One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Global Warming Petition Project
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Feb 26, 2017 18:35:56   #
Carol Kelly
 
permafrost wrote:
Nice short article from my news file..

At the end it has a mention of el nino, you may like to read that part..



http://www.salon.com/2017/01/18/2016-officially-declared-hottest-year-on-record_partner/?source=newsletter



It’s official: 2016 was the hottest year on record
2016 is a “data point at the end of many data points that indicates” long-term warming
ANDREA THOMPSON, CLIMATE CENTRAL SKIP TO COMMENTS
TOPICS: CLIMATE CENTRAL, CLIMATE SCIENCE, GLOBAL WARMING

It's official: 2016 was the hottest year on record
This article originally appeared on Climate Central
2016 was the hottest year in 137 years of record keeping and the third year in a row to take the number one slot, a mark of how much the world has warmed over the last century because of human activities, U.S. government scientists announced Wednesday.

2016 is a “data point at the end of many data points that indicates” long-term warming, Deke Arndt, chief of the monitoring branch of the National Centers for Environmental Information, said.

While the record was expected, the joint announcement by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration came in the midst of Senate confirmation hearings for President-elect Trump’s cabinet nominees, several of whom have expressed doubts about established climate science, as has Trump himself.

Many climate scientists, policy experts and environmentalists are concerned about the potential for the incoming administration to limit funding for climate science and roll back both national and international progress toward limiting the greenhouse gases that are warming the planet.

According to NOAA data, the global average temperature for 2016 was 1.69°F (0.94°C) above the 20th century average and 0.07°F (0.04°C) above the previous record set last year.

In NASA’s records, 2016 was 1.8°F (0.99°C) above the 1951-1980 average.

Each agency has slightly different methods of processing the data and different baseline periods they use for comparison, as do other groups around the world that monitor global temperatures, leading to slightly different year-to-year numbers.

But despite these differences, all of these records “are capturing the same long-term signal. It’s a pretty unmistakable signal,” Arndt said. Or as he likes to put it: “They’re singing the same song, even if they’re hitting different notes along the way.”

Several spots around the globe had record heat for 2016, including Alaska and a swath of the eastern U.S. The contiguous U.S. had its second hottest year on record, according to NOAA, but with the remarkable warmth experienced by Alaska factored in, 2016 would be the hottest for the country as a whole.

The first eight months of the year were all record hot globally; in NOAA’s data, they were part of an unprecedented streak of 16 record hot months in a row.

Of the 17 hottest years on record, 16 have occurred in the 21st century (the exception being the strong El Niño year of 1998).

While El Niño played a role in bumping up global temperatures during 2015 and 2016, the bulk of the warmth was due to the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases emitted by humans over the past century, particularly carbon dioxide.

In 2016, CO2 concentrations also permanently passed the 400 parts per million mark for the first time in human history; during preindustrial times, that concentration was 280 ppm.

As example of how greenhouse gases have affected global temperatures, 2016 was almost 0.5°F (0.9°C) warmer than 1998, both years that experienced comparably strong El Niños. Even 2014, before the most recent El Niño emerged, was warmer than 1998.

Nearly 120 nations, including the U.S., have ratified the 2015 Paris climate agreement and committed to keeping the worst impacts of warming from materializing by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The agreement cites a goal of keeping global temperature rise “well below” 2°C (3.6°F) above preindustrial levels by the end of this century, with a limit of 1.5°C as a more aggressive goal.

To show how close the world already is to surpassing those limits, Climate Central has been reanalyzing the global temperature data by averaging the NASA and NOAA numbers and comparing them to a baseline closer to preindustrial times. That analysis shows that 2016 was 1.2°C (2.16°F) above the average from 1881-1910.

We have clearly passed 1 degree above preindustrial temperatures,” and likely won’t go below it without a major volcanic eruption (which tends to cool global temperatures), Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said.

When we might actually reach 1.5°C isn’t clear, Schmidt said, and depends both on how quickly greenhouse gases are emitted — which depends on how quickly countries act to limit their emissions — and just how much additional carbon dioxide can be emitted before the 1.5°C goal is breached, which is still somewhat uncertain.

