Submitted by Charlton Stanley (aka Otteray Scribe), Guest Blogger
Approximately 1,000 weather reporting stations all over the world have been monitoring local temperatures for decades. Temperature data have been compiled and analyzed by NASA scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York.
Nine of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since the year 2000. The tenth? From the 20th Century, that was 1998. Temperature rise is not completely steady and consistent from one year to the next. That is due to factors such as volcanic eruptions and other natural causes; however, trends are the important thing.
We can see from the short video below the flip that Earth continues to experience warmer temperatures than several decades ago. The average temperature around the globe in 2011 was 0.92 degrees F (0.51 C) warmer than the mid-20th century baseline. Weather experts warn that a consistent global average change of even a half-degree Fahrenheit can have catastrophic effects on global weather patterns. Anyone recall April and May 2011?
130 years in 27 seconds:
Rep. Steve King (R-Douchebag) claims climate change is a religion, not science, while at the same time asserting climate change is good for the planet.
Sounds familiar. I love it when people start parroting Koch/FOX/GOP talking points.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/08/07/2429331/steve-king-climate-religion/
Joe Blow 1, August 7, 2013 at 11:51 am
Here’s the 48 hour forecast animation of the EXTREMELY powerful Arctic Cyclone spinning over the North Pole. This is going to spread Arctic Ice even further and then when it refreezes the Arctic Ice extent will expand even greater.
================================
Irrelevant straw man.
“Ice extent” is not a function of volume/quantity of ice.
Ice extent is expressed in square kilometers or square miles.
Ice volume/quantity, however, is expressed in cubic kilometers or cubic miles.
If you want to know how much ice has melted or how much exists still, you must use a volume/quantity formula.
Some ignorant deniers flaunt their ignorance like dancers in a parade:
(How Fifth Graders Calculate Ice Volume). Shame on you Joe Blow for endangering you fellow citizens and their children by trying to put their eyes out.
Attack the messenger? No, no. We’re attacking your rather transparent methodology as a propagandist and purveyor of distortion and contortion about a subject that is far more important than protecting the profits of your masters.
I’ll bet any one of the people taking you to task can identify easily one or more of the propaganda tactics you’ve deployed here. Why? In part because we have an unusually smart group around here. In part because we discuss propaganda and its various nefarious methodologies all the time.
Don’t feel too bad you’re having such a rough time of things though.
Your bosses did the equivalent of throwing you to the wolves in sending you here.
Joe Blow 1, August 7, 2013 at 12:14 pm
Those ice cores from 4,000 meters deep in the ice give an accurate record going back almost a half-million years.
and show Ice Age, Medieval Warming period and Little Ice Age. These all occurred before the invention of the SUV.
=======================================
They are useless unless they also take into consideration the cycle of axial precession, then combine the data (A Savvy Ecocosmological Earth Calendar – 2). The ~26,000 year cycle within the Global Climate System is a factor.
Joe Blow 1, August 7, 2013 at 12:12 pm
but climate is not weather. Climate is different from local weather, which is why it is less important to look at single years, or weather catastrophes in single years, but to evaluate climate, it is more important to monitor very large scale patterns over longer spans of time.
Which is done by recording the daily weather data. If they don’t record the daily weather they can’t do weekly,monthly,yearly averages. 15-30 year averages makes up one climatological year. Use to be 30 but somehow they keep changing the bar. Now it’s every extreme weather event is caused by climate change.
===================================
More of what your daddy taught you.
The thing you need to focus on is The Global Climate System.
It is a system, which has a special meaning in science:
The ignorance generators do not want people to think of climate or weather as being components of a system.
But it is a system, and it is damaged.
Thus, any systemic event within the Global Climate System is part of a damage system:
(False Climate Change Meme Infects The President). The appeal to parochial sentiments is a propaganda technique.
Joe Blow you are naked and the commenters here see your private parts for what they are: the ignorance generators a la Fox, Koch, Limgaugh, Inhofe, and other reality deniers.
OS, you certainly appear to have struck a nerve. It is both enlightening and informative to see the lengths denialists will go to in order to disrupt any dialogue, including a days-old thread on a blog. Keep it up. 🙂
Joe,
It is the deniers who are trying to stifle the debate on climate change. it.
*****
Cyberbullying Scientists: Using Threats in an Effort to Silence the Discussion on Climate Change
2/18/12
http://jonathanturley.org/2012/02/18/cyberbulling-scientists-using-threats-in-an-effort-to-silence-the-discussion-on-climate-change/
Excerpt;
Climate Change and the Integrity of Science, the letter that was signed by the 255 scientists, spoke of their concern about the recent escalation in assaults on scientists—especially climate scientists. They said that the assaults on both climate science and scientists came from climate change deniers who “are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence.” The scientists called “for an end to McCarthy-like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association, the harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them.”
