ADVERTISEMENT

2024 Sea Surface Temperature exceed previous records by wide margin

Where did you get those datasets? Did you take them at face value, or did you look at the data collection methodology, and include asterisks to explain how the dataset collection might have an influence on statistical outcomes or variances?

Of course I went over methodology and things that influence them (urban heat island effect, etc.)

Here's one site

 
The volcano-created clouds are sulfate aerosols that do not persist in the atmosphere. They are not H2O clouds. They can have a significant short-term effect, but they will not have any effect on the long-term warming trend caused by anthropic CO2. Period. You mentioned Krakatoa - its effect was gone within five years.
Waiting for the other half of "both sides" to counter this.


Chair Dancing GIF
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarheelbybirth

Scientists suspect the unprecedented marine heatwave of 2013 to 2016—the largest ever recorded around the world—caused the whales to starve to death. During this period, North Pacific Ocean temperatures were 4 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than normal, depending on the location and date.

This heatwave, known as “the blob,” caused ripple effects up and down the food chain—including the proliferation of less-nutritious zooplankton, which led to smaller fish. Those fish, in turn, provided fewer calories for humpback whales, seabirds and other marine creatures that depend on them for energy. A million Pacific seabirds also died because of the marine heatwave, past research has found.

Under these conditions, whales become thinner, more vulnerable to disease and less likely to reproduce. In addition to causing a whale die-off, the heatwave likely impacted pregnancy rates among the North Pacific humpbacks, Ari Friedlaender, an ecologist at the University of California Santa Cruz who was not involved with the study, tells the Guardian’s Brianna Randall.



This is where & how mass-extinction events begin.
Bottom of the food chain collapses, and things spiral upwards...

And the warming will only get worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ree4
Wait...can you elaborate on that comment. The graph SHOWS that previous El Nino's produced the same extreme SST? Where on the graph do you see this? In what year or years are you seeing the temps of 2024 replicated? I'll hang up and listen. Thanks.

GGiqTYOXEAAW8T2
Let me give you a hint. You see that GIANT white space between the 2023 line and the rest of the freaking data? That's called not following the trend = there was a sudden event that happened in 2023 that didn't happen in the other years. AKA no way in hell it's CO2 from humans. How about you just hang it up, that would be better for you.
 
Let me give you a hint. You see that GIANT white space between the 2023 line and the rest of the freaking data? That's called not following the trend = there was a sudden event that happened in 2023 that didn't happen in the other years.
Actually, it happened in the other years (El Nino), but NOW the trend follows both El Nino increases AND warming due to our CO2 emissions.
 
Let me give you a hint. You see that GIANT white space between the 2023 line and the rest of the freaking data? That's called not following the trend = there was a sudden event that happened in 2023 that didn't happen in the other years. AKA no way in hell it's CO2 from humans. How about you just hang it up, that would be better for you.

The idea you speak in such absolutes shows you don't understand the complexities of such topics
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ree4 and Joes Place
Actually, it happened in the other years (El Nino), but NOW the trend follows both El Nino increases AND warming due to our CO2 emissions.
No, it didn't happen in other years. The temperature went up and then down in the other years. 2023, it went up and never went back down and now continues to go up in 2024. This isn't that hard. It's not CO2 emissions from humans that does that rapidly. We did not launch our whole nuclear arsenal into the ocean.
 
No, it didn't happen in other years. The temperature went up and then down in the other years. 2023, it went up and never went back down and now continues to go up in 2024. This isn't that hard. It's not CO2 emissions from humans that does that rapidly. We did not launch our whole nuclear arsenal into the ocean.

2 dimensional thinking
 
Let me give you a hint. You see that GIANT white space between the 2023 line and the rest of the freaking data? That's called not following the trend = there was a sudden event that happened in 2023 that didn't happen in the other years. AKA no way in hell it's CO2 from humans. How about you just hang it up, that would be better for you.
There’s. An. El. Nino.

We did not launch our whole nuclear arsenal into the ocean.

Please don’t talk about things you’re obviously ignorant about. Willfully ignorant at that. The oceans have been - thankfully, I suppose - absorbing much of the extra heat from the atmosphere for decades. They have served as a buffer protecting us from our stupidity. That heat is being stored in the deep ocean - up to 2 km below the surface. Between 1971 and 2018 it's estimated that the oceans absorbed 396 zetajoules of heat. How much heat is that? Well, it's the equivalent of 25 BILLION Hiroshima bombs. So yes...we basically launched our entire nuclear arsenal many times over into the oceans. For decades. And we heated the ocean. A lot

There's a limit to how much heat the oceans can absorb and an El Nino releases a lot of that pent-up heat back into the atmosphere. This is our chickens coming home to roost and no amount of idiotic denialism by ignorant asshats can change the facts.
 
There’s. An. El. Nino.



