

NismoZ

01-10-15, 03:07 PM

"Best time to go"?...must not have been this morning...dog would NOT go out! -24 chill...waited for sunup then out and back in under a minute! Weather change...easier to follow!:)

TravelGal

01-10-15, 10:37 PM

"Best time to go"?...must not have been this morning...dog would NOT go out! -24 chill...waited for sunup then out and back in under a minute! Weather change...easier to follow!:)

:laugh: I can't help thinking he was a whiz today. Nope, can't help thinking it.

dando

02-08-15, 09:28 PM

What say thee, Al Gore? Busy inventing Internet 2.0? :saywhat:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html

KLang

02-08-15, 09:55 PM

What say the, Al Gore? Busy inventing Internet 2.0? :saywhat:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html

Read that a few hours ago. Combine this with the dubious claim from NASA recently about the 'warmest year on record' and I don't think we can believe anyone on this issue. :(

Gnam

02-09-15, 01:49 PM

prophetic. :laugh:

http://s13.postimg.org/4v4vo0w7r/62m_Hs.png

http://s8.postimg.org/pmc64ffkl/image_american_apparel_unisex_baseball_tee_white.j pg

dando

02-09-15, 05:39 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMWGXt979yg

cameraman

02-09-15, 06:32 PM

Ugh. Christopher Booker is a conspiracy theorist who has been ranting on for a decade or more.

NOAA adjusts the historical data to address calibration issues with various weather stations. There is nothing hidden about it. You can see all the data either adjusted or unadjusted with the click of a mouse. What he has done is cherry picked through all that data and found the weather stations with the largest adjustments in his favor and created his theory.

One of the more irked researchers made this YouTube to explain what Booker is talking about & how NOAA actually works.

qRFz8merXEA

The real take home is all of the unadjusted data is still there and freely available. Anyone can look at the original data or the adjusted data and do their work using either data set. There is no conspiracy, the adjustments are freely open for all the world to see.

There is also this blog from one of the scientists at UC Berkeley who uses the data in its adjusted form.

http://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/guest-post-skeptics-demand-adjustments/

KLang

02-09-15, 08:23 PM

That's pretty sweet, if the data doesn't prove your theory just adjust it.

datachicane

02-10-15, 06:16 PM

It's a conspiraaaaaacy!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f3/Tin_foil_hat_2.jpg

:laugh:

cameraman

02-12-15, 08:16 PM

02-13-15, 02:03 AM

And some great mind from Alabama parroted the "falsified" NOAA story on the radio which caused FactCheck.org to enter the fray.

Their conclusion is that nothing has been falsified.
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/nothing-false-about-temperature-data/

And here

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/02/noise-on-the-telegraph/

and here...

http://variable-variability.blogspot.de/2015/02/evil-nazi-communist-world-government.html

Thanks for the links.

Curious why factcheck.org would say this:

"As the years go by, all those stations undergo various types of changes: This can include shifts in how monitoring is done, improvements in technology, or even just the addition or subtraction of nearby buildings.

For example, a new building constructed next to a monitoring station could cast a shadow over a station, or change wind patterns, in such ways that could affect the readings."

I always assumed that a weather station would have the thermometer in the shade always, so it can measure the air temp. And what relevance does wind have?

Otherwise, good source. MUCH better than the guest blogger at the other source. :laugh:
http://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/guest-post-skeptics-demand-adjustments/ (Did he really compare temp station adjustments to cost of living increases? I thought he was going to eventually get around to saying that they were both increases based on Federal laws.);)

I truly appreciate the scientific resources that you provide, C-man. Thanks. :thumbup:

cameraman

02-13-15, 03:44 AM

Otherwise, good source. MUCH better than the guest blogger at the other source. :laugh:
http://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/guest-post-skeptics-demand-adjustments/ (Did he really compare temp station adjustments to cost of living increases? I thought he was going to eventually get around to saying that they were both increases based on Federal laws.);)

It wouldn't have been the example that I would have chosen. That's part of the problem with blogs, there is no editor to go "erm, really?"
That said, the rest of the post did a good job of explaining what is going on.

cameraman

09-09-16, 12:06 PM

So a low angle glacier fell off of a mountain this summer in one of the largest ice avalanches ever seen. It would be just a cool science story except for the 9 guys out herding sheep & yaks that were killed.

350 sheep and 110 yak to be exact.

“This event really has no precedent, and no apparent trigger,” Joseph Shea, a scientist at the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, said in an email which has been published as a blog post. “But low-angle glaciers generally don’t just slide off mountains, so the field investigations and local data will be really important for determining the cause of this disaster.”

