The Planet is not warming as fast as predicted, the oceans are not acidifying and now, the ice is doing just fine
By
rushmc, in Speakers Corner
Recommended Posts
billvon 3,064
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Bill - do you think that a 38% chance of it being the hottest year is enough to say,
>"2014 was the hottest year?"
I think that three major meteorological organizations agreeing that it is the warmest year is pretty good evidence that it was.
(But if you still want to doubt it because there is some statistical error, then feel free. Also feel free to throw out 1998 as a statistical error, which means there's no slowdown.)
>"2014 was the hottest year?"
I think that three major meteorological organizations agreeing that it is the warmest year is pretty good evidence that it was.
(But if you still want to doubt it because there is some statistical error, then feel free. Also feel free to throw out 1998 as a statistical error, which means there's no slowdown.)
billvon>Bill - do you think that a 38% chance of it being the hottest year is enough to say,
>"2014 was the hottest year?"
I think that three major meteorological organizations agreeing that it is the warmest year is pretty good evidence that it was.
The WMO hasn't said anything since December. The JMA said it was.
Question: do you look at all data sources? The JMA is one of the big four landbased sets. If UAH were to say, "2015 is coldest year on record) and I repeated it, ould your reaction be to just agree? What if HADCRUT did it?
Because as much as there is good evidence that 2014 was the warmest year (I agree with this statement), would you also agree that there is good evidence that 2014 was not the warmest year? I agree with the second statement, too.
[Quote](But if you still want to doubt it because there is some statistical error, then feel free. Also feel free to throw out 1998 as a statistical error, which means there's no slowdown.)
Inot doubting because of statistical error. I'm putting out that NASA itself says that the chance of 2014 being the warmest is 38%. NOAA is more confident at 48%. Either way, the odds are less than the flip of a coin.
I don't think that is enough to state as a "fact." Just my thoughts.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
jclalor 12
rushmcLots of good reading out there
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/11/alarmists-bizarrely-claim-just-what-agw-predicts-about-the-record-high-global-sea-surface-temperatures-in-2014/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/08/anthropogenic-warming-in-the-cet-record/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/09/two-new-papers-suggest-solar-activity-is-a-climate-pacemaker/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/03/the-great-pause-lengthens-again/
Wattsupwiththat.com? The first and last place I turn for all of my climate change data needs.
billvon 3,064
>Wattsupwiththat.com? The first and last place I turn for all of my climate change data needs.
Like 911truth.org for architectural insights, or AnswersInGenesis.com for biology. Hey, it's on the Internet; it has to be true.
Like 911truth.org for architectural insights, or AnswersInGenesis.com for biology. Hey, it's on the Internet; it has to be true.
brenthutch 444
billvon>And they are 38% sure this is true.
Next year likely won't be quite as hot, and if that happens I am 100% sure you will be claiming "this year was cooler! That's a FACT! Sorry you can't handle FACTS." (Of course if it's warmer than 2014 you'll just deny it again.)
Don't hate me..... Hate math. 38% < 62%
"We are 38% certain it is the warmest". Which means we are 62% certain that it is not.
SkyDekker 1,465
brenthutch***>And they are 38% sure this is true.
Next year likely won't be quite as hot, and if that happens I am 100% sure you will be claiming "this year was cooler! That's a FACT! Sorry you can't handle FACTS." (Of course if it's warmer than 2014 you'll just deny it again.)
Don't hate me..... Hate math. 38% < 62%
"We are 38% certain it is the warmest". Which means we are 62% certain that it is not.
Your logic needs some work, cause that simply isn't true.
brenthutch 444
Ok you caught me being lazy. Point conceded.
billvon>Wattsupwiththat.com? The first and last place I turn for all of my climate change data needs.
Like 911truth.org for architectural insights, or AnswersInGenesis.com for biology. Hey, it's on the Internet; it has to be true.
Yesterday I atched "Aliens on the Moon" pursuant to a recommendation from a friend as an entertaining and interesting documentary. You know? It as entertaining. I was laughing throughout because of how ridiculous it was. It led to some interesting discussions. All it takes is a bit of sense and some basic knowledge to understand that: (1) one does not simply launch a Saturn 5 from Vandenberg AFB without anybody noticing; and (2) a Saturn 5 launched from Vandenberg on polar orbit cannot send a manned spacecraft to the moon.
