"The average temperature across the world's land and ocean surfaces during July 2014 was 0.64°C (1.15°F) above the 20th century average, the fourth highest for July on record." Source.
[This message has been edited by FlyinFieros (edited 09-09-2014).]
Study: Snow has thinned on Arctic sea ice "From research stations drifting on ice floes to high-tech aircraft radar, scientists have been tracking the depth of snow that accumulates on Arctic sea ice for almost a century. Now that people are more concerned than ever about what is happening at the poles, research led by the University of Washington and NASA confirms that snow has thinned significantly in the Arctic, particularly on sea ice in western waters near Alaska."
Study: Water Scarcity and Climate Change through 2095 "When they incorporated water use and availability in this powerful engine and ran scenarios of possible climate mitigation policy targets, they found that without any climate policy to curb carbon emissions, half the world will be living under extreme water scarcity. Climate mitigation policies that increase growth of certain water-hungry biofuels may actually exacerbate water scarcity."
Here's a fantastic overview of the incontrovertible scientific basis:
Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget "The Earth’s climate is a solar powered system. Globally, over the course of the year, the Earth system—land surfaces, oceans, and atmosphere—absorbs an average of about 240 watts of solar power per square meter (one watt is one joule of energy every second). The absorbed sunlight drives photosynthesis, fuels evaporation, melts snow and ice, and warms the Earth system. (continued at link)"
[This message has been edited by FlyinFieros (edited 09-09-2014).]
Study: Snow has thinned on Arctic sea ice "From research stations drifting on ice floes to high-tech aircraft radar, scientists have been tracking the depth of snow that accumulates on Arctic sea ice for almost a century. Now that people are more concerned than ever about what is happening at the poles, research led by the University of Washington and NASA confirms that snow has thinned significantly in the Arctic, particularly on sea ice in western waters near Alaska."
quote
Originally posted by FlyinFieros:
Study: Water Scarcity and Climate Change through 2095 "When they incorporated water use and availability in this powerful engine and ran scenarios of possible climate mitigation policy targets, they found that without any climate policy to curb carbon emissions, half the world will be living under extreme water scarcity. Climate mitigation policies that increase growth of certain water-hungry biofuels may actually exacerbate water scarcity."
...well which is it?
Ice melts produces water and floods the earth, then in the next breath you say there is going to be no more water. So what happened to the flood water? Where did all this water go?
Ice melts produces water and floods the earth, then in the next breath you say there is going to be no more water. So what happened to the flood water? Where did all this water go?
Most of the ice melts are either salt water, or they end up in the ocean - unfit to drink. Can't irrigate a farm with brine.
Arn, you may just have qualified for the finals as this year's poster child for Confirmation Bias.
We'll see when winter arrives. A volume of posts does not prove the point. The point is this. If meteorologists have it right we'll have a cold and snowy winter. If the IPCC and Al Gore got it right (and his million dollar award is justified), then the Polar Passage will be in business in the spring.
Arn, you embarrass yourself. You are so deep into confirmation bias that you still fail to recognize that the article you cited so seriously is a joke! The entire Empire News web site is dedicated to satire. All the "news stories" there are not just fake, but intentionally fake:
There’s an amazing correlation between individuals who insist practically all the scientists are wrong and individuals who ask questions like this.
From another thread:
quote
"You don't believe as I do therefore you are to be ridiculed."
Please show me where I said "all the scientists are wrong" in my post dickwad (my post is unedited for your convenience).
Yes you can't irrigate with brine as mentioned above, but as some people like to point out here it is simple science, water evaporates, which in turns forms rain which essentially is fresh water (some of which just might return to ground you think?). Are you saying that when all the ice melts all this water is going to stay in the ocean? I can't believe you are that thick.
Could it be that there is a 'fresh' water shortage that the more likely cause of it man's use of it for irrigation, etc vs. your post which blames it on "climate change". You mean the worlds growing population and the amount of food that we have to grow to sustain people has nothing to do with it?
Of course this is par for the course as I have asked many questions is the past that you have chosen to ignore, you just like to cherry pick what you want so you can post your graphs (again) and such taken from sites with a political agenda as you like to call them. I have yet to see you post any actual link to an actual published paper and then have the gall to whine about others.
edit:
Besides that, look who is going for the shock and awe factor, taken from your posted link:
...talk about embellishment of the 'truth' by showing a picture of the earth completely devoid of water...
[This message has been edited by Mickey_Moose (edited 09-09-2014).]
Man, I was all kinds of against Global Warming, until I saw how you went after anyone that didn't agree with you. Man, I gotta say.... I'm impressed. Ignoring logic and just attacking people on a personal level to win is a genius move! Someone should tell the White House that this is possible!