The link has one of those before & after slider photos of the avalanche

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/scientists-racing-to-unravel-ice-avalanche-mystery-20678

and this one neatly lists the wtf nature of this event

https://josephmichaelshea.wordpress.com/2016/09/08/glacier-collapse-tibetan-plateau/

Gnam

09-09-16, 01:09 PM

Bad things happen when big things move fast. That ice flow was a menace to society.
At least now that the entire glacier is gone it's safe to travel in the area. ;)

Icelandic re-enactment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P99Q6Blqvm4

SteveH

09-09-16, 08:39 PM

Iceland: rapid glacier melting drastically alters landscape
(http://www.euronews.com/2016/09/09/iceland-rapid-glacier-melting-drastically-alters-landscape)

In about 6 hours I should be stepping off the plane there.

09-10-16, 12:53 AM

EDwardo

09-11-16, 01:17 PM

Oklahoma republican Senator James Inhofe isn't a climate scientist but he pretends to be one in the Senate. On February 26, 2015, Inhofe held up a snowball on the Senate floor, proving that man made climate change is a hoax. I guess that pretty well settles it. No science necessary, just bloviating from a Senator backed by the oil and gas industry.

Thousands of scientists and hundreds of scientific organizations worldwide, armed with mountains of alleged evidence
and part of a vast international conspiracy, continue to perpetuate the hoax of human caused global climate change.
Luckily a few dozen truth seekers, funded by benevolent oil and gas corporations only interested in the public good,
valiantly continue to fight back against this vast global conspiracy.
These corporations and wealthy conservatives, unlike the science backed conspiratorialists, have absolutely no positive
financial gain resulting from denial.They would be the first to admit catastrophic environmental damage due to the use
of carbon based fuel.These truth seekers have no hidden agenda. Fossil fuels are actually good for the environment.
There is non scientific evidence that the growing use of wind power is actually bad for the climate because it is using
up all of the wind. The use of solar energy is actually depleting the sun
If it wasn't for the Flat Earth Society we wouldn't even be aware that the earth is flat despite all of the so called
evidence proving that the earth is an oblate spheroid.

Belief in science is highly over rated.

(warning: this post contains causticity)

gjc2

09-11-16, 01:49 PM

Ice ages have come and gone without any human intervention.

Has there ever been a time in Earth’s history when the climate didn’t change?

Global warming, climate change, or whatever it will be called next is a perfect of a cause for people who love making rules for others to live by.

EDwardo

09-11-16, 02:30 PM

Not normal.

gjc2

09-11-16, 02:45 PM

Not normal.

Per Wikipedia;

(The Sperry Glacier) . . . . “is a product of the recent Little Ice Age, the period of cooler average temperatures starting in about the 13th century and concluding in the mid-19th century.”

As I said, ice ages have come and gone without human intervention.

EDwardo

09-11-16, 03:13 PM

You left out this sentence from Wiki:
"The glacier lost almost 35 percent of its surface area between 1966 and 2005".

"Along with glacial melting, permafrost around the globe is turning to mush, causing ground to simply collapse.
While global warming gets most of the blame for glacier recession, soot pollution from automobiles and industrial chimneys might also play a role. Clean, shiny ice reflects sunlight and remains cool. But dirty, soot-covered ice absorbs more warmth from the sun, causing a glacier to melt more quickly."
http://www.livescience.com/674-glaciers-disappear-photos.html

No one is disputing that there are natural cycles to the climate. What is at issue are all of the measurable effects civilization has had in the acceleration of a warming climate.

09-11-16, 08:14 PM

Not normal.

More National Park vandalism?

:shakehead:

You left out this sentence from Wiki:
"The glacier lost almost 35 percent of its surface area between 1966 and 2005".

Almost the same time-frame with the establishment of the EPA and the Clean Air Act.

Coincidence??

:gomer:

(seriously)
So what do we do about it?
I heard on NPR of all places that it's far too late to do anything.
We just need to adapt.

cameraman

09-12-16, 12:22 AM

Humans have done a pretty stunning job of jacking up the atmospheric CO2 concentration over the last hundred years. There's no going back, the damage is done, but any reduction in greenhouse gasses from geologically sequestered sources (coal, oil, natural gas, peat) will help reduce the CO2 increase. The CO2 is changing the climate far more rapidly than it would ever do on its own.

This is the CO2 graph for the last couple of years

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2_trend_mlo.png

It is going up like clockwork and that CO2 comes from humans burning geologically sequestered carbon. (indisputable scientific fact)
All that carbon has been out of our atmosphere and buried underground for hundreds of millions of years. We are extremely rapidly moving it out of the ground and pumping it into the atmosphere and into the oceans. We have taken the level from the mid 250s to over 400 in a hundred years. That much CO2 has a demonstrable effect, the climate of the planet will change, more rapidly and more erratically than our civilization (such as it is) is prepared to deal with.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_10000_years.gif

That is the effect of humans burning carbon on the atmosphere. There's no going back but anything that slows that spike in CO2 will help.

That's an old graph, today's levels are off the top of the frame.

Gnam

09-12-16, 04:04 AM

I just finished a book about an American expedition to the North Pole in 1881. It's called In the Kingdom of Ice.

The major theme of the book is "**** all this ice."

gjc2

09-12-16, 06:35 AM

Is this guy wrong?