“We’re closer than we would like to be,” he said.

With El Niño gone, and a weak La Niña to start off 2017, this year isn’t likely to continue the streak and best 2016, climate scientists say. But even if 2017 is cooler than 2016, it will only be a very slight dip compared to the long-term warming trend — in fact, the U.K. Met Office expects that 2017 will still rank among the hottest years on record.

“It’s still going to be a top 5 year in our analysis. I’m pretty confident about that,” Schmidt said.
Nice short article from my news file.. br br At t... (show quote)


The world hasn't always had the same temperature year after year. It is a perfectly ordinary set of temps and events.

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 18:59:38   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
Carol Kelly wrote:
The world hasn't always had the same temperature year after year. It is a perfectly ordinary set of temps and events.




Carol,

When did this quibble over CC become, The UN is taking us over?

And what is your point with this observation? Of course the temperature is always changing. CC is about the trend in climate, not day to day weather..

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 19:01:28   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
Carol Kelly wrote:
That should convince all the nitwits. I paraphrase it to mean the eminent takeover of our
country by the most hated and most terrifying United Nations. Why didn't someone fly a plane into that building?


That would have been too much of a mixed blessing.

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2017 19:04:38   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
permafrost wrote:
Carol,

When did this quibble over CC become, The UN is taking us over?

And what is your point with this observation? Of course the temperature is always changing. CC is about the trend in climate, not day to day weather..


CC?

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 19:14:08   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
BigMike wrote:
CC?




Sorry about that-----CC=Climate Change...

Are we using Global Warming today? I like that better even if not the fashion..

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 20:00:57   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
permafrost wrote:
Sorry about that-----CC=Climate Change...

Are we using Global Warming today? I like that better even if not the fashion..


Brain fart. Ignore me. The terms all mean the same thing to me since I believe in Global Warming and climate change.

Back to the Petition Project...you will peruse the site, won't you? There has been a lack of consensus this whole time and some of us have been saying so.

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 20:25:15   #
Ricko Loc: Florida
 
BigMike wrote:
Some jerkoff on the OPP prompted me to do just the teeeeeniest bit of searching and this is what 3 minutes got me.

All you folks who believe this "settled science" BS are political tools!

This is worth a listen, although some will refuse because it clashes with the narrative they've been programmed with.

http://www.petitionproject.org/seitz_letter.php


Big Mike-this makes total sense and totally debunks the left wing agenda of rationing energy and doing away
with coal and other energy sources. I hope president Trump will have the time to review the conclusions of
this report. America's future can indeed be bright if we rid ourselves of the alarmists whose goal is to line their
pockets with taxpayer dollars. America First !!!

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2017 20:55:55   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
Raylan Wolfe wrote:
Or one of intelligence would realize that the article posted by weemikey, was from a person who died in 2008, and is as irrelevant now as he was then!

For more reliable and accurate info on global warming ask NASA!

2016 Climate Trends Continue to Break Records!

https//www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/climate-trends-continue-to-break-records
Yeah, we tried asking NASA, Wolfe. We didn't get an honest answer. Obama turned NASA into an ideological tool to advance his agenda, which included changing our nation's space exploration and research agency into a Muslim outreach program. NASA's opinion on AGW is as reliable as a politician's promise.

97 Articles Refuting The “97% Consensus”

The 97 Percent Solution

The Myth of the Climate Change '97%'

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 21:12:46   #
Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere
 
BigMike wrote:
How'd you do in science, Doc? I think what I liked the most was the hands-on thing. We had to learn at Robert E Lee High in J'ville, FL...but the best thing I learned from all of it was critical thinking. These yahoos read a headline, cop a feeling rush and then run with it, proclaiming its gospel truth (not that they have, NOR DO THEY WANT, an even rudimentary understanding of the subject) with the zeal of a TV preacher.
How'd you do in science, Doc? img src="https://s... (show quote)


The entire story is in the geological record. Ice cores tell us that CO2 has been much higher than at the present, they tell us how high the concentration was when it began affecting life, and how planetary heat/cooling cycles directly relate to atmospheric CO2 levels.