The numbers are in and the verdict is that there has been no global warming for 17 years and 11 months, according to satellite data.
Satellite data prepared by Lord Christopher Monckton shows there has been no warming trend from October of 1996 to August of 2014 — 215 months. To put this in perspective, kids graduating from high school this year have not lived through any global warming in their lifetimes.
According to Monckton — the third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley and a former policy adviser to U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher — the rate of warming has been half of what climate scientists initially predicted in the early 1990s.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) first predicted in 1990 that global temperatures would rise at a rate of 2.8 degrees Celsius per century. But the temperature rise since the IPCC’s prediction has only been at a rate of 1.4 degrees Celsius per century.
The so-called “pause” in global warming has baffled climate scientists, as many climate models did not predict a prolonged period of little to no warming. While some climate scientists deny the “pause” in global warming even exists, others have looked to places ocean and wind patterns for answers as to why there has been no warming for nearly two decades.
There are now literally dozens of potential explanations for the global warming “pause,” ranging from increasing volcanic activity to Chinese coal-fired power plant emissions.
“The Great Pause is a growing embarrassment to those who had told us with ‘substantial confidence’ that the science was settled and the debate over,” Monckton wrote in his climate analysis. “Nature had other ideas.”
“Though more than two dozen more or less implausible excuses for the Pause are appearing in nervous reviewed journals, the possibility that the Pause is occurring because the computer models are simply wrong about the sensitivity of temperature to manmade greenhouse gases can no longer be dismissed,” Monckton added.
Recent articles have claimed that excess heat has been stored in the Earth’s oceans instead of going up into the atmosphere. A new study in the journal Science claims that global warming “slowdown is mainly caused by heat transported to deeper layers in the Atlantic and the Southern oceans, initiated by a recurrent salinity anomaly in the subpolar North Atlantic.”
Pacific and Atlantic oscillation cycles supposedly force warm water deeper and bring up cooler waters to the surface — the reverse of what ocean patterns were doing in the 1990s when global temperatures were rising.
But meteorologists have been predicting a weak el Niño this fall and winter, which would warm ocean waters and potentially put an end to the “pause” in global warming.
“The Great Pause may well come to an end by this winter,” said Monckton. “An el Niño event is underway and would normally peak during the northern-hemisphere winter. There is too little information to say how much temporary warming it will cause, but a new wave of warm water has emerged in recent days, so one should not yet write off this el Niño as a non-event.”
El Niños occur every few years and can cause global temperatures to temporarily spike. Such events caused temperature spikes in 1998, 2007 and 2010, according to Monckton’s data. But these temperature spikes are often succeeded by huge drops in temperatures due to la Niña events.
However, global average temperatures have not risen in concert with the sustained growth in CO2, leading to many voices claiming that global warming has paused.
Originally posted by Hudini: However, global average temperatures have not risen in concert with the sustained growth in CO2, leading to many voices claiming that global warming has paused.
From your link, the very next sentence: "The climate system is not linear, it is not straightforward. It is not necessarily reflected in the temperature in the atmosphere, but if you look at the temperature profile in the ocean, the heat is going in the oceans," said Oksana Tarasova, chief of the atmospheric research division at the WMO.
[This message has been edited by FlyinFieros (edited 09-10-2014).]
Yes you can't irrigate with brine as mentioned above, but as some people like to point out here it is simple science, water evaporates, which in turns forms rain which essentially is fresh water (some of which just might return to ground you think?). Are you saying that when all the ice melts all this water is going to stay in the ocean? I can't believe you are that thick.
Could it be that there is a 'fresh' water shortage that the more likely cause of it man's use of it for irrigation, etc vs. your post which blames it on "climate change". You mean the worlds growing population and the amount of food that we have to grow to sustain people has nothing to do with it?
People obviously do consume water and not always wisely - but that's not the most important issue here.
First off, more water in the ocean does not mean more rain. Evaporation depends on surface area. Adding volume to the ocean only increases the surface area of the ocean a minuscule amount (compared to the volume of water that's being added).
Second, most scientists are concerned because having more energy in the climate system (global warming) makes climate patterns and precipitation less predictable. Some areas get more rain, some areas get less.
Looks like flyinfieros is still spamming the s*** out of this thread. Typical tactic of the disingenuous who believe in shutting up the opposition by shouting them down.
Looks like flyinfieros is still spamming the s*** out of this thread. Typical tactic of the disingenuous who believe in shutting up the opposition by shouting them down.
That's an amazing statement coming from you, the person whom has been throwing crap at the wall for hundreds of posts.
Meanwhile, you post another link to a junk article about this so called "pause" that doesn't exist.
