Tuesday, September 23, 2014

Here’s That Story in the Los Angeles Times about Global Warming

Give Credit Where Credit is Due

Because when the Los Angeles Times runs a piece questioning the A in AGW (anthropogenic, or man-made, global warming), then you know something is wrong:

A new study makes the case that human activity played very little role in the warming of the northeast Pacific Ocean over the past century or so. … Naturally occurring changes in winds, not human-caused climate change, are responsible for most of the warming on land and in the sea along the West Coast of North America over the last century, a study has found. … This latest research shows that similar changes in atmospheric and ocean circulation can drive trends that last a century or longer, overshadowing the effects of human-generated increase in greenhouse gases, the study's authors said.

It is not news that AGW is has its share of scientific challenges. But give credit to the Los Angeles Times for running such a story in the politically-charged environment we are in. We need to let the science speak for itself.

58 comments:

  1. Now you just have to account for the increase in temperature for the rest of the globe

    .Funny that after so much skepticism about scientists and scientific papers,suddenly scientific papers are newest bestest friend

    So the moral of the story is the media covers up the failure of AGW until it doesn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Summer snow and perhaps the coolest summer in the northeast in many years. If anything the warming is regional, with other regions not getting that warmth.

      Delete
    2. "The planet just had its hottest summer on record, according to data released Thursday by NOAA's National Climatic Data Center. It's also well on its way to having its hottest year ever, beating 2010, said climate scientist Jake Crouch of the data center.

      The global temperature for summer was 1.28 degrees above the 20th-century average of 61.5 degrees.

      Records go back to 1880. Climatologists define summer in the Northern Hemisphere as the months of June, July and August.

      August temperatures set overall records as well, the climate center reported. The world's oceans were also very warm and had the largest departure from average of any month.

      It was the 38th consecutive August (and 354th consecutive month) that saw a global average temperature above historic averages. The last below-average August was in 1976."

      Delete
    3. Despite all the misleading hype, the more accurate satellite data shows that August was the coolest in 5 years and that here has been no global warming for 17 years. Further, antarctic ice is at record high levels and artic is is near the same level it was ten years ago, hurricanes are at a twenty year low, tornados are also down. Basically all the AGW, hysteria has proven false.

      Delete
    4. It wasn't hot in New England. My garden barely produced anything. As I said if anything the warming is regional.

      August sucked where I live. The only good thing about this summer was the lack of an air conditioner requirement.

      BTW there were more record cold days than hot days in the USA for this past summer. And don't forget that summer snow.

      So where was it warmer? If it is in the urban heat islands then that doesn't count.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. As well shown by Steven Goddard, NASA's claim that August was the hottest on record contradicts other more reliable data, including NASA's own records. The "hottest August" was derived by assigning very high heat values to places where there were no temperature measurements.

      Delete
    7. Joe,
      It wasn't hot in New England. My garden barely produced anything. As I said if anything the warming is regional.


      As was the cooler, just when you added all the regional weather together it was warmer.

      Delete
    8. dk:
      shown by Steven Goddard, NASA's claim that August was the hottest on record contradicts other more reliable data


      Have a link?

      Delete
    9. If it's regional then it ain't global...

      Delete
    10. Joe,
      If it is regional,then it ain't global...


      Global is the summation of regions, when you add all those regions the temperature is rising, the cooler regions are the outliers. Global. Sum of all parts.

      Delete
    11. Who says that the summation is the correct way to go? Summer snow, the first since 1888, and that is why most people think global warming is BS. Not only that a human couldn't tell the difference- it takes special and sensitive equipment to even register any warming.

      Delete
    12. Joe:
      Who says that the summation is the correct way to go?


      Logic, we are interdependent.


      Summer snow, the first since 1888, and that is why most people think global warming is BS.

      Until the next heat wave, that is why we keep records.

      Not only that a human couldn't tell the difference- it takes special and sensitive equipment to even register any warming

      It takes special equipment to detect cancer

      Delete
    13. In New England we didn't have any heat waves this year. Not one.BTW women have been detecting cancer with their hands

      Delete
    14. Joe,

      In New England we didn't have any heat waves this year. Not one


      Two years ago you did, but your are confusing weather with climate.

      BTW women have been detecting cancer with their hands

      Try that method on a cancerous polyp.

      Delete
    15. LoL! Climate is based on the weather. Didn't you know that? You cannot have a climate without weather. The two are inseparable.

      As for a cancerous polyp, just open your eyes and take a look around.

      Delete
    16. Joe:
      LoL! Climate is based on the weather. Didn't you know that? You cannot have a climate without weather. The two are inseparable.


      You cannot have a year without hours. They are inseparable. That does not mean that one hour is the same as one year.

      As for a cancerous polyp, just open your eyes and take a look around.

      Personally I prefer special and sensitive fiber optic cameras but good luck if that is your preference.

      Delete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, good for them! Perhaps this will embolden others to at least publish both sides of the issue rather than publishing and pushing one side.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Omg! What will Al Gore do if the global warming charade ends?

