Missing January Update

[olofscience 480]

A long-time poster here has strangely missed his usual January "climate update" I'll just put the full 2023 result here: World breaches 1.5C warming threshold for full year (bbc.co.uk)

2023 was by far, the warmest year on record.

 

And to anticipate his excuse "it's only because of the El Niño":

While El Niño has given air temperatures an extra boost, it would typically only do so by about 0.2C.

 

Now let's watch his mental gymnastics to say what's NOT the cause of the warming. It will be one for the Olympics.

 

I'll also make another prediction for next January - 2024 probably won't be as warm as 2023 due to normal fluctuations (a La Nina cycle seems to be forming again), but the long-time poster will take that as "proof" that CO2 isn't the cause of the warming (because of his lack of maths ability), so he'll make a January 2025 "update" then saying that.

[jakee 1,489]

Too much credit. He’ll just say ‘So what? Warmer is better!’

Which won’t stop him crowing as soon as the temp comes down from this peak that it means warming isn’t happening at all because it’s not currently the absolute hottest it’s ever been since we started measuring.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

2 hours ago, olofscience said:

A long-time poster here has strangely missed his usual January "climate update" I'll just put the full 2023 result here: World breaches 1.5C warming threshold for full year (bbc.co.uk)

2023 was by far, the warmest year on record.

 

And to anticipate his excuse "it's only because of the El Niño":

While El Niño has given air temperatures an extra boost, it would typically only do so by about 0.2C.

 

Now let's watch his mental gymnastics to say what's NOT the cause of the warming. It will be one for the Olympics.

 

I'll also make another prediction for next January - 2024 probably won't be as warm as 2023 due to normal fluctuations (a La Nina cycle seems to be forming again), but the long-time poster will take that as "proof" that CO2 isn't the cause of the warming (because of his lack of maths ability), so he'll make a January 2025 "update" then saying that.

Nah, I think he's just burnt out.

[GeorgiaDon 362]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Nah, I think he's just burnt out.

Getting too hot will do that to you.

[ryoder 1,590]

In other climate news, 2 climate deniers FAFO that slander can be expensive:

Michael Mann, a Leading Climate Scientist, Wins His Defamation Suit

[billvon 2,990]

9 minutes ago, ryoder said:

In other climate news, 2 climate deniers FAFO that slander can be expensive:

Michael Mann, a Leading Climate Scientist, Wins His Defamation Suit

It's getting so you can't even compare someone to a convicted child molester without them getting all upset with you!  This country is going straight to hell I tell ya,

[ryoder 1,590]

As Ron Filipkowski (of Meidastouch) posted recently:

"Speech is free; Lies are expensive!"

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

6 hours ago, ryoder said:

In other climate news, 2 climate deniers FAFO that slander can be expensive:

Michael Mann, a Leading Climate Scientist, Wins His Defamation Suit

Kind of a shame that there can't be some sort of punishment for all those who repeated that slander.
You know, like the trolls on here.
 

[JoeWeber 2,720]

7 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Kind of a shame that there can't be some sort of punishment for all those who repeated that slander.
You know, like the trolls on here.
 

But there is, they are forced to suffer your acerbic wit, again, and again, and again.......

[brenthutch 444]

Well here it is folks!  Let’s get the big one out of the way.

Global Temperature prediction = WRONG (I failed to predict a strong ElNino)

CO2 emissions = correct 

Coal usage = correct 

Floods, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, hailstorms, lightning strikes, blizzards and all meteorological phenomena within historical boundaries = correct 

Arctic sea ice still exists = correct 

EV adaptation stalled = correct 

“Green” energy transition stalled = correct 

Global food production at or near record levels = correct 

Polar bear population stable = correct 

That gives me a B+ 

[brenthutch 444]

On 2/8/2024 at 5:33 AM, olofscience said:

A long-time poster here has strangely missed his usual January "climate update" I'll just put the full 2023 result here: World breaches 1.5C warming threshold for full year (bbc.co.uk)

 

I'll also make another prediction for next January - 2024 probably won't be as warm as 2023 due to normal fluctuations (a La Nina cycle seems to be forming again), but the long-time poster will take that as "proof" that CO2 isn't the cause of the warming (because of his lack of maths ability), so he'll make a January 2025 "update" then saying that.

You can’t have it both ways, either CO2 drives global temperatures or its natural variability. I choose the latter.

[olofscience 480]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

You can’t have it both ways

This is funny.

I keep saying, you can't handle a system with more than one variable, and you keep proving me right.

[brenthutch 444]

6 minutes ago, olofscience said:

This is funny.

I keep saying, you can't handle a system with more than one variable, and you keep proving me right.

When did you say that?

[olofscience 480]

18 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

When did you say that?

A few times already...one was on November 16th, 2021.

[olofscience 480]

Back to the topic though:

Consider a function y = sin(x) + 0.1x

Which term dominates at x = 100? Which term contributes to the greatest change between 0 < x < 2*pi?

 

That's just a very simple example, and global temperature is magnitudes more complicated, but to answer your question,

 

Yes, yes we can have it both ways.

 

You just can't understand, or won't. It's really up to you.

[billvon 2,990]

1 hour ago, olofscience said:

Back to the topic though:

Consider a function y = sin(x) + 0.1x

Dude, that's math, which is both liberal and woke.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

19 minutes ago, billvon said:

Dude, that's math, which is both liberal and woke.

When I live my truth, there is no math.

[jakee 1,489]

5 hours ago, brenthutch said:

You can’t have it both ways, either CO2 drives global temperatures or its natural variability. I choose the latter.

You realise you are just a caricature of yourself at this point, right? 
 

Cause you cannot possibly think that declaring you have no idea what ‘trend’ means is going to make you sound clever.

[brenthutch 444]

24 minutes ago, jakee said:

You realise you are just a caricature of yourself at this point, right? 
 

Cause you cannot possibly think that declaring you have no idea what ‘trend’ means is going to make you sound clever.

I know what the “trend” is, the planet has been warming in fits and starts since the last ice age, long before the industrial era and has continued since, irrespective of CO2 emissions.  Correlation doesn’t mean causation.  The only demonstrable impact of elevated CO2 is a literal greening of the planet.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130708103521.htm#:~:text=free email newsletter.-,Deserts 'greening' from rising carbon dioxide%3A Green foliage boosted,across the world's arid regions&text=Summary%3A,fertilization%2C according to new research.

[olofscience 480]

45 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I know what the “trend” is, the planet has been warming

Funny, you've spent SO much effort denying that, only to throw all that effort away.

46 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The only demonstrable impact

Nice, head in the sand time.

 

Let me say this again - I wish you were right and warming isn't a thing (at least some of the time - since you keep changing your arguments). Not least because I love snowsports and it hardly snows in the UK any more.

But I'm not the one needing a reality check.

[jakee 1,489]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

I know what the “trend” is, the planet has been warming in fits and starts since the last ice age, long before the industrial era and has continued since, irrespective of CO2 emissions.  Correlation doesn’t mean causation.  The only demonstrable impact of elevated CO2 is a literal greening of the planet.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130708103521.htm#:~:text=free email newsletter.-,Deserts 'greening' from rising carbon dioxide%3A Green foliage boosted,across the world's arid regions&text=Summary%3A,fertilization%2C according to new research.

Hey look, a reply that has nothing to do with the ridiculous claim you just made. Just like always.