Global Warming -- LOL

]
Yeah that is something Jack would normally try to bring up .. akin to grammar nazism . Rules/ Laws .. we know what was meant .. I just want to know which law of thermodynamics the boys thought was broken. 3 year Chem thermodynamics is a bit rusty .. Jack was gonna teach us some new tricks .. DrLug normally talks more sensibly .. not sure why he wandered into this cricifixion so eagerly.

 

Learn about anomalies and then get back to me.
Absolute estimates of global average surface temperature are difficult to compile for several reasons. Some regions have few temperature measurement stations (e.g., the Sahara Desert) and interpolation must be made over large, data-sparse regions. In mountainous areas, most observations come from the inhabited valleys, so the effect of elevation on a region's average temperature must be considered as well. For example, a summer month over an area may be cooler than average, both at a mountain top and in a nearby valley, but the absolute temperatures will be quite different at the two locations. The use of anomalies in this case will show that temperatures for both locations were below average.

Using reference values computed on smaller [more local] scales over the same time period establishes a baseline from which anomalies are calculated. This effectively normalizes the data so they can be compared and combined to more accurately represent temperature patterns with respect to what is normal for different places within a region.

For these reasons, large-area summaries incorporate anomalies, not the temperature itself. Anomalies more accurately describe climate variability over larger areas than absolute temperatures do, and they give a frame of reference that allows more meaningful comparisons between locations and more accurate calculations of temperature trends.

 

Jack Temperature is not a good indicator of Global warming and you have no idea what a trend is.

You said I broke a rule of Thermodynamics .. which rule was that ?

 

I never mentioned thermodynamics.
And NOAA finds temperature anomalies quite useful.

 

The IPCC says that ~1.7C a century is normal. You tell me if you think it is catastrophic.

 

Yes you did .. forget what you say from one post to the next. No one said Temp anomalies were not useful .. they just don't tell us that climate change has reversed course.

 

I didn't say it would be "catastrophic." I asked if it was okay.

We need to figure out what is okay given the increased world population pressure, up 400% in the past century. We're using more marginal land, have problems with water, and so on. A 1°C rise in temperature may be more of a problem in a world with 10+B people.

 

I live on the West Coast, always have from Southern California north. The main problem with the bad weather east of California is the extreme whining.

If you don't like the snow, move to the West Coast.

Kwitchurbellachin.

 

I moved from the west coast, there is no weather worse than living with folks like, well, you get the point After a month there, I come back to Wyoming and literally kiss a moose on the lips

LMAO, Irony from someone that spend most their day online in a state full of sunshine and Beach's.. I get more out of cali in a month than you do in a year

 

How odd... So, when demonstrated that the thing you're willing to hyperventilate about is well under that actual "what is expected" by the most radical of econazis, your tactic is, "run away".. "run away".... change the subject, talk about anything other than the thing you just tied yourself to. Oh well. Here we are.

 

Nope. The word thermodynamics appears in no post of mine.
And you're still at sea regarding temperature anomalies.

 

It appears in a post you refer to .. once again you have no clue what you are saying half the time.

What about temperature anomolies .. what did you wish to say about them ... your claim that your graph showed that Global warming has reversed was false .. wrong again you were.

 

Yes, "thermodynamics" appears in a post to which I referred. So what?
The graph showed a cooling trend since 2016.

 

The claim you affirmed .. was that I got a rule of thermodynamics wrong - What rule was that ?

"Cooling trend" - on the basis of anomalies .. How do you figure that .. what is the corrolation between "anomalies" and the over-all trend = the actual heating/cooling trend. and who cares given it is insignificant time period as told you previously by Langleyman. a small blip in a much larger wave.

Yaada whoo .. Yaada haaa .. Yaada hooo .. whopte waaaa ..

 

Nothing odd about you misrepresenting my position. That''s part of your counterattack game. Say nothing, attack your imagined opponent.

As I said, "We need to figure out what is okay given the increased world population pressure, up 400% in the past century. We're using more marginal land, have problems with water, and so on. A 1°C rise in temperature may be more of a problem in a world with 10+B people."

 

Sorry, but I believe I merely said I could not improve on another post.
As for anomalies, I'll repeat NOAA's explanation.
Using reference values computed on smaller [more local] scales over the same time period establishes a baseline from which anomalies are calculated. This effectively normalizes the data so they can be compared and combined to more accurately represent temperature patterns with respect to what is normal for different places within a region.

For these reasons, large-area summaries incorporate anomalies, not the temperature itself. Anomalies more accurately describe climate variability over larger areas than absolute temperatures do, and they give a frame of reference that allows more meaningful comparisons between locations and more accurate calculations of temperature trends.

 

Right .. and no one is debating that the anomalies show a small trend ... in "Climate variability" New term you need to look up and come back with clear understanding .. as you were trying to claim temperature variation .. yammering on about temperature variations .. as if this were a direct temperature trend measurement rather than a measurment of the variation in temperature .. but this matters not .. so don't bring it up again .. my head already in pain .... as no one has questioned the temperature trend claim ... do you understand ? So why are you defending this claim ..

"I merely stated" ... what a joke You "Merely stated" what ? what was it that you merely stated .. other than what I claimed you stated. That you can not improve on logical fallacy we know. That haven't a clue about the post you were agreeing with .. that is clear also.

That you have no idea what your original claim was .. that is apparent as well .. what we call a rabbit hole of your own creation.

So .. to sum up .. your chart does not show some big climate reversal .. as you stated previously .. woud this go on for another 20 years .. at a certain magnitude .. we might be able to say something .. there is no warming trend reversal .. there is no energy in the system reversal of any significant magnitude shown in the data you presented .. and you should know better than to stick around when I already told you was the hill of crucifixion .. how many time you gonna bang head against same brick wall .. hoping it will not hurt. on the next whack.