There are always some hardcore kooks that cannot be reasoned with. On the other hand, sites like wattsupwiththat and climateprogress are very useful in seeing different perspectives. One doesn't ant to go to either for climate data. They are very useful in providing some insight into differing interpretations of the data.
What are the implications of the NOAA/GISS data? You may think, "hottest year ever." Then bretthutch or rushmc puts a chink in that statement by pointing out that not even Gavin Schmidt is unequivocal in that statement. Then someone else can point out, ".01 or .02 degrees is insignificant." Then someone else says, ".02 degrees since 2004, according to the data and if it's right, it is statistically flat."
You don't find those interpretations looking in just one place. (Except maybe here). They provide reasoning for it. One may disagree or agree.
It's wwhy I don't say bill's assertion that 2014 is the armest recorded year is wrong. Or right. We don't know. Only other sources of information will let us see that. Do you suggest that one should limit one's universe in terms of study?
My wife is hotter than your wife.
sfzombie13 324
the whole global warming thing really boils down to one argument, and that is what happens when you're wrong.
say it isn't really happening. we waste a lot of time and money trying to curb emissions, stop polluting, stop using fossil fuels, start actually taking care of the environment. all of this to try to stop something that was not going to happen, but we didn't know this at the time. what happens if we were wrong? nothing.
say it is happening. we do nothing, continue doing what we are doing, polluting, using all of the fossil fuels, destroying the fresh water reserves, etc. and what if we were wrong here? we destroy the planet.
so it all comes down to common sense, except listening to most of you here, and most people everywhere else, leads me to believe that there is nothing common about it. if you have two options, and both lead to an unknown result, it seems to make sense to take the option which does no harm if we are wrong. i know i make mistake all the time, and i am very good at what i do. in a case where a mistake could lead to the destruction of the planet, i would rather that everyone just takes a little responsibility and err on the side of caution. why can nobody else see this? am i so far sighted and enlightened that i know things others don't? i really hope not, but it would seem that way.
since it is speakers corner, let me put it a way you can all understand: you have a gun. you don't know if it is loaded. you make a guess, but you could be wrong. you can either point it at someone and pull the trigger, and hope you guessed right and it was empty, but if you were wrong, someone could die. or you could use common sense and not point it at someone and pull the trigger, guessing it is loaded. this way, if you are wrong, nobody dies.
of course, i would clear it just to make sure. i like to know if my gun is loaded. i really just wanted to fit guns into this thread while staying on topic.
nazis.
say it isn't really happening. we waste a lot of time and money trying to curb emissions, stop polluting, stop using fossil fuels, start actually taking care of the environment. all of this to try to stop something that was not going to happen, but we didn't know this at the time. what happens if we were wrong? nothing.
say it is happening. we do nothing, continue doing what we are doing, polluting, using all of the fossil fuels, destroying the fresh water reserves, etc. and what if we were wrong here? we destroy the planet.
so it all comes down to common sense, except listening to most of you here, and most people everywhere else, leads me to believe that there is nothing common about it. if you have two options, and both lead to an unknown result, it seems to make sense to take the option which does no harm if we are wrong. i know i make mistake all the time, and i am very good at what i do. in a case where a mistake could lead to the destruction of the planet, i would rather that everyone just takes a little responsibility and err on the side of caution. why can nobody else see this? am i so far sighted and enlightened that i know things others don't? i really hope not, but it would seem that way.
since it is speakers corner, let me put it a way you can all understand: you have a gun. you don't know if it is loaded. you make a guess, but you could be wrong. you can either point it at someone and pull the trigger, and hope you guessed right and it was empty, but if you were wrong, someone could die. or you could use common sense and not point it at someone and pull the trigger, guessing it is loaded. this way, if you are wrong, nobody dies.
of course, i would clear it just to make sure. i like to know if my gun is loaded. i really just wanted to fit guns into this thread while staying on topic.
nazis.
_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes
billvon 3,064
>It's wwhy I don't say bill's assertion that 2014 is the armest recorded year is wrong. Or
>right. We don't know. Only other sources of information will let us see that.
Now we are up to four confirming sources: NASA, NOAA, JAMA and an independent Berkley study. From TechTimes:
=============
It's Official! 2014 is Hottest Year On Record: Global Warming Is No Hoax
By Jim Algar, Tech Times
January 19, 10:39 AM
The figures are in, and it's not a mistake, an exaggeration or a hoax, scientists say -- 2014 was the warmest year on record, confirming a warming trend and increasing climate worries.