The record totally destroys man induced CC because clearly planet earth has seen these cycles repeatedly long before man came upon the scene and after. It is the one factor the CCers avoid discussing because the record cannot be changed and is not subject to interpretation.

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 21:20:10   #
Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere
 
BigMike wrote:
How'd you do in science, Doc? I think what I liked the most was the hands-on thing. We had to learn at Robert E Lee High in J'ville, FL...but the best thing I learned from all of it was critical thinking. These yahoos read a headline, cop a feeling rush and then run with it, proclaiming its gospel truth (not that they have, NOR DO THEY WANT, an even rudimentary understanding of the subject) with the zeal of a TV preacher.
How'd you do in science, Doc? img src="https://s... (show quote)


In high school there was only one teacher with the credential of professor. He taught physics. For our final we had to each build a parabolic refector and accurately measure the distance from earth to moon within 1 mile, which he said was a huge margin of error. And we had to allow for atmospheric distortion in our calculations.

That hooked me. I went in medicine but never lost the general science bug.

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 21:48:30   #
HedgeHog
 
Raylan Wolfe wrote:
And once again tinymikey has proven his stupidity is surpassed by no others!

And 2016 has just surpassed the last 14yrs as the hottest on record!

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/18/2016-locked-into-being-hottest-year-on-record-nasa-says


Well, THAT'S proof. No question about it.

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2017 21:55:13   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
Ricko wrote:
Big Mike-this makes total sense and totally debunks the left wing agenda of rationing energy and doing away
with coal and other energy sources. I hope president Trump will have the time to review the conclusions of
this report. America's future can indeed be bright if we rid ourselves of the alarmists whose goal is to line their
pockets with taxpayer dollars. America First !!!


The narrative is looking more and more threadbare, eh?

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 21:58:46   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
Docadhoc wrote:
The entire story is in the geological record. Ice cores tell us that CO2 has been much higher than at the present, they tell us how high the concentration was when it began affecting life, and how planetary heat/cooling cycles directly relate to atmospheric CO2 levels.

The record totally destroys man induced CC because clearly planet earth has seen these cycles repeatedly long before man came upon the scene and after. It is the one factor the CCers avoid discussing because the record cannot be changed and is not subject to interpretation.
The entire story is in the geological record. Ice... (show quote)


Amazing what tunnel vision does to the brain. So sad.

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 22:04:06   #
HedgeHog
 
permafrost wrote:
Nice short article from my news file..

At the end it has a mention of el nino, you may like to read that part..



http://www.salon.com/2017/01/18/2016-officially-declared-hottest-year-on-record_partner/?source=newsletter



It’s official: 2016 was the hottest year on record
2016 is a “data point at the end of many data points that indicates” long-term warming
ANDREA THOMPSON, CLIMATE CENTRAL SKIP TO COMMENTS
TOPICS: CLIMATE CENTRAL, CLIMATE SCIENCE, GLOBAL WARMING

It's official: 2016 was the hottest year on record
This article originally appeared on Climate Central
2016 was the hottest year in 137 years of record keeping and the third year in a row to take the number one slot, a mark of how much the world has warmed over the last century because of human activities, U.S. government scientists announced Wednesday.

2016 is a “data point at the end of many data points that indicates” long-term warming, Deke Arndt, chief of the monitoring branch of the National Centers for Environmental Information, said.

While the record was expected, the joint announcement by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration came in the midst of Senate confirmation hearings for President-elect Trump’s cabinet nominees, several of whom have expressed doubts about established climate science, as has Trump himself.

Many climate scientists, policy experts and environmentalists are concerned about the potential for the incoming administration to limit funding for climate science and roll back both national and international progress toward limiting the greenhouse gases that are warming the planet.

According to NOAA data, the global average temperature for 2016 was 1.69°F (0.94°C) above the 20th century average and 0.07°F (0.04°C) above the previous record set last year.

In NASA’s records, 2016 was 1.8°F (0.99°C) above the 1951-1980 average.