    ReplyDelete
  5. no credit to the bad guys. They are only doing what they should. Thats why they get the public trust and money.
    I'm confident global warming is a myth .
    The planet is too great for man to affect it over time or in a short time.
    nothing has changed.
    They just want a cleaner greener planet and possibly anticipate more cars with rising China etc.
    Its not deception but a willing spirit to see problems in trivial data.
    Its a humbug.
    Its like evolution. no evidence but a lot of insistence there is evidence.
    If President Obama thinks theres global warming then its more evidence there isn't.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Because when the Los Angeles Times runs a piece questioning the A in AGW (anthropogenic, or man-made, global warming), then you know something is wrong:

    I think the amazing part is they finally figured out what has been known for years. Since the liberal media behaves like a herd of mindless animals, I think you're correct in giving them a little credit when one article is posted that breaks from the herd.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marcus: Because when the Los Angeles Times runs a piece questioning the A in AGW (anthropogenic, or man-made, global warming), then you know something is wrong

      The finding doesn't concern global warming, but regional warming.

      Delete
    2. According to vel regional warming is global warming

      Delete
    3. Joe G: According to vel regional warming is global warming

      Some regions may cool, others may warm. The average over all regions is global warming.

      Delete
    4. And yet the only thing that can recognize this warming is specialized sensitive equipment. People can't tell the difference.

      But anyway you should call it what it is- regional warming with other regions getting cooler.

      Delete
    5. Joe G: And yet the only thing that can recognize this warming is specialized sensitive equipment.

      They're called thermometers.

      Delete
    6. Regular thermometers cannot detect the alleged increase- well if they are in urban heat islands, then maybe.

      Delete
    7. Joe G: Regular thermometers cannot detect the alleged increase

      Actually, they can. Generally, the margin of error is proportional to the inverse of the square-root of the number of measurements. That's important because it allows scientists to derive trends from historical data.

      In any case, more accurate instrumentation is used nowadays, and they are placed not only on land, but on the sea, underwater, the upper atmosphere, even radiation measured from space.

      Delete
    8. And those instruments say there has been a pause in warming. One year is hot the next not so much. Not what we would expect if the alarmists were correct.

      Delete
    9. Joe G: And those instruments say there has been a pause in warming.

      Ocean heat content continues to rise.
      http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/heat_content700m2000myr.png


      Delete
    10. Joe,

      Joe GSeptember 25, 2014 at 6:42 AM
      And those instruments say there has been a pause in warming. One year is hot the next not so much.


      But not a return to the old normal. How do you square your theory that reduction of particulate in the atmosphere is causing the temperture to rise with the pause?

      Delete
    11. Zachriel:
      Ocean heat content continues to rise.

      The Sun heats the oceans.

      Delete
    12. velikovskys:
      But not a return to the old normal.

      There isn't any such thing as "the old normal". Not only that the earth has been warmer in the past.

      The whole problem is no one knows what the average temperature of the Earth should be. What we do know is that without greenhouse gases we wouldn't be here as it would be too hostile to complex life.

      Delete
    13. Joe G: The Sun heats the oceans.

      Sure, but solar irradiance has been relatively stable for decades, so the overall heat content should be close to equilibrium. Instead, the Earth's surface has been warming.

      Joe G: Not only that the earth has been warmer in the past.

      Gosh! What will those climate scientists figure out next?!

      Joe G: The whole problem is no one knows what the average temperature of the Earth should be.

      Well, for modern humans, with high population densities especially on coasts, and reliant on agriculture, stability is important.

      Delete
    14. Joe,
      There isn't any such thing as "the old normal".


      The pause has not caused average temperature to decrease back to previous recorded levels, it has only slowed the increase

      Not only that the earth has been warmer in the past.

      You are missing the point, climate change doesn't destroy the earth, it affects the life on the planet.

      Delete
    15. Cleaner air has allowed more of the Sun's radiation to reach the surface:

      ENLIGHTENING GLOBAL DIMMING AND BRIGHTENING

      That would mean we would expect the oceans to get warmer- that is what happens when the sunlight reaches them. Duh.

      The climate changes and there isn't anything we can do about it. People can move.

      We do NOT want the temps to go back to those of the little ice age. Warm is good. People have prospered during warm periods. Warmer would change our lives for the better and CO2 helps the plants.

      We cannot control the climate- short of a nuclear winter. We are only along for the ride.

      Delete
    16. Joe G: That would mean we would expect the oceans to get warmer

      The period of global dimming occurred as the Earth's surface was warming. Only recently has overall insolation increased.

      Delete
    17. Joe,
      The climate changes and there isn't anything we can do about it. People can move.


      If human activities are the cause we can. Sure, no potential problem relocating Florida.

      Delete
    18. Joe:
      We do NOT want the temps to go back to those of the little ice age.


      If you don't like it ,you can always move. Personally it would cut down on my cooling bill.

      Delete
    19. Zachriel,

      "The finding doesn't concern global warming, but regional warming."