 

Data trump ignorance.
In 2016 a powerful El Nino broke a lengthy Pause in warming and created another "hottest year ever." Since then temperatures have fallen, and that decline seems likely to continue indefinitely. It is now fair to ask whether the overall temperature trend has turned from warming to cooling.

Solar Update September, 2021
2021 › 09 › 22 › solar-update-september-2021
by solar hemisphere 1985 – 2021 ... Breaking down solar activity by hemisphere shows that solar activity ... relative length of the solar cycles. ... Figure 6: F10.7 flux for solar cycles 19 to 25 aligned
modulates the solar signal on the decadal scale, but that the QBO is itself modulated by the solar variability


Our planet’s temperature peaked in 2016 and has been in a disciplined decline since. It is in a channel 0.5°C wide with a slope of -0.03°C per annum. The atmosphere had been warming at 0.013°C per annum according to Dr Roy Spencer’s work. If the established cooling trend continues it will only take another decade to get back to the temperatures of the early 1980s. With the cooling trend firmly established, the question is: Can the proximate cause be found in the solar record?


. . . .

 

I forgot mention in last post .. that the interesting thing in this whole affair. is that I am arguing your side against back slap pudd pull in many ways .. totally against current climate/environmental/economic policy. but unlike you have good arguments for the cause. Notice Dr ditched the crucifixion right quick like .. smart fellow

 

Did you miss the part about no one questioning the data .... now tell me who is the ignorant one who has no idea what the data he puts up means. Your claim that there has been some significant reversal in the energy trend a falsehood .. myopic focus on temperature .. grounded in word #3

Wrong again Jack .. I'm sorry dont learn lesson.

 

Figure 1: NCDC global temperature anomaly 1979 – 2021

From the mid-1980s the atmospheric temperature was in an uptrend channel 0.75°C wide with its boundaries shown by the purple lines. It was a disciplined uptrend with the lower bounding line being touched four times over 30 years. Similarly the current downtrend has its lower bound defined by four data points. . . .

Figure 8: aa Index 1868 -2020

Before the Ap index there was the aa index which has data back to 1868. The Modern Warm Period stands out as a period of higher activity of the aa index. Since the end of the Modern Warm Period the aa index has averaged 14.6, very similar to the average of the last decades of the Little Ice Age. This is also likely to be the long term state of the Sun.

 

WE SURE COULD USE SOME OF THAT GLOBAL WARMING - LOL!

SNOWFALLS ARE NOW JUST A THING OF THE PAST: Los Angeles has first blizzard warning in decades. As much as five feet of snow could fall in some areas of usually balmy Southern California.

FIVE FEET!


brrr!


DOUBLE BRR!

HOW IT STARTS

'Karen Krenis was driving to a pottery studio in Santa Cruz in the San Francisco Bay area on Thursday when she stopped in her tracks after seeing snow on the beach. She got out of her car and went to take photos. By the time she left, about 50 other people were there. Adults were snapping photos, and children were making snowballs. “I have lived in California for 30 years, and I’ve never seen anything like it,” Krenis said.'



'Terry Stephens, who lives in a trailer with her son and his girlfriend in Palmdale, was temporarily placed in a hotel room in the Antelope Valley city northeast of Los Angeles after shivering through the night on Wednesday.'

'“It was frigid; your bones ache and you can’t get warm,” she told the Los Angeles Times. “I had three blankets on me last night and I was still freezing. Nothing helped.”'

FINGERS CROSSED FOR THE RETURN OF WARMTH

According to the ancients of North America, the Great Ice Mountains were melted by the vast herds of warmth bringing farting buffalo, but, the buffalo are all gone now.



Yeah, keep laughing, fluffy!

 

BECAUSE IT’S PLAIN IT’S CRAZY: Former Reuters Science Writer Slams Climate Hysteria Promoted by Today’s Media.

CULT

'The BBC and the mainstream media regularly frighten everyone with the latest climate disaster news with pictures of floods, fires and hurricanes, always followed by scary predictions that things will only get worse unless mankind mends its irresponsible ways.'

'the ideological capture of science, today’s writers do not have strong backgrounds in science, there is an interest in getting “clicks and exposure,” and social media throttles articles that go against the current political narratives.'

IT'S ONE DISINFORMATION ASSAULT AFTER ANOTHER WITH THESE FOLKS.

'The complete failure of “experts” during the pandemic have people questioning the realities of other science . . . including climate science.'

 

Increasing sequential tropical cyclone hazards along the US East and Gulf coasts

Two tropical cyclones (TCs) that make landfall close together can induce sequential hazards to coastal areas. Here we investigate the change in sequential TC hazards in the historical and future projected climates. We find that the chance of sequential TC hazards has been increasing over the past several decades at many US locations. Under the high (moderate) emission scenario, the chance of hazards from two TCs impacting the same location within 15 days may substantially increase, with the return period decreasing over the century from 10–92 years to ~1–2 (1–3) years along the US East and Gulf coasts, due to sea-level rise and storm climatology change. Climate change can also cause unprecedented compounding of extreme hazards at the regional level. A Katrina-like TC and a Harvey-like TC impacting the United States within 15 days of each other, which is non-existent in the control simulation for over 1,000 years, is projected to have an annual occurrence probability of more than 1% by the end of the century under the high emission scenario.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-023-01595-7

 

Ah.
"To address these questions, we investigated the change in sequential TC hazards using both historical observations and climate simulations."
Garbage in, garbage out.