Give Credit Where Credit is Due
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.
Now you just have to account for the increase in temperature for the rest of the globe
ReplyDelete.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.
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"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.
DeleteThe 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."
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.
DeleteIt wasn't hot in New England. My garden barely produced anything. As I said if anything the warming is regional.
DeleteAugust 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.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAs 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.
DeleteJoe,
DeleteIt 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.
dk:
Deleteshown by Steven Goddard, NASA's claim that August was the hottest on record contradicts other more reliable data
Have a link?
If it's regional then it ain't global...
DeleteJoe,
DeleteIf 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.
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.
DeleteJoe:
DeleteWho 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
In New England we didn't have any heat waves this year. Not one.BTW women have been detecting cancer with their hands
DeleteJoe,
DeleteIn 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.
LoL! Climate is based on the weather. Didn't you know that? You cannot have a climate without weather. The two are inseparable.
DeleteAs for a cancerous polyp, just open your eyes and take a look around.
Joe:
DeleteLoL! 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.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell, good for them! Perhaps this will embolden others to at least publish both sides of the issue rather than publishing and pushing one side.
ReplyDeleteOmg! What will Al Gore do if the global warming charade ends?
ReplyDeleteno credit to the bad guys. They are only doing what they should. Thats why they get the public trust and money.
ReplyDeleteI'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.
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:
ReplyDeleteI 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.
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
DeleteThe finding doesn't concern global warming, but regional warming.
According to vel regional warming is global warming
DeleteJoe G: According to vel regional warming is global warming
DeleteSome regions may cool, others may warm. The average over all regions is global warming.
And yet the only thing that can recognize this warming is specialized sensitive equipment. People can't tell the difference.
DeleteBut anyway you should call it what it is- regional warming with other regions getting cooler.
Joe G: And yet the only thing that can recognize this warming is specialized sensitive equipment.
DeleteThey're called thermometers.
Regular thermometers cannot detect the alleged increase- well if they are in urban heat islands, then maybe.
DeleteJoe G: Regular thermometers cannot detect the alleged increase
DeleteActually, 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.
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.
DeleteJoe G: And those instruments say there has been a pause in warming.
DeleteOcean heat content continues to rise.
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/heat_content700m2000myr.png
Joe,
DeleteJoe 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?
Zachriel:
DeleteOcean heat content continues to rise.
The Sun heats the oceans.
velikovskys:
DeleteBut 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.
Joe G: The Sun heats the oceans.
DeleteSure, 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.
Joe,
DeleteThere 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.
Cleaner air has allowed more of the Sun's radiation to reach the surface:
DeleteENLIGHTENING 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.
Joe G: That would mean we would expect the oceans to get warmer
DeleteThe period of global dimming occurred as the Earth's surface was warming. Only recently has overall insolation increased.
Joe,
DeleteThe 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.
Joe:
DeleteWe 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.
Zachriel,
Delete"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?
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?
DeleteThere'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.
Zachriel,
Delete"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?
Nic: I suppose the fact temperatures have remained relatively steady for the last two decades
DeleteOcean 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?
Zachriel,
Delete"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.
Nic: The Arctic ice cap has grown by over 40% in the last two years.
Deletehttp://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/nh-seaice/201407.gif
Zachriel,
DeleteLike 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?
Nic: what constitutes sea ice?
DeleteFrozen 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?
Zachriel,
DeleteNic: "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.
Nic: As weather patterns are known to occur over centuries, no one can chart a 'trend' based on the data available.
DeleteThat's quite a different argument. Before you were arguing that 2012 to 2014 was a trend.
Zachriel,
Delete"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.
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.
ReplyDeleteIt 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..
lipesy,
DeleteGW 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;)
Climate models have been proven to be bogus. It is difficult to model the weather one week out.
DeleteJoe G: Climate models have been proven to be bogus. It is difficult to model the weather one week out.
DeleteClimate and weather are not the same phenomenon.
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.
ReplyDeleteThat's funny Eugen, I had cows in my post at first then I thought the same way as you and removed them.
ReplyDelete