Not long ago, I was disheartened to learn that climate scientists in the United States and in other countries have become victims of cyber-bullying. In 2010, Douglas Fisher wrote an article for Scientific American titled Cyber Bullying Intensifies as Climate Data Questioned. Fisher spoke of how climate researchers have to purge crude and crass emails that they find in their inboxes every day. Some consider purging such correspondence as a task they must deal with as part of the job of being a climate scientist. Others, however, “see the messages as threats and intimidation—cyber-bullying meant to shut down debate and cow scientists into limiting their participation in the public discourse.”
Clive Hamilton, an Australian author and academic said, “The purpose of this new form of cyber-bullying seems clear; it is to upset and intimidate the targets, making them reluctant to participate further in the climate change debate.” Gavin Schmidt, a scientist who works for NASA, said that “organized, ‘McCarthyite’ tactics aimed at specific scientists by various groups can be stressful.” He added “‘Frivolous’ Freedom of Information Act requests can tie up considerable quantities of researchers’ time.” Schmidt claims that the worst things of all are the “‘intimidating letters’ from congressional members threatening dire consequences to scientists working on climate change.”
Last month, MIT scientist Kerry Emanuel, a Republican and the director of MIT’s Atmospheres, Oceans and Climate program, received a “frenzy of hate male” after a video that featured an interview with him was published by Climate Desk…
Mother Jones reported that the emails contained “veiled threats’ against Emanuel’s wife—as well as other “tangible threats.” Emanuel said, “They were vile, these emails. They were the kind of emails nobody would like to receive.” He added, “What was a little bit new about it was dragging family members into it and feeling that my family might be under threat, so naturally I didn’t feel very good about that at all. I thought it was low to drag somebody’s spouse into arguments like this.”
The Guardian reported last June that Australian climate scientists had been receiving death threats. As a response to the large number of threatening emails and telephone calls, the Australia National University (ANU) in Canberra moved some of its “leading climate scientists to a secure facility…”
Ian Young, ANU’s vice-chancellor, said, “Obviously climate research is an emotive issue at the present time. These are issues where we should have a logical public debate and it’s completely intolerable that people be subjected to this sort of abuse and to threats like this.” Young added that “scientists had been threatened with assault if they were identified in the street.”
Canberra Times reported last year that more than 30 researchers in Australia—including ecologists, environmental policy experts, meteorologists, and atmospheric physicists—told the paper that they had been receiving a “stream of abusive emails threatening violence, sexual assault, public smear campaigns and attacks on family members.” Some of the scientists installed upgraded home security systems and switched to unlisted phone numbers because they were fearful that their homes and cars might be damaged.
One researcher even spoke of “receiving threats of sexual assault and violence against her children after her photograph appeared in a newspaper article promoting a community tree-planting day as a local action to mitigate climate change.”
One climate scientist, who did not want to be identified, told ABC News that a dead animal was once left on his doorstep. He said he now travels with bodyguards at times. David Koroly, a professor at the University of Melbourne’s School of Earth Science, told ABC that he receives threats whenever he is interviewed by the media. He said, “It is clear that there is a campaign in terms of either organised or disorganised threats to discourage scientists from presenting the best available climate science on television or radio.”
Joe Blow 1, August 6, 2013 at 12:19 am
Tornadoes and Global Warming: Is There a Connection?
Will the future bring more twisters to Oklahoma and Tornado Alley?
There is no real evidence that tornadoes are happening more often.
…
=====================================
Evidence has nothing to do with denialism. It is a matter of psychological fear masking as evidence.
Counting the numbers of tornadoes and observing trends is what sane people do.
Very accurate tornado data have been collected since 1950.
Less so before that.
But only a Luddite would miss the increase from 1950 (206 tornadoes) to 2011 (1777 tornadoes).
The meticulous data collected is done by NOAA (On The Origin of Tornadoes – 3).
It’s comical that I respond on topic and when you don’t like my responses you revert back to attacking the messenger. Too funny.
It’s all the COCK brothers fault.
It’s been fun. I will leave you with one of my all time favorites as I get back to more productive things in my life.
Agnotology is the study of ignorance generators like Joe Blow.
His footprints lead back to conservative rags and propaganda generated by Oil-Qaeda:
(Journal: Public Understanding of Science). Epistemology is the study of how “knowledge” is produced.
Joe Blow’s brain was formed by Fox News, Luntz, Marshall Institute, The Heartland Institute, Koch Inc., and other propaganda ignorance generators.
Joe wins the internet cherry-picking prize, despite formidable competition from all the other deniers, conspiracy theorists, religionists and True Believers.
Apologize I should have read further.
What Dr. Forbes is saying, in simple terms; do not take a single year or two and try to make determinations on long term global warming on that basis.
AGREED
In responding to a question about the high number of tornadoes in 2011 and the low number in 2012, he wrote on his Facebook page on November 17, 2012:
You mention long term and then make note of a one year difference.
FACT over the last 50 years the number of VIOLENT F3-F5 tornadoes are decreasing. The overall number of tornadoes are going up. This is likely do to more chasers as reporters and better technology in detection.
Those ice cores from 4,000 meters deep in the ice give an accurate record going back almost a half-million years.
and show Ice Age, Medieval Warming period and Little Ice Age. These all occurred before the invention of the SUV.
but climate is not weather. Climate is different from local weather, which is why it is less important to look at single years, or weather catastrophes in single years, but to evaluate climate, it is more important to monitor very large scale patterns over longer spans of time.
