NASA: 2010 Meteorological Year Warmest Ever

While politicians, ideologues, and certain media outlets continue to deny climate science ("it's cold somewhere this week so it can't be real"), another annual global record has been set...

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/12/nasa-2010-meteorological-year-wa.html

Notable is that this record occurred at the time of maximum cooling influence from the solar cycle valley.

Temperature anomaly map for the meteorological year:



Create a map for any time period here:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/maps/

2010 involved the worst Russian Heat Wave on record by far, and all-time heat records set in many countries.

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1571

Global warming also leads to more extreme precipitation events, such as the mega-disaster observed in Pakistan.

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/RickyRood/comment.html?entrynum=168

or Mexico, or Tennessee...

http://blogs.chron.com/climateabyss/weather/floods/

All of this is weather and thus all limited anecdotal evidence, but extreme precipitation events are part of an observed trend, at least here in the United States. See step 4:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/extremes/cei/graph.php

Weather variation in each direction still happens. For instance, it's been cold in Europe and the eastern U.S. recently, due largely to an unusually negative AO index.

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/ao_index_ensm.shtml

Heat extremes continue to outpace cold extremes over time.



As for 2011, with la Nina firmly in place, it will almost certainly be cooler than 2010, but with more record years to follow when it subsides.

 

(Massive silence with distant popping sounds as the denier cultists brains explode, much like the Martians' brains in 'Mars Attacks' when that piece of yodeling music, "Indian Love Call" by Slim Whitman was played.)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MhgnMX73Pw"]YouTube - Indian Love Call in Mars Attacks![/ame]

 

Including the Medieval warm period? I don't think so Tim.

I can't believe that you people still believe this hoax is real, after the perpetrators were exposed as liars and frauds, I was doubtful until their scam was revealed and sealed the deal. Its fricking amazing! I guess it proves that intelectual curiousity is all but dead.

 

What were the weather cycles like prior to that time period?

At least in the last . . . what . . . 130 years??

Convenient idea calling it climate change. That way ANY extreme weather can be blamed on humans.

But let's just say for the sake of discussion that I agree with you. We need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and halt "climate change". What sort of data will support success of this endeavor? How will we know when the climate stops changing? If weather variaton in each direction still happens, how will we know when we've done enough? And how can anyone show that this is not part of some normal cycle that has reoccured throughout the history of the Earth? I mean, the Earth has been around much longer than 130 years yet this is the body of data that we look at to prove that we are causing human-induced climate change?

 

Did NASA go and get the Muslims in on this too, being as that's what they do now too ?

 

If you're referring to and relying solely on the "Climategate" emails, then you're quite ill-informed about the subject.

 

Great scene! Actually, "massive silence" is a step above the usual "it's all a hoax" stuff.

 

Speaking of massive silence . . . is anyone going to answer my questions?

 

Seems to me that the people who are falling for this infamous hoax are the ill-informed. Just saying. Its all leftist loser globalist government BS.

 

The mountains of observations from the surface record is only one small compelling piece of the puzzle.

http://www.iac.ethz.ch/people/knuttir/papers/knutti08natgeo.pdf

http://www.skepticalscience.com/How-do-we-know-CO2-is-causing-warming.html

http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/papers-on-water-vapor-feedback-observations/

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html

 

It is a hoax that has never been anything else.

 

That graph looks stupid and out of whack, not to mention phoney and fruadulent and without explanation.

 

Which of the other rhetorical questions or red herrings would you like answered?

 

Right, I'm sure that most of this planet's scientist's are in a large conspiracy, Never Left. Anybody that says that global warming is false or a hoax because of the "Climategate" emails probably haven't read the emails nor the context of the emails. Now continue babbling about leftists, losers, and globalists while clinging to your guns.

 

Silence is better in your case. Take your trolling elsewhere.

 

Okay, but how far back have they been collecting the data?

And besides all that, like I said, for purposes of this discussion let's say I agree with you. What I want to know are the answers to the questions in my earlier post.

What sort of data will support success in reversing the effects of the greenhouse gases build up?

How will we know when the climate stops changing?

If weather variaton in each direction still happens, how will we know when we've done enough?

And how can anyone show that this is not part of some normal cycle that has reoccured throughout the history of the Earth?

 

Need to get these tree huggers "informed".

At least be happy that we put Global Warming out with the recycleables.

 

If you don't want to answer them just say so. What is the purpose of changing the behaviors that caused climate change if we are not going to measure their effectiveness?

 

Since we don't have to wait for the year to end to make our announcement, why should we wait for next year to start? Why don't we just announce now that 2011 was the hottest year ever on December 31st, 2010? Oh, wait, that's the meterological year. I wonder why they don't go with the same year as everyone else. Perhaps this way it's easier to cook the books.

 

Observations that greenhouse gas concentrations (particularly CO2) are slowing and then stabilizing.

A better question would be how do we know when the human impact on climate change has stopped or has become minimal. You could start with the CO2 concentrations. There's lots of places to look.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/its-not-us.htm

The question is not dependent on the first statement, and is answered above.

Answered in the previous post. You seem inquisitive, so I suggest taking a weekend in reading up on the science.

 

You bet they are, this is a funding bonanza they are rich because of "global warming" or "climate change" or "catastrophic climate events" or what ever leftist loser scamological moniker they are calling it now. Its all BS and the more they try to roll out incoherent scientific data as is in the op the more obvious it becomes, I note that they do not call on Al (rub right there....Yeah....riiiiggghhht thhhheeerrreee) Gore any more. Did you not think it was interesting that Gore never debated anyone ever on this. The international sales man of AGW the debate is settled loser. Saying the debate is over alone makes it scientific BS.

 

So? Telling the truth is "trolling" now? Can you explain the graph and the weird assed numbers they used to make some irrelevant point? Can you? Give it your best shot, I'm all ears!

 

I wish Pelosi had gone out with it.

 

Tell it to the Manatees in Florida:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/volusia/os-manatee-deaths-record-20101210,0,6230636.story

They are dying off in record numbers because of hypothermia.

 

Scientists are rich? Really? I don't think you understand how funding works, Never Left. Scientists use funding for research, they don't get to keep that money for themselves. And Al Gore is not a scientist nor was he the "salesman" of climate change.