Please don’t talk about things you’re obviously ignorant about. Willfully ignorant at that. The oceans have been - thankfully, I suppose - absorbing much of the extra heat from the atmosphere for decades. They have served as a buffer protecting us from our stupidity. That heat is being stored in the deep ocean - up to 2 km below the surface. Between 1971 and 2018 it's estimated that the oceans absorbed 396 zetajoules of heat. How much heat is that? Well, it's the equivalent of 25 BILLION Hiroshima bombs. So yes...we basically launched our entire nuclear arsenal many times over into the oceans. For decades. And we heated the ocean. A lot

There's a limit to how much heat the oceans can absorb and an El Nino releases a lot of that pent-up heat back into the atmosphere. This is our chickens coming home to roost and no amount of idiotic denialism by ignorant asshats can change the facts.
I'm not saying there isn't one. How about you please stop talking about things you're ignorant of which is shown in the freaking chart, bonehead. 2023 was different than the rest. I see you didn't dispute that. You're still going down this shit route of history blah, blah, blah.

Stay focused on what is being presented in the article and graph. The article itself couldn't even explain what happened. Minus all the rhetoric about CO2, humans, etc THIS particular event was not caused by us. It's not possible.
 
This thread was too long to read....

I guess since others are non-climate change deniers I won't have to buy a hot tub and just visit Gulf of Mexico once per year after I'm forced to move to Canada
 

Yes. If you knew prior data, you'd understand this.

Every big El Nino year since the 1990s we've seen a significant (sometimes massive) jump above prior temperatures. Followed by the rest of the decade "filling in the difference" until you can no longer distinguish that El Nino year from other regular years.

Then, the next big El Nino hits, and the pattern repeats.

Over the next 5-8 years, annual SSTs will fill in this gap, until the next big El Nino repeats it, once again.
 
I'm not saying there isn't one. How about you please stop talking about things you're ignorant of which is shown in the freaking chart, bonehead. 2023 was different than the rest. I see you didn't dispute that. You're still going down this shit route of history blah, blah, blah.

Stay focused on what is being presented in the article and graph. The article itself couldn't even explain what happened. Minus all the rhetoric about CO2, humans, etc THIS particular event was not caused by us. It's not possible.
I just gave you a perfectly plausible explanation. You’re just too f’n stupid to understand it. Yes…2023 was different. And 2024 looks like 2023 on ‘roids.
That heat is being stored in the deep ocean - up to 2 km below the surface. Between 1971 and 2018 it's estimated that the oceans absorbed 396 zetajoules of heat. How much heat is that? Well, it's the equivalent of 25 BILLION Hiroshima bombs.
There's a limit to how much heat the oceans can absorb and an El Nino releases a lot of that pent-up heat back into the atmosphere.
Read this article and see if you can comprehend…

More heat stored in the ocean now means more will inevitably return to the atmosphere.

“A couple of El Niño events will do the trick,” said England. The warm water and calm winds of this periodic Pacific tropical condition are “a big way to get subsurface heat back to the surface.” Meteorologists say a mild El Niño condition is underway this year.


And recognize they say that could happen within a decade…in an article published nine years ago.
 
I just gave you a perfectly plausible explanation. You’re just too f’n stupid to understand it. Yes…2023 was different. And 2024 looks like 2023 on ‘roids.

He's had it explained to him several different ways now.

In 10 years, that "gap" will fill in with non-El Nino years, and a future El Nino will create a new gap. It's been doing this for decades now.
 
_133281516_era_5_global_sea_temp_lines2024-05-05-nc.png.webp





It is now a full year of sea surface temperature records, daily records broken each day since last May.

Imagine if we broke air surface temperature records, every day, for the entire calendar year... 👀

 
How many scientific papers on climate have you published?
If I have published a paper on climate, does that automatically mean I am more credible than you? What about a "climate denier" who has published more than 200 papers on climate? does he deserve more credit than climate supporters who have not published any papers?

The point I am making is that there are lots of aspects that play into the climate. It is impossible to be an expert in every aspect of the climate. This is why we should welcome all disciplines to give their input on climate change.

Climate change is not settled science which is why i find it ridiculous that you think you know the truth and everyone else is wrong. The science we have today is different than what we will know in 20 years. Science is always evolving. It is anti-scientific to exclude the opinions of a certain group because they don't agree with what you believe.

There are many scientists who were not proven right until after they died. They believed something to be true when the consensus was wrong. Is it impossible that this will happen again?

Yes, someone who has 200 articles on Climatology published in respected, academic journals has more credibility in the field of Climatology than someone who has none.

You have piqued my interest. Who are you referring to? Who is this climate change-denying scholar with such a towering curriculum vitae?
 
Yes, someone who has 200 articles on Climatology published in respected, academic journals has more credibility in the field of Climatology than someone who has none.

You have piqued my interest. Who are you referring to? Who is this climate change-denying scholar with such a towering curriculum vitae?
John Clauser is the person I was talking about.
 
John Clauser is the person I was talking about.

I did some Googling and found that he is a Nobel Prize laureate with a prestigious academic background and several articles published in Physics academic journals.



While I don't think his admittedly impressive credentials in Physics give his theory on Climate Change as much weight as the majority consensus of actual Climatologists, I think they do give him enough credibility that his theories should not be dismissed out-of-hand without providing substantive arguments and evidence that rebut his theory.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT