Whatever Happened to Global Warming?

Doesn't seem to be an “extremist” site to me. So, why are they reporting that all of the previous warnings may no longer be valid?

Again, I'm not an expert but this seems worthwhile reading.

Article @ http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/05/matt-ridley-in-the-wsj-whatever-happened-to-global-warming/

Snow in Calgary, Canada next week @ http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/snow-in-the-forecast-for-calgary-next-week-1.2757747?cmp=rss

 

Whatever happened to global warming. Good question. Thought I would check it out.



Just for your info. 'wattsup..' is a well known denialist site. More sophisticated than some but denialist nevertheless. For high end denialism you might want to check out 'climateaudit.org' too.

 

so what? Why do you suppose you get to tell people what is and isn't a valid science site? Who do you think you are?

 

What happened in 1960 since CO2 rose before that? Wait, maybe it is just natural warming after the Little Ice Age.

 

Here come the charts and graphs.

 

So data offends you?

I also find it funny how you think one of the craziest extremist sites out there, WUWT, isn't an extremist site. Of course it's extremist. When it regularly rants about the great socialist conspiracy and specializes in calling every climate scientist a fraud, you know you're looking at a political hack site.

Anyways, the article was by famous denier shill Matt Ridley, a man with no experience in climate science, repeating phony stories of a "hiatus". In the real world, August 2014 was the hottest August ever in the historical record. Funny, that doesn't look like a "hiatus".

 

Aerosols from dirty coal burning and natural variability. The longer term trend is what denialists need to look at, not the inevitable short term anomalies. You will find the temperature rises inevitably if erratically around the more uniform slope of rising CO2. You will also notice smaller drops around 1980 and 1990. In at least one instance volcanic aerosols from the Philipines appear to have been the primary reason.

 

So this thread

1/ Starts with a link to a known and discredited denier site
2/ A call to avoid actual data because it confuses the denialists
3/ A personal attack.

Meanwhile we just came out of the warmest August ever.

 

I explained this to you before but you selectively ignored it...snow in calgary in september is not unknown, the rockies are an hour away we get wild temperature swings and large dumps of snow...the day before it snowed I was dressed in sandals shorts and t shirt and today again I'm in sandals shorts and a t shirt, and all that snow is long gone...our summers are getting longer and our winters are milder...you can ask any farmer or rancher around here and they'll all confirm it and they're about as consetvative bunch you'll ever meet anywhere...

 

It is only discredited with the CAGW religion because it does not reflect the alarmist but instead presents science. I know that is tough for some of you but there it is.

 

yeah but they're science challenged cherry pickers...they'll dissect your graph and point to any dip and proclaim "there ya go look at that drop, it's getting colder lol! "...their analytical skills are so weak they're unable to see individual data points as part of larger picture, long term trends is a meaningless concept to them...

 

No we didn't. We only came out of a RECENT warm August. Cherry picking the time frame to be able to say EVER is a typical denier stunt. There is no denying the planets warmer past, this type of denier of paleoclimate work is only possible because of your myopia.Not just YOUR myopia of course, but everyone else who wants to pretend that the planets temperature history started with the industrial revolution.

 

When they say "warmest August ever," they mean in the history of direct instrument measurement. The temps you refer to are from proxy measurements which vary greatly, as for every proxy that shows a warmer temp there is a proxy that shows a colder temp. Deniers cherry pick only the warmer proxies and ignore the colder proxies. Proxy data is nowhere near as accurate as direct instrument measurement.

 

Obviously. The problem is WHY they do it. Either because A) they are ignorant, or B) they think everyone else is ignorant or C) they don't care and just say it because it encourages people to think about this problem the way THEY want you to think about it.

But of course. Any probabilistic analysis of what monthly temperatures would be, say in August, back during any of the recent warmings (Medieval, Roman, Minoan, Holocene A or B) would have a near certainty of higher temperatures than are being recorded today. This happens if only because the entire temperature distributions were higher back in those times, which is why the proxies even work for this exercise in the first place.

But you don't get to say "EVER!" without falling into one of those 3 categories I mentioned above. And I find that ignorance, or faux ignorance annoying, because it presumes that everyone is either as gullible, ignorant, or malevolent as they are.

 

Or they're just assuming people aren't as dumb as deniers, and know they are speaking of the historical record.

Remember, most people are not as ignorant, paranoid and brainwashed as deniers, so deniers should never start out assuming everyone is like themselves.

 

We know that that is your alls montra, don't be so bashful and think we can't see it. It is only you and Jiminey who use the word 'everyone' 'nobody' in their references of oppostion. So careful where you walk, it gets slippery.

 

Great the ocean has about 1000 times the heat capacity of the atmosphere n the deep ocean AGW amounts to little more than a rounding error so there is no problem.

 

You just might be wrong at this point comparing now with the above, so to help you out why not compare now with the temperature during the age of dinosaurs? Then you would be covering your bases and be sure to keep your denialist ideology intact. Just don't trip up on those apples and oranges. lol

 

I don't know if you are confused or you are just replying with nothing to give the appearance of a response. Just to be clear, AGW refers to ALL the heat retained due to human agency. That includes the ocean as well as the atmosphere.

 

??

Are you claiming that during the Cretaceous Period that the world wasn't here? That temperatures weren't higher? Why would I confuse either of these with now...temperature is still temperature, and the world was still going up and down in temperature just like it is now. If there had been humans around suffering from their usual and unique brand of hubris, they would have been hysterically proclaiming the warmest record EVER in August!!! (if you only consider the last X years).

Nothing is any different. What kind of silliness were you taught in Geology 101? That temperature wasn't temperature? That dinosaurs were responsible for building coal fired powered plants to cause the warmest August on record (if you only consider the last X years)?

 

So if its going into the ocean as you claim then problem averted. The effect is so small its not even a rounding error.

No need for a carbon tax. No need for global CO2 controls. No need fo any of the big government (*)(*)(*)(*) you have been pushing. Isnt that grand. We can go in eith our lives and you can move onto the next crisis.

 

What are you smoking dude? You seem to be having a conversation with yourself. But maybe I can help you anyway. What about radical transition don't you get? It's not about absolute temperature over millions of years but about the rapidity of temperature rise relative to the range of norms we are used to. The fact is in traditional climate terms we are rocketing upwards in temperature at an unprecedented rate, not to mention acidifying the oceans and other rapidly increasing self-induced challenges. When we are shooting up relative to recent times which we are adapted to surely you can understand that is meaningful rather than comparing us with temperatures from the time of dinosaurs which is worlds removed from our times and therefore inapplicable to any discussion of our survival.

Does distant versus recent times throw you or are you simply stuck on absolutes?

 

So far, so bad. So, what is the ideal temperature? Ocean acidification is a hypothesis not even backed up by the NOAA, no evidence of such. Rapidly increasing? Opposed to what? Before the rise in CO2 it warmed just as rapidly from the 1900's to the 1940's. You realize that geologically speaking we just came out of the Little Ice Age don't you?

 

No I am not claiming any such thing and I haven't a clue why you should think that other than denialists seem to suffer from the Don Quixote syndrome, battling windmills of their own imagination.

 

Form meaningful questions, check with google and you might tangent with reality. I can't keep spending time baby sitting the stubbornly clueless.