Which is done by recording the daily weather data. If they don’t record the daily weather they can’t do weekly,monthly,yearly averages. 15-30 year averages makes up one climatological year. Use to be 30 but somehow they keep changing the bar. Now it’s every extreme weather event is caused by climate change.
Sedimentary ice patterns have been compared with ancient tree rings to establish whether the data are reliable and valid for comparison. Weather patterns are like fingerprints; no two patterns over several years are exactly alike, making it possible to take a block of wood from a tree, even a long-dead one, and establish what years that piece of lumber was alive and growing as part of a tree. Provided of course there are enough rings visible to make a good sample.
ALL very true now ask yourself how many trees were used and what location they came from.
And besides, since your confirmation in tree ring belief it is turning out that the TREEmometer is not as good as the THERmometer
A new paper by Brienen et al in the journal Global Biogeochemical Cycles suggests that there may be a whole new set of biases in tree ring studies.
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/3/20/a-whole-new-bias.html
Science always in search of the truth, got ta love it
Here’s the 48 hour forecast animation of the EXTREMELY powerful Arctic Cyclone spinning over the North Pole. This is going to spread Arctic Ice even further and then when it refreezes the Arctic Ice extent will expand even greater.
http://models.weatherbell.com/news/rgem_2013080712_dew2m_pole.gif
BFM, Gene & Elaine,
That question about how far the record goes back. Without naming names, someone keeps ignoring the longitudinal data from Antarctic ice cores that date back 414,000 years. Sedimentary ice patterns have been compared with ancient tree rings to establish whether the data are reliable and valid for comparison. Weather patterns are like fingerprints; no two patterns over several years are exactly alike, making it possible to take a block of wood from a tree, even a long-dead one, and establish what years that piece of lumber was alive and growing as part of a tree. Provided of course there are enough rings visible to make a good sample.
The past couple of centuries, weather has been observed and measured all over the planet by human observers, and those data are now being analyzed and compared with tree rings and sedimentary samples. FWIW, not just by agencies like NOAA and NASA. The US Department of Agriculture has a strong interest in accurate data. And for the xenophobes among us, I have to break the news that it’s not just in the USA. For example, Russia, England, France and others have excellent weather reporting networks and their weather agencies are staffed with competent scientists. This is one area of research where international cooperation has been good.
When looking at weather patterns over a long span of time, the patterns are unique, much like fingerprints. No two years are exactly alike, with each year giving a specific weather pattern. As an example, archaeologists and weather scientists working together figured out what happened to the settlers at Jamestown. Scientists working in teams examined tree ring records of what the weather was like at the time Jamestown was founded. The record shows that area had the worst drought in many years, and it lasted several consecutive years. That’s what happened to the Jamestown settlers. They could not cope with the drought, as their crops withered due to lack of rain and the summer heat. The Jamestown settlers starved or were killed by disease, all due to the multi-years dry spell in that area. As many of the deniers point out, weather varies. That is about the only thing they get right. Weather does vary, but climate is not weather. Climate is different from local weather, which is why it is less important to look at single years, or weather catastrophes in single years, but to evaluate climate, it is more important to monitor very large scale patterns over longer spans of time.
Those ice cores from 4,000 meters deep in the ice give an accurate record going back almost a half-million years.
As for TV meteorologists, how many are actually meteorologists, with a college major in meteorology? And of those, how many have either a Master’s or Doctorate in meteorology? Dr. Greg Forbes, the Weather Channel’s severe weather expert, has pointed out individual severe weather events, or even severe weather years are only a data point in evaluating climate change. In responding to a question about the high number of tornadoes in 2011 and the low number in 2012, he wrote on his Facebook page on November 17, 2012:
What Dr. Forbes is saying, in simple terms; do not take a single year or two and try to make determinations on long term global warming on that basis. It can’t be done. I trust Dr. Forbes to know what he is talking about. Since Dr. Ted Fujita died, there are few people in this country who know more about violent weather events than Forbes, who got his Master’s and Doctorate degrees under the supervision of Fujita.
I have known several TV weather people, and used to have one as a client. Many of them are weather presenters, not meteorologists. They get the job on the basis of how good they look, and how well they can read a script or ad lib. My former client came out of journalism school, not a meteorology program. As has been pointed out, when I look at a petition or mass-signed letter, I want to know who these people are and what are their credentials for opining on a scientific subject.
One of my lifetime friends was a signatory. He is a theoretical physicist, specializing in dense matter subatomic physics. He is not a weather expert. He is not particularly political, but what politics he has are quite a bit farther to the right than the average person. Despite his brilliance and substantial contributions to physics, he is not a climatologist.
Gives Hide the decline a whole new meanning
For those who would like to see what data tampering looks like. This will soon go viral
Smoking Gun That The NOAA US Climate Extremes Index Is 100% Fraudulent
http://climatism.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/smoking-gun-that-the-noaa-us-climate-extremes-index-is-100-fraudulent/