Each agency has slightly different methods of processing the data and different baseline periods they use for comparison, as do other groups around the world that monitor global temperatures, leading to slightly different year-to-year numbers.

But despite these differences, all of these records “are capturing the same long-term signal. It’s a pretty unmistakable signal,” Arndt said. Or as he likes to put it: “They’re singing the same song, even if they’re hitting different notes along the way.”

Several spots around the globe had record heat for 2016, including Alaska and a swath of the eastern U.S. The contiguous U.S. had its second hottest year on record, according to NOAA, but with the remarkable warmth experienced by Alaska factored in, 2016 would be the hottest for the country as a whole.

The first eight months of the year were all record hot globally; in NOAA’s data, they were part of an unprecedented streak of 16 record hot months in a row.

Of the 17 hottest years on record, 16 have occurred in the 21st century (the exception being the strong El Niño year of 1998).

While El Niño played a role in bumping up global temperatures during 2015 and 2016, the bulk of the warmth was due to the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases emitted by humans over the past century, particularly carbon dioxide.

In 2016, CO2 concentrations also permanently passed the 400 parts per million mark for the first time in human history; during preindustrial times, that concentration was 280 ppm.

As example of how greenhouse gases have affected global temperatures, 2016 was almost 0.5°F (0.9°C) warmer than 1998, both years that experienced comparably strong El Niños. Even 2014, before the most recent El Niño emerged, was warmer than 1998.

Nearly 120 nations, including the U.S., have ratified the 2015 Paris climate agreement and committed to keeping the worst impacts of warming from materializing by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The agreement cites a goal of keeping global temperature rise “well below” 2°C (3.6°F) above preindustrial levels by the end of this century, with a limit of 1.5°C as a more aggressive goal.

To show how close the world already is to surpassing those limits, Climate Central has been reanalyzing the global temperature data by averaging the NASA and NOAA numbers and comparing them to a baseline closer to preindustrial times. That analysis shows that 2016 was 1.2°C (2.16°F) above the average from 1881-1910.

We have clearly passed 1 degree above preindustrial temperatures,” and likely won’t go below it without a major volcanic eruption (which tends to cool global temperatures), Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said.

When we might actually reach 1.5°C isn’t clear, Schmidt said, and depends both on how quickly greenhouse gases are emitted — which depends on how quickly countries act to limit their emissions — and just how much additional carbon dioxide can be emitted before the 1.5°C goal is breached, which is still somewhat uncertain.

“We’re closer than we would like to be,” he said.

With El Niño gone, and a weak La Niña to start off 2017, this year isn’t likely to continue the streak and best 2016, climate scientists say. But even if 2017 is cooler than 2016, it will only be a very slight dip compared to the long-term warming trend — in fact, the U.K. Met Office expects that 2017 will still rank among the hottest years on record.

“It’s still going to be a top 5 year in our analysis. I’m pretty confident about that,” Schmidt said.
Nice short article from my news file.. br br At t... (show quote)


Anthropogenic climate change science is no longer legitimate science. I'm not sure it ever was. Starting with the hockey stick project.

The data and/or experimentation, if any, are not based either on valid reasoning or valid mathematics. The Bayesian statistics used can not legitimately model occurrences, as a mathematical explanation or capable predictor model.

I was able to, in discussions with some of my mathematician friends, shoot holes in Bayesian statistics.

So any "facts" or "sources" you try to foist on the rest of us is based on bad science.

That is part of the reason it is losing popularity with legitimate scientists. "The rock they stood upon is broken up and gone..."

Reply
Feb 26, 2017 22:06:23   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
Docadhoc wrote:
In high school there was only one teacher with the credential of professor. He taught physics. For our final we had to each build a parabolic refector and accurately measure the distance from earth to moon within 1 mile, which he said was a huge margin of error. And we had to allow for atmospheric distortion in our calculations.

That hooked me. I went in medicine but never lost the general science bug.


I can use algebra to demonstrate how many Hershey Bars would bridge the distance...and I can tell you the difference between an annelid and a cnidarian.

It just seems like the ability to critically think and make inferences has been educated out of people. They don't seem to want to know as much as be told. Very sad.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.