      How many regions are there, (you can name them if you wish), and how many of them must show warming for it to be considered global? If it's based on average rises in temperature do the regions being averaged have to be in close proximity to each other, or do you just go for the average overall?

      Delete
    20. Nic: How many regions are there, (you can name them if you wish), and how many of them must show warming for it to be considered global?

      There's many ways to divide up the globe. Global warming refers either to the average surface temperature across the globe, or the total heat content of the climate system consisting of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, and cryosphere.

      Delete
    21. Zachriel,

      "There's many ways to divide up the globe. Global warming refers either to the average surface temperature across the globe, or the total heat content of the climate system consisting of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, and cryosphere."

      So there are many ways to fudge the data. I suppose the fact temperatures have remained relatively steady for the last two decades and the fact the polar ice caps are larger than they have been in decades means nothing to your belief the world is getting warmer?

      Delete
    22. Nic: I suppose the fact temperatures have remained relatively steady for the last two decades

      Ocean heat content continues to rise.
      http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/heat_content700m2000myr.png

      Nic: and the fact the polar ice caps are larger than they have been in decades

      Both ice caps have lost ice. You are probably referring to sea ice. While Arctic sea ice has reduced substantially, which is very important to global climate, Antarctic winter sea ice has increased, but melts nearly completely every summer. However, total Antarctic ice mass has decreased.
      http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_15/fig2.gif

      Nic: means nothing to your belief the world is getting warmer?

      Sure it means something. Does the actual data mean something to you?

      Delete
    23. Zachriel,


      "Arctic sea ice has reduced substantially,..."

      The Arctic ice cap has grown by over 40% in the last two years.

      "Sure it means something. Does the actual data mean something to you?"

      Yeah, it does, and it's the actual; data which convinced me global warming is a myth. However, my past experiences with you made me aware facts mean absolutely to you. Rhetoric and the party line is all that matters. As such I'm not even going to bother getting into an argument with you over the topic of global warming. This myth will go the same way as all earlier doomsday myths such as Acid Rain, New Ice Age, The Club of Rome, etc., etc.

      Delete
    24. Nic: The Arctic ice cap has grown by over 40% in the last two years.

      http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/nh-seaice/201407.gif


      Delete
    25. Zachriel,

      Like I said, Zachriel, the facts do not matter to you.

      http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/latest-data-shows-arctic-ice-volume-has-increased.html

      Tell me, Zachriel, what constitutes sea ice?

      Delete
    26. Nic: what constitutes sea ice?

      Frozen sea water floating on the surface.

      Now, let's look again at the data.

      http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/nh-seaice/201407.gif

      Yes, 2014 Arctic ice extent is greater than 2012. That's clear on the graph. It's clear that this doesn't change the overall trend. Looking at the NOAA graph, do you disagree?

      Delete
    27. Zachriel,

      Nic: "what constitutes sea ice?"

      Zachriel: "Frozen sea water floating on the surface."

      So, you would agree that a vast amount of the ice making up the Arctic ice cap is sea ice, and that the Arctic ice cap is growing?

      "Yes, 2014 Arctic ice extent is greater than 2012. That's clear on the graph. It's clear that this doesn't change the overall trend."

      As weather patterns are known to occur over centuries, no one can chart a 'trend' based on the data available. Accurate data regarding weather does not extend back into history far enough to provide the information necessary. Polar ice caps have always grown and shrunk. What is happening now is not at all unusual.

      Delete
    28. Nic: As weather patterns are known to occur over centuries, no one can chart a 'trend' based on the data available.

      That's quite a different argument. Before you were arguing that 2012 to 2014 was a trend.

      Delete
    29. Zachriel,

      "Before you were arguing that 2012 to 2014 was a trend."

      I never stated it was a trend, nor did I imply that it was a trend. I simply presented it as a fact.

      Delete
  7. AGW cannot be about data at this point. The simple fact is that too many people's reputations are on the line now. There is no going back.

    It will now turn into an absurd game of "well, you can't prove AGW *isn't* happening!"... what a joke. And these people think they represent science..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. lipesy,
      GW cannot be about data at this point.


      I guess they aren't as perceptive as you are, since scientists continue to collect data and test it against climate models.

      The simple fact is that too many people's reputations are on the line now.

      I guess the skeptics don't have to worry about their reputations as long as the checks clear;)


      Delete
    2. Climate models have been proven to be bogus. It is difficult to model the weather one week out.

      Delete
    3. Joe G: Climate models have been proven to be bogus. It is difficult to model the weather one week out.

      Climate and weather are not the same phenomenon.

      Delete
  8. "liberal media behaves like a herd of mindless animals, ".

    Very good, Marcus! Ha ha I pictured a herd of slobbering cows. Wait a minute, cows are useful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought the liberal press knew the truth but forced you to watch Fox to find it out. Keeping all these conspiracies straight is such a bother.

      Delete
    2. That's funny Eugen, I had cows in my post at first then I thought the same way as you and removed them.

      Delete