The "pause" is a contrived, cherry picked scenario that only shows up if you pick 1998 as the starting year - an abnormally hot El-Nino year. Of course, this has been explained by at least three people at least a dozen times and you keep ignoring it and posting crap.
"Let me very very clear, for us climate change is real and it's a threat that we want to act on. We're not aligning with skeptics...I think what has happened over the past few years is that the discussion has become dysfunctional. I think energy companies like us have retreated because there was no reputational upside in it, so better keep your head down. So the discussion has gone into la-la land a little."
Originally posted by fierobear: Looks like flyinfieros is still spamming the s*** out of this thread. Typical tactic of the disingenuous who believe in shutting up the opposition by shouting them down.
Are you completely ignorant of how C - O - M - M - O - N you use the 'tactic' you are complaining about?
fierobear constantly uses this 'tactic' to drown out evidence he doesn't want people to see.
Originally posted by fierobear: Looks like flyinfieros is still spamming the s*** out of this thread. Typical tactic of the disingenuous who believe in shutting up the opposition by shouting them down.
Originally posted by avengador1: I'm just waiting for the twenty some odd posts FlyinFieros is going to post now
A few pages back, he put three placeholder posts with nothing in them. He didn't even know what was going to post, but knew he needed to spam the thread with at least three warmist bits of crap.
LOL @ flyinfieros
[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 09-11-2014).]
In a recent post, I reported on the diagram in Jones 1998 (Science), which pushed hide-the-decline a year earlier than my previous inventory. (The Briffa bodge, an earlier technique, dates back to 1992 and Jones 1998 is a sort-of transition from the Briffa bodge to truncation as hide-the-decline technology.)
I’ve had a few requests for a fresh inventory of hide-the-decline incidents, updating the discussion of Oxburgh panelist Kerry Emanuel’s false claim to the US Congress that hide-the-decline had been limited to a “single lapse of judgement” in a “non peer-reviewed publication” (the WMO diagram).
However, rather than this being a “single lapse of judgement”, to my knowledge, there is NOT A SINGLE graphic in “peer reviewed literature” that shows the Briffa decline in a spaghetti graph comparison of temperature reconstructions.
I’ve done a quick inventory below (and other examples will come to mind) and re-examined the handling of the Briffa reconstruction in the spaghetti graph in each article. In 22 of the 28 diagrams listed below, the Briffa reconstruction has been truncated to hide-the-decline (following the practice of IPCC AR3 where Mann had been Lead Author.) As an alternative to showing the decline, Mann, in 1999, proposed that IPCC simply not show the Briffa reconstruction. This practice has been followed in 6 of the 28 listed below, including the influential 2006 NAS report and 2009 EPA Endangerment Finding (which used the diagram from the NAS report.) But remarkably, not a single one contains a graphic comparing the actual Briffa reconstruction to other reconstructions.
Article Figure Jones 1998 (Science) Figure captioned “Getting Warmer?” Jones et al 1999 (Rev Geophys) Figure 6 Briffa and Osborn 1999 (Science) Figure 1 IPCC FOD Figure 2.25 WMO-1999 Cover IPCC AR3 SOD Figure 2.21 Crowley and Lowery 2000 Figure 1 omits Briffa et al 2001 (JGR) Plate 3 IPCC AR3 Figure 2.21 Jones et al 2001 (Science) Figure 2A Briffa and Osborn 2002 (Science) Figure captioned “Records of Past Climate” Esper et al 2002 (Science) Figure 2 omits Bradley et al 2003 (Springer) Figure 6.5, 6.6 Mann et al 2003 (EOS) Figure 1 Briffa et al 2004 (Glob Plan Chg) Figure 8 Cook et al 2004 (QRS) Figure 1 Esper et al 2004 (EOS) Figure 1 omits Esper et al 2005 (Clim Dyn) Figure 1 omits Esper et al 2005 (GRL) omits Juckes et al 2006 (CPD) Figure 1 Hegerl et al 2007 (Nature) Figure 1 Hegerl et al 2007 (J Clim) Figure 5b IPCC AR4 2007 Figure 6.10b NAS Panel 2006 omits D’Arrigo et al 2007 (Gl Plan Chg) Figure 3 omits Mann et al 2008 (PNAS) truncated input Mann et al 2008 (PNAS) Figure 3 Kaufman et al 2009 (Science) Figure 3G omits EPA Endangerment Finding 2009 (Science) omits IPCC AR5 2013 Figure 5.7 not shown
Within the literature, there are several articles disclosing the decline, notably by Briffa himself e.g. Briffa et al 1998 (Nature 291), Briffa et al 1998 (Nature 393), Briffa 2000 (QSR) – indeed, this was how I originally noticed that the decline had been hidden in the IPCC AR3 diagram in 2005 long before Climategate – but none of these articles shows a comparison of the Briffa reconstruction to the other (Mann, Jones) reconstructions. The spaghetti graphcs of Briffa et al 2001 and Briffa et al 2004 (Glob Plan Chg) both hide-the-decline, but there are other figures that show the decline (but these other figures do not compare to other reconstructions.) Mann et al 2008 took matters to a different plane entirely: in addition to hide-the-decline in its spaghetti graph, Mann et al 2008 replaced the modern portion of Briffa MXD data with “infilled data”.I Even technical articles on the “divergence” problem do not contain diagrams showing the Briffa et a 2001 reconstruction including decline as against other reconstructions (e.g. D’Arrigo et al 2007 (Glob Plan Chg)).