The past year's average temperature was the highest ever recorded since detailed records began to be kept 135 years ago, scientist at NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration say.
They weren't alone in their determination; Japan's national weather agency as well as independent researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, also confirmed 2014 as the warmest year on record.
The year's average temperature, 58.24 degrees Fahrenheit (14.58 C) was 1.24 degrees F (0.69 C) above the 20th century average, NOAA scientists said.
NASA calculates temperatures a bit differently but its figures were within tenths of a degree of the NOAA numbers, with their year's average 1.22 degrees F over the average recorded between 1951 and 1980.
The last month of 2014 "sealed the deal" as it set a record for the warmest December ever recorded, NOAA scientists said.
The findings should end claims by some that warming has stopped, climate experts said, and the global warming development can be laid at the feet of human activities, including the burning of fossil fuels and the resulting emission of greenhouse gases.
"Greenhouse gas trends are responsible for the majority of the trend that we see," said Gavin Schmidt, head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, and since such emissions are likely to continue to rise, "we may anticipate further record highs in the years to come."
Land temperatures were only the fourth highest ever recorded, but every ocean saw new temperature highs, driving the global average up, he said.
"This was very clearly the warmest year in the ocean records," Schmidt said. "It wasn't quite the warmest year in the land records, but combined, this did actually give the warmest year."
All parts of the world saw elevated temperatures in 2014, the researchers said, including the far east of Russia, much of Europe, the western U.S., northern Africa, the interior of South America and regions of Australia.
"Every continent had some aspect of record high temperatures," said Tom Karl of NOAA's National Climatic Data Center.
Nine of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since the year 2000, NOAA global records show.
"This is the latest in a series of warm years, in a series of warm decades," said NASA's Schmidt.
========================
>right. We don't know. Only other sources of information will let us see that.
Now we are up to four confirming sources: NASA, NOAA, JAMA and an independent Berkley study. From TechTimes:
=============
It's Official! 2014 is Hottest Year On Record: Global Warming Is No Hoax
By Jim Algar, Tech Times
January 19, 10:39 AM
The figures are in, and it's not a mistake, an exaggeration or a hoax, scientists say -- 2014 was the warmest year on record, confirming a warming trend and increasing climate worries.
The past year's average temperature was the highest ever recorded since detailed records began to be kept 135 years ago, scientist at NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration say.
They weren't alone in their determination; Japan's national weather agency as well as independent researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, also confirmed 2014 as the warmest year on record.
The year's average temperature, 58.24 degrees Fahrenheit (14.58 C) was 1.24 degrees F (0.69 C) above the 20th century average, NOAA scientists said.
NASA calculates temperatures a bit differently but its figures were within tenths of a degree of the NOAA numbers, with their year's average 1.22 degrees F over the average recorded between 1951 and 1980.
The last month of 2014 "sealed the deal" as it set a record for the warmest December ever recorded, NOAA scientists said.
The findings should end claims by some that warming has stopped, climate experts said, and the global warming development can be laid at the feet of human activities, including the burning of fossil fuels and the resulting emission of greenhouse gases.
"Greenhouse gas trends are responsible for the majority of the trend that we see," said Gavin Schmidt, head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, and since such emissions are likely to continue to rise, "we may anticipate further record highs in the years to come."
Land temperatures were only the fourth highest ever recorded, but every ocean saw new temperature highs, driving the global average up, he said.
"This was very clearly the warmest year in the ocean records," Schmidt said. "It wasn't quite the warmest year in the land records, but combined, this did actually give the warmest year."
All parts of the world saw elevated temperatures in 2014, the researchers said, including the far east of Russia, much of Europe, the western U.S., northern Africa, the interior of South America and regions of Australia.
"Every continent had some aspect of record high temperatures," said Tom Karl of NOAA's National Climatic Data Center.
Nine of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since the year 2000, NOAA global records show.
"This is the latest in a series of warm years, in a series of warm decades," said NASA's Schmidt.
========================
Bill - do you think that a 38% chance of it being the hottest year is enough to say, "2014 was the hottest year?"
Really. Bill. It's okay. You didn't have all the information hen you posted it. As this new information/admission comes along, does it change your stance at all?
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites