Summer hottest on record/GOP dumbest on record
- Thread starter Huey Grey
- Start date
How can anyone say the Dems are smarter than the GOP? They are both bumbling idiots. BOTH!!!!!!
Record crop yields also. Corn, soy and wheat all expected to have huge, possibly record breaking numbers.
I don't get it, you're allowed to marry your boyfriend now and your still pissy all of the time.
What's going on champ, want to talk about it?
Lets make up some numbers and call it a record that way we can keep our government grants.
That mysterious thing we call 'science' doesnt always work that way. Enjoy the pleasant weather we are having...
Also hottest in the last 10,000 years, which is the time period when our modern societies have emerged and thrived, so we're moving out of that temperature region now and into new territory; more than likely, the hottest in the last half-million to million years, actually. (Or 6,000 years, which is the hottest since Earth was 'created', depending on where you get your 'science'.)
So just playing it by ear then? Okay. We'll just wait and see what happens. More habitable land being opened up, higher crop yields, warmer climates around the world. Sounds good to me.
http://www.zmescience.com/research/studies/global-temperatures-reaching-11000-years-peak/
“We already knew that on a global scale, Earth is warmer today than it was over much of the past 2,000 years,” Marcott said. “Now we know that it is warmer than most of the past 11,300 years. This is of particular interest because the Holocene spans the entire period of human civilization.”
“The last century stands out as the anomaly in this record of global temperature since the end of the last ice age,” said Candace Major, program director in the National Science Foundation’s Division of Ocean Sciences, which co-funded the research with NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences. “This research shows that we’ve experienced almost the same range of temperature change since the beginning of the industrial revolution as over the previous 11,000 years of Earth history – but this change happened a lot more quickly.”
“The last century stands out as the anomaly in this record of global temperature since the end of the last ice age,” said Candace Major, program director in the National Science Foundation’s Division of Ocean Sciences, which co-funded the research with NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences. “This research shows that we’ve experienced almost the same range of temperature change since the beginning of the industrial revolution as over the previous 11,000 years of Earth history – but this change happened a lot more quickly.”
Also, CO2 levels are the highest in more than 800,000.
texas hit 100 maybe twice or three times, coolest I ever been in the whole 25 years I been here. usually we go months at 105, 30+ days in a row
One thing the AGW alarmists and Creationists have in common is that they believe the Earth is only a couple of hundred years old.
This will get really fun with the Pope coming to town and planning to hand the GOP its ass on this issue.
Hell ya, government grants are better than food stamps, Obama phones. There a government grants for ex-convicts.....Huey has probably got one?
http://www.livestrong.com/article/212663-government-grants-for-ex-convicts/
wait a minute, does god run the world and the climate after all or does man?
I would make a bunch of rules for u.s. Factories and force them to make them in China where they basically have no rules.
The world will be worse and the u.s. Economy will be worse but people will feel better about themselves.
I thought this past summer was very mild for Iowa. Of course that is weather not climate. Well except for the hot days in which case that is global death caused by man.
I can only assume all the people that hate humans never fly, drive, or own anything that requires heat to make.
The world will be worse and the u.s. Economy will be worse but people will feel better about themselves.
I thought this past summer was very mild for Iowa. Of course that is weather not climate. Well except for the hot days in which case that is global death caused by man.
I can only assume all the people that hate humans never fly, drive, or own anything that requires heat to make.
http://www.zmescience.com/research/studies/global-temperatures-reaching-11000-years-peak/
“We already knew that on a global scale, Earth is warmer today than it was over much of the past 2,000 years,” Marcott said. “Now we know that it is warmer than most of the past 11,300 years. This is of particular interest because the Holocene spans the entire period of human civilization.”
“The last century stands out as the anomaly in this record of global temperature since the end of the last ice age,” said Candace Major, program director in the National Science Foundation’s Division of Ocean Sciences, which co-funded the research with NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences. “This research shows that we’ve experienced almost the same range of temperature change since the beginning of the industrial revolution as over the previous 11,000 years of Earth history – but this change happened a lot more quickly.”
Also, CO2 levels are the highest in more than 800,000.
Harvard Scientists disagree.
A review of more than 240 scientific studies has shown that today's temperatures are neither the warmest over the past millennium, nor are they producing the most extreme weather - in stark contrast to the claims of the environmentalists.
The review, carried out by a team from Harvard University, examined the findings of studies of so-called "temperature proxies" such as tree rings, ice cores and historical accounts which allow scientists to estimate temperatures prevailing at sites around the world.
The findings prove that the world experienced a Medieval Warm Period between the ninth and 14th centuries with global temperatures significantly higher even than today.
They also confirm claims that a Little Ice Age set in around 1300, during which the world cooled dramatically. Since 1900, the world has begun to warm up again - but has still to reach the balmy temperatures of the Middle Ages.
The timing of the end of the Little Ice Age is especially significant, as it implies that the records used by climate scientists date from a time when the Earth was relatively cold, thereby exaggerating the significance of today's temperature rise.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...n-physicist-computer-models-used-un-overstate
http://www.michaelkeller.com/news/news575.htm
So when you look at annual average temperatures you only look at the northern hemisphere summer?
You're seriously citing Willie Soon as 'evidence' here?
Also.....both the Little Ice Age and Medeival Warm Period have been evaluated a 'regional', not 'global' phenomena.
Also.....both the Little Ice Age and Medeival Warm Period have been evaluated a 'regional', not 'global' phenomena.
unfortunately this pope thinks he's Jesuit king ruler of the globe and Obama thinks so as well and so do the leftists and commies, he's down there meeting with the castros and they bow to him and Obama is a commie and kisses his feet
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201508
It's #1 for both Northern, Southern and Global analysis, for combined land and ocean surface temperatures.