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

gjc2

09-12-16, 06:40 AM

Or this guy?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwqIy8Ikv-c

gjc2

09-12-16, 06:42 AM

Here's the first guy again.

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

EDwardo

09-12-16, 10:16 AM

Dennis Mark Prager is an American, conservative, nationally syndicated radio talk show host, columnist, author, and public speaker.
He is not a scientist. He is a right wing talking head.
From his website:
"Students no longer learn that America is a land of opportunity, a defender of freedom around the world, and a source of pride. Instead, they are taught that America is a land of inequality, racism, imperialism, and, ultimately, shame that can only be redeemed through the adoption of leftist ideals. As Ronald Reagan said, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” Never before in America has Reagan’s warning felt so real."...."We believe in economic and religious freedom, a strong military that protects our allies and the religious values that inform Western civilization, also known as Judeo-Christian values."
There is a petition on his website that is titled "A PragerU Presenter is Being Persecuted for Disagreeing with the Left on Climate Change."
He is aligning himself with Exxon/Mobil in this petition. I wouldn't be surprised if Exxon/Mobil helps fund PragerU. They make no mention of how they are funded except by donations. I'm sure Exxon/Mobil makes sizable "donations" to fund this denier.

This talking head has a conservative agenda not the credentials to be pontificating about how benign CO2 is.

I give him no credence whatsoever.

gjc2

09-12-16, 10:40 AM

Dennis Mark Prager is an American, conservative, . . . . . . . I give him no credence whatsoever.

You have proven my point perfectly.

Climate change has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics and the world view of some.
You believe the scientific findings based on the political view of the finder.

I’m not going to participate in the thread any further.

Insomniac

09-12-16, 11:00 AM

I just hope when (or if if you prefer) things get bad enough that real action is taken that Earth is more resilient than currently believed.

cameraman

09-12-16, 11:32 AM

and back to the data...

Crunching the numbers the science folks have come up with their prediction for the 2016 warming based on the first 2/3s of the year. They're quite literally 99% confident of the numbers, wish I could do that with NFL picks...

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CsKZVuWW8AA9U2D.jpg:large

Now the Paris Accords of 2015 set a goal of keeping the warming below 2.0°C over pre-industrial times. Welp if we take a look at the y-axis on the graph it's a pretty safe bet that we're going to blow right on thru that 2.0° goal sooner rather than later. We could really use some of those nice downward drops that have normally happened every few years.

EDwardo

09-12-16, 11:53 AM

You have proven my point perfectly.

Climate change has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics and the world view of some.
You believe the scientific findings based on the political view of the finder.

I’m not going to participate in the thread any further.

Too bad your position stops at politics. You ignored all the reasons I gave as to why I reject the commentary by Mr. Prager.
He has no credentials as a scientist.
He has a political agenda himself.
He has aligned himself with Exxon/Mobil, a significant contributor to organized climate change denial.
His video contains all of the talking points promulgated by deniers on the subject of CO2 as being beneficial and completely benign to the atmosphere.
HIS politics drives his position as a climate denier.

I choose to believe the overwhelming majority of scientists and scientific organizations that have scientifically linked the connection between the increase of CO2 produced by human activity, and climate change. My political views are not part of this belief. My problem with deniers is that very little actual science is behind their denial.
I do have issues with the politics of the deniers because their position of global warming being a hoax is driven by business profits. The oil and gas industry stands to lose enormous profits if the status quo changes. Exxon/Mobil and the Koch brothers are the source of major funding of the climate change denial industry. The Koch brothers have made billions of dollars from their oil and gas companies.

This is why I believe that human activity is a major cause of climate change. It is not based on my politics.

EDwardo

09-12-16, 12:19 PM

"The largest, most-consistent money fueling the climate denial movement are from a number of well-funded conservative
foundations built with so-called "dark money," or concealed donations, according to an analysis released Friday
afternoon...In all, 140 foundations funneled $558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations from 2003 to
2010. The largest and most consistent funders were a number of conservative foundations promoting "ultra-free-market
ideas" in many realms, among them the Searle Freedom Trust, the John Williams Pope Foundation, the Howard Charitable
Foundation and the Sarah Scaife Foundation. (all right wing foundations)
...Powerful funders are supporting the campaign to deny scientific findings about global warming and raise doubts
about the "roots and remedies" of a threat on which the science is clear."

Scientific American

It is clear that profits by the oil and gas industry drives the climate change denial movement.

One claim by deniers is that volcanic activity is the source of most of the extra CO2 in the atmosphere. Unfortunately for them there is no scientific basis for this claim. The fact is that the opposite is true and there is hard science to back this up.
The US Geological Service has a website dedicated to this subject. The USGS measures the CO2 output at several volcanoes. They use these measurements to extrapolate the total average amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes annually. The total is approximately 200 million tonnes of CO2. The amount of CO2 emitted by human activity (in 2003) was 26.8 billion tonnes. "Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value."

http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html