In summary, far from hide-the-decline being the “single lapse of judgement” claimed by Emanuel and the Oxburgh panel, the opposite is the case: nowhere in peer reviewed academic literature can one find a diagram showing the decline in the Briffa MXD reconstruction compared to other reconstructions.
[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 09-11-2014).]
"..I think what has happened over the past few years is that the discussion has become dysfunctional. I think energy companies like us have retreated because there was no reputational upside in it, so better keep your head down."
This applies to many controvercial topics even for individuals. Usually we find out what they really think when they get up enough in age that they dont care what anyone can say or do about what they say. I wonder how many good thinking people are just quet about this whole topic for this reason.
Originally posted by fierobear: I just got this one. Let's not forget the warmists hiding the inconvenient decline in their temperature proxies...also known as LIEING.
Inventory of Hide-the-Decline
This hoax was debunked years ago.
"The "decline" does not refer to a "decline in global temperature" as often claimed. It actually refers to a decline in tree growth at certain high-latitude locations. This decline began in the 1960s when tree-ring proxies diverged from the temperature record." Source.
"The "decline" does not refer to a "decline in global temperature" as often claimed. It actually refers to a decline in tree growth at certain high-latitude locations. This decline began in the 1960s when tree-ring proxies diverged from the temperature record." Source.
bear is a denier he will not read any science link you post and he never ever posts a science link only the dailycaller like denier links to blogs or opinion BS
nut con's do not deal with facts or science IN THE NUT-CON WORLD FACTS DO NOT MATTER they have faith in nut-con sites ONLY AS TRUTH VIOLATES THEIR DOGMA SO THEY CAN'T HANDEL THE TRUTH
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
Study: Gulf anglers could be entitled to $585 million after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill "The UF researchers used about 70,000 fishing trips each year for five years, 2006 to 2010, to learn how each type of anglers changed their fishing trips to avoid closures in federal fisheries following the oil spill. They arrived at the $585 million figure by multiplying the per-trip losses for each type of trip by the number of affected fishing trips, which was assumed to be for the year as if anglers could re-plan their trips to avoid closures, Larkin said."
"The study authors emphasize their model only depicts losses for recreational fishermen, not commercial fishermen, hotels, restaurants, retail establishments that lost money after the BP oil spill. It also doesn’t measure ecosystem losses."
Earth Overshoot Day - "August 19 is Earth Overshoot Day 2014, marking the date when humanity has exhausted nature’s budget for the year. For the rest of the year, we will maintain our ecological deficit by drawing down local resource stocks and accumulating carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We will be operating in overshoot."
Study: Solar Energy That Doesn't Block The View "A team of researchers at Michigan State University has developed a new type of solar concentrator that when placed over a window creates solar energy while allowing people to actually see through the window.
It is called a transparent luminescent solar concentrator and can be used on buildings, cell phones and any other device that has a clear surface."
Article: Mexico 2014 Renewable Investment May Exceed $2.4 Billion "Investment in the first half of 2014 was about $1.3 billion, compared with $1.6 billion for all of last year, the London-based research firm said today in an e-mailed statement. Spending on wind and solar projects is expected to see a “significant” increase over the next two years."
Open Utility - a peer-to-peer energy market place: "We’ll provide the tools for renewable generators to sell their electricity directly to local customers. In return, energy consumers to have real choice and transparency in where their power comes from. We think the future is in abundant, clean and local energy."
Study: Antarctic Ice Sheet Is Result of CO2 Decrease, Not Continental Breakup "Climate modelers from the University of New Hampshire have shown that the most likely explanation for the initiation of Antarctic glaciation during a major climate shift 34 million years ago was decreased carbon dioxide (CO2) levels. The finding counters a 40-year-old theory suggesting massive rearrangements of Earth’s continents caused global cooling and the abrupt formation of the Antarctic ice sheet. It will provide scientists insight into the climate change implications of current rising global CO2 levels."