You can view the plots yourself here:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global/globe/land_ocean/3/8/1880-2015
The interactive graph allows you to look at 'August only', or any timeframe you want (last XX months, year to date, etc).
see, the whole point of all those goldfinger type james bond movies of the sixties and seventies was to make fun of people for thinking one man could rule the globe and the climate, to poke fun at the stupidity of it all, to laugh at humans for thinking they could change the world and the climate. silly humans, only in a james bond movie could man change the climate.
Honestly if he came to Des Moines, I wouldn't drive from Ankeny to see him. I never understood confessing your sins to another human as they have no authority to forgive them.
It's not a disrespect thing, it's a difference in theology.
So Obama doesn't control the weather? So did he still make Hurricane Sandy happen?
You cited information that has been demonstrated to be incorrect by several other studies. From your own link:
Dr Simon Brown, the climate extremes research manager at the Meteorological Office at Bracknell, said that the present consensus among scientists on the IPCC was that the Medieval Warm Period could not be used to judge the significance of existing warming.
Dr Brown said: "The conclusion that 20th century warming is not unusual relies on the assertion that the Medieval Warm Period was a global phenomenon. This is not the conclusion of IPCC."
It's also not consistent with the latest research on the topic.Dr Brown said: "The conclusion that 20th century warming is not unusual relies on the assertion that the Medieval Warm Period was a global phenomenon. This is not the conclusion of IPCC."
The 'modeling' article you linked is an OpEd, not a scientific article. If you review the actual science article on 'modeling', you'd find that their model is completely unable to properly model the climate over the past century, nor does it respond to things like volcanic events properly. Thus, it's not reliable, and this has been demonstrated by others:
http://skepticalscience.com/monckton15errors.html
"For example, instead of testing their prediction against real world data records, they invented their own "observations" up to 2050. While their prediction looks good when compared with the future they made up, they look bad compared with the past that we've already measured"
Normally researchers test their calculations against measurements if possible, and since Monckton et al. estimate temperature change then it would make sense to check against measurements of temperature change. We have global temperature records since 1850, but Monckton et al. didn't do this comparison. This is what it looks like, consistently calculating temperatures that are cooler than measurements:
Here is what the actual models, constructed by actual climate scientists, look like:
When your model cannot accurately represent past climate/temperatures, it is junk.
I never said he made hurricane sandy happen, I did say he cared more about that than the fires in tx because he , well, favors the east and liberals- over tx
I did say he made sandy hook happen, to take our guns, maybe you mixed those two up
I'm pretty sure you've made the claim that he controlled the weather in the past. Even if you didn't the fact that it's not out of the realm of possibility says a lot about how serious people take you.
Even Exxon's scientists tried to warn on the continued burning of fossil fuels... executives ultimately chose to ignore the science, and in fact, deny it.
"In the first place, there is general scientific agreement that the most likely manner in which mankind is influencing the global climate is through carbon dioxide release from the burning of fossil fuels," Black told Exxon's Management Committee, according to a written version he recorded later.
...and note that this was in 1977.
Yep. Also, from Black: … Rainfall might get heavier in some regions, and other places might turn to desert. "Some countries would benefit but others would have their agricultural output reduced or destroyed."
I guess as long as the US benefits, or at least doesn't deviate too much (negatively) from status quo, denial will remain.
Selective amnesia again?
The latest IPCC reports included (as I recall) >60 DIFFERENT scientists in one of the sections on paleoclimate, as compared with prior reports - you posted in that thread I believe. Thus, claiming 'IPCC' is somewhat disingenuous, because each report has been constructed by DIFFERENT groups of scientists....
South pole icecap is enlarging.I can't believe how nice the weather has been in aug and sept here in iowa.Alarmists are getting pseudoscience.Obama is blaming global warming for fires in cali but ignors the beautiful weather here.I just want to laugh.
You cited information that has been demonstrated to be incorrect by several other studies. From your own link:
Dr Simon Brown, the climate extremes research manager at the Meteorological Office at Bracknell, said that the present consensus among scientists on the IPCC was that the Medieval Warm Period could not be used to judge the significance of existing warming.It's also not consistent with the latest research on the topic.
Dr Brown said: "The conclusion that 20th century warming is not unusual relies on the assertion that the Medieval Warm Period was a global phenomenon. This is not the conclusion of IPCC."
The 'modeling' article you linked is an OpEd, not a scientific article. If you review the actual science article on 'modeling', you'd find that their model is completely unable to properly model the climate over the past century, nor does it respond to things like volcanic events properly. Thus, it's not reliable, and this has been demonstrated by others:
http://skepticalscience.com/monckton15errors.html
"For example, instead of testing their prediction against real world data records, they invented their own "observations" up to 2050. While their prediction looks good when compared with the future they made up, they look bad compared with the past that we've already measured"
Normally researchers test their calculations against measurements if possible, and since Monckton et al. estimate temperature change then it would make sense to check against measurements of temperature change. We have global temperature records since 1850, but Monckton et al. didn't do this comparison. This is what it looks like, consistently calculating temperatures that are cooler than measurements:
Here is what the actual models, constructed by actual climate scientists, look like:
When your model cannot accurately represent past climate/temperatures, it is junk.
I am not saying that GW doesn't exist, but I can go back and forth showing data and studies to the contrary all day long.
Your assertion that the warming data is accurate thousands of years back is flimsy at best. There are geological indicators that different groups make temperature assumptions about. Your Scientists make assumptions in favor of their beliefs. Other scientists make assumptions to the contrary.
There were after all no accurate measuring instruments back then. Can we agree on that?
Assumptions are not factual.
