While every snow flurry or cool snap is often cited as evidence of the folly of “global warming” by critics, scientists at the NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies have released data showing that 2010 now ranks as the hottest climate year on record.
The combined land-ocean temperature readings from NASA’s Goddard Institute indicate that 2010 has surpassed what it identified as the previous warmest climate year, 2005.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data shows that 1998 was the warmest year on record with 2005 close behind. The findings have been released after another failure to reach a significant reductions in emissions in the Cancun summit.
Nations again refused to make the cuts necessary to prevent global temperatures from rising 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels by 2100.
This report comes with the disclosure that a top FOX executive ordered correspondents not to cite global warming statistics and to question the basis for climate change claims.
Source: Washington Post
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Dd6-KV0TR8&fs=1&hl=en_US]
Any Snow Bob? where in NY?
Global warming; what a crock.
It’s 22 degrees with a wind chill of 1 degree here in New York.
badtroll,
I have never lost an argument with you, I’m just tired of having the same one over and over based on your ignorance.
If you don’t like being discredited as a racist?
Quit making racist “jokes”.
If you don’t like being considered a troll?
You shouldn’t 1) act like one and 2) shouldn’t have admitted you are nothing but a troll.
You’ll never live down the troll admission, but I’ve told you what you need to do to get me to drop the racism issue: apologize for being a racist. I’ve let it slide that you were also misogynistic at the same time.
It’s your own words and actions that convict your credibility. And that’s the issue, birther. You’re so full of crap on so many things, why should anyone take your word – a non-scientist siding with the lunatic fringe – that you’re right about the weather? Hm? No reason at all is the one and only correct answer.
roflol
Yeah, Gyges. I couldn’t even make it though five minutes. His ignorance of geometry was stunning. I had to quit after he said the U.S. was going to revert to cannibalism if we don’t start believing in the time cube. In setting where the bar is for lunatic theories, that guy sets a high mark. Maybe not the world record, but it’s a formidable mark nonetheless.
oh and don’t forget to mention troll bigot and racist.
Don’t want one of them agreeing with you.
Ah now thats the Buddha we all know. When he begins to lose the argument he turns to attacks and tries to change the subject.
You admitted what I’ve previously said about the carbon cycle is true.
Oh now you want to listen to a non scientist, a surfing sous chef.
Not so sure you want that type of guy backing up your claim. He has no credibility except when it fits your argument. See how you are.
Buddha,
It actually stops being amusing after like 5 min. Then you just want to drink heavily to purge your body of the braincells that have been infected by the way the guy talks.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn2UCqL5qyo&fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0]
Preach on, badtroll!
Come on! Tell us how the surfing sous chef figured out how the bulk of the scientific community got it wrong! Tell us about how Obama isn’t a citizen! Make some racist jokes!
Oops! Sorry. I blame your drivel, which all starts to sound the same after awhile: uniformly ignorant.
You admitted what I’ve previously said about the carbon cycle is true. Your best retort was along the lines of “yeah, but how much carbon will it take to throw the system into disequilibrium.” Like screwing with atmospheric chemistry was some kind of Vegas game you could play the odds on. Tipping points in complex systems don’t work that way. When they break, you’re screwed. You can disbelieve chemistry all you want. For your next trick, might I suggest that you try disbelieving gravity. Throw yourself at the ground from a high spot and try to miss. Who knows? Maybe you’ll be able to fly. It worked for Arthur Dent.
______
Gyges,
That was a something else! What – other than abject lunacy – I’m not sure, but it was something else. Do they let that Ray fellow out and about in public without a handler? I’d love to see the documentary about him.
Monthly Snow – November 2007
Northern Hemisphere:
32.87 million sq. km
Eurasia:
19.74 million sq. km
North America:
13.13 million sq. km
Must be all the warming that keeps melting all the snow.
Monthly Snow – November 2009
Northern Hemisphere:
34.44 million sq. km
Eurasia:
22.34 million sq. km
North America:
12.10 million sq. km
Monthly Snow – November 2010
Northern Hemisphere:
34.03 million sq. km
Eurasia:
20.13 million sq. km
North America:
13.90 million sq. km
Monthly Snow – November 2008
Northern Hemisphere:
32.01 million sq. km
Eurasia:
18.76 million sq. km
North America:
13.25 million sq. km
http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/chart_vis.php?ui_year=2008&ui_month=11&ui_set=1
Buddha,
And for my final act…
I present: The time cube
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Cube
Let’s ignore irrefutable evidence like:
Carbon dioxide contributes to only 4.2 – 8.4% of the greenhouse gas effect.
Only approximately 4% of carbon dioxide is man-made.
Water vapor accounts for 90 – 95% of the green house gas effect.
99.99% of water vapor is natural, meaning that no amount of de-industrialization could get rid of it.
Increases in carbon dioxide follow increases in temperature by about 800 years, not precede them, even Nal knows this one.
During the Ordovician period carbon dioxide concentrations were twelve times what they are now, and the temperature was lower.
The distance between Earth and Sun changes every year, affecting the amount of energy the earth receives.
Higher temperatures over land
Summer land surface temperature of cities in the Northeast were an average of 7 °C to 9 °C (13°F to 16 °F) warmer than surrounding rural areas over a three year period, the new research shows.
Higher sea levels
Sea level 81,000 years ago was 1 meter higher than it is now while carbon dioxide levels were lower.
According to satellite data, sea level has been decreasing since 2005
Less snow cover
Really Buddha less snow cover, go ahead blame the cold medicine.
Gyges,
That is truly a blast from the past. I haven’t thought about Galen since high school.
While you do all the cherry picking. Yes, yes. We’ve seen your endless beating the dead dog and pony show before. When backed into the corner over chemistry, you’ll respond “the question is how much carbon will destabilize the system” or words to that effect – a rationalization to further justify fossil fuels despite the mechanism you are talking so blithely about monkeying with could cause mass extinctions by making surface weather chaotic and making the oceans so acidic it kills off all the phytoplankton. The greenhouse effect is not some thermostat in the hall you can screw with. When a tipping point is reached, it’s game over. But you’d have to understand complex systems to understand that idea and your grasp of complexity is even weaker than your grasp of chemistry and physics. But please, cherry pick from the statistically insignificant minority of scientists who back denial.
Let’s ignore irrefutable evidence like:
— Higher temperatures over land
— Higher temperatures over oceans
— Higher ocean heat content
— Higher near-surface air temperatures (temperatures in the troposphere, where Earth’s weather occurs)
— Higher humidity
— Higher sea surface temperatures
— Higher sea levels
— Less sea ice
— Less snow cover
— Shrinking glaciers
All because the minority of scientists and a surfer say it isn’t so.
Speaking of which . . . when are you going to tell us about how that birther thing worked out for you?
Buddha,
Phrenology is old hat. For REALLY old hat, how about the basis for “Healthy diets” in Europe for much of history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Temperaments
Sorry hefty sb heavy
I blame the cold medicine
You can’t say you’re bdaman the science guy because you don’t know jack squat about science except what appeals to your confirmation bias.
I don’t have to, I let the real scientist do all the hefty lifting.
Gyges,
I’ll have to say “fan death” was a new one for me. A hilarious new one. Seriously, that’s one of those things so blatantly science illiterate it makes you wonder how phrenology ever died out.