warmest year on record? well, sorta, maybe... actually... probably not

Global Warming: The Most Dishonest Year on Record

A good example of why BobJam’s recent blog on taking supposedly “scientific” findings with a grain of salt pending further investigation, esp. if the supposed finding happens to support a liberal shibboleth, is becoming more necessary all the time.

1 Like

I gotta go to bed, but want to just input w/o having read the article that our area is averaging 6° below the 'normal average.'
No, I do not think that we’re heading for a glacier ice age where everybody’s going to starve to death, but I do agree with REAL scientists whom I trust that crops will not do as well as they generally do in warmer periods.

A Big NOT… :confused:

Warmest year where? Not anywhere I’ve lived!

so far on this thread, sounds like we have a very tough audience here for global warming.

well, we all know what that means. these are the kinda people who probably also cling to their guns and their religion.

it’s re-education camp time!

3 Likes

From the article:

We don’t have thermometer measurements going back that far, but scientists can use “proxies”—things they can measure that tend to vary with temperature, such as the composition of ancient deposits of seashells, or the thickness of the rings in ancient, slow-growing trees—to get very rough estimates.

I’m glad that Mr. Tracinski said, “very rough estimates,” or I would’ve started questioning everything that came next.

Then as I read along, I realized his intent wasn’t so much to question the veracity of global warming as it was to reproach reporters for their lazy, sloppy approach to journalism. He was simply using ‘global warming’ as an example of that, and demonstrated how the job could be done properly if you’re willing to go to the trouble of finding the facts; hard as that may be at times. What’s such sad commentary is that he had to go to a British source to show the contrast.

My hat’s off to Robert Tracinsky, as he obviously takes the time to think for himself. Better yet, tries to coax others into thinking for themselves, as well.

1 Like

An impossible weather warning, hot off the press!

[quote=theweathernetwork]
Alerts in Effect (Date January 25, 2015)
Blizzard Warning
Summary

NORTHERN NEW HAVEN-NORTHERN MIDDLESEX-NORTHERN NEW LONDON- SOUTHERN FAIRFIELD-SOUTHERN NEW HAVEN-SOUTHERN MIDDLESEX- SOUTHERN NEW LONDON-HUDSON-EASTERN BERGEN-EASTERN ESSEX- EASTERN UNION-SOUTHERN WESTCHESTER-NEW YORK (MANHATTAN)-BRONX- RICHMOND (STATEN ISLAND)-KINGS (BROOKLYN)-NORTHWESTERN SUFFOLK- NORTHEASTERN SUFFOLK-SOUTHWESTERN SUFFOLK-SOUTHEASTERN SUFFOLK- NORTHERN QUEENS-NORTHERN NASSAU-SOUTHERN QUEENS-SOUTHERN NASSAU- 339 PM EST SUN JAN 25 2015 …BLIZZARD WARNING IN EFFECT FROM 1 PM MONDAY TO MIDNIGHT EST TUESDAY NIGHT… THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN NEW YORK HAS ISSUED A BLIZZARD WARNING…WHICH IS IN EFFECT FROM 1 PM MONDAY TO MIDNIGHT EST TUESDAY NIGHT. THE BLIZZARD WATCH IS NO LONGER IN EFFECT.

  • LOCATIONS…NEW YORK CITY AND SURROUNDING IMMEDIATE SUBURBS…LONG ISLAND…AND MOST OF SOUTHERN CONNECTICUT.

  • HAZARD TYPES…HEAVY SNOW AND BLOWING SNOW…WITH BLIZZARD CONDITIONS.

  • ACCUMULATIONS…SNOW ACCUMULATION OF 20 TO 30 INCHES…WITH LOCALLY HIGHER AMOUNTS POSSIBLE. SNOWFALL RATES OF 2 TO 4 INCHES PER HOUR EXPECTED LATE MONDAY NIGHT INTO TUESDAY MORNING. [/quote]
    This has to be impossible given the effect that tailpile emissions are having on climate. I thus refuse to fill the car with gas, go to the grocery store to stock up, or even invest in a snow shovel.

3 Likes

[quote=“Susanna, post:4, topic:45830”]
Warmest year where? Not anywhere I’ve lived!
[/quote]One thing that leaps out at me is that almost all of the “warming” occurs in parts of the world where there are very few people and very few devices to record temperatures. And literally no records before the International Geophysical Year (“IGY”) of, I believe, 1957. I would be far more willing to believe in global warming if it were observed in a cross-section of long-inhabited areas. I would accept London, Paris, Moscow, New York City, Chicago, Rome, Madrid, Lisbon and other similar locales in my sampling.

Alas, all the efforts refer to high latitudes where there are no measurements. Melting glaciers or icecaps could well be the long-term result of a rebound from an Ice Age. The ice doesn’t melt instantly.Thus, the observations can be skewed to look alarming.

Further the O.P.: 2014 as the Mildest Year: Why You are Being Misled on Global Temperatures | Roy Spencer, PhD.

Probably Chicago cemeteries.

1 Like

The media driven dishonesty, coupled with the usual omissions from NASA, is how they created something out of nothing.

What they didn’t tell you is the range of error on the data,which when factored in, show that it was not any warmer now, than other warm years of this century.

Here is the near current status of “global temperature”:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/graph/hadcrut4gl/from:2001/to:2014.12/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2001/to:2014.12/trend/plot/rss/from:2001/to:2014.12/plot/rss/from:2001/to:2014.12/trend

LINK

As you can see no actual warming trend this century is evident, in contradiction to the IPCC prediction of at least a .30C warming in the first 13 full years:

“For the next two decades, a warming of about 0.2°C per decade is projected for a range of SRES emission scenarios. Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1°C per decade would be expected.”

LINK

1 Like

I could use some global warming. We are expected to get 10 inches of snow and Monday I will have to dig out three homes.

I heard 9-12" tonight from someone at church today. I haven’t heard a forecast, but the plows were out plowing off the shoulders, indicating that they were expecting something big.

Woodfortrees has some wonderful graphing tools, but I’m wondering why you started your graph at 2000? If you go back to when we started keeping records, the graph is indisputable:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1900/to:2015

Changes in global temperatures move in fits and starts. 1920-1950 was a particularly bad stretch. From 1950-1980, there was almost no warming. From 1980 to present, there’s been almost a degree of warming. There are several things to be said about this:

  1. The data is unreliable and there is actually no warming occurring. No one seriously believes this. Even the public has abandoned this idea.65% are less likely to vote for a candidate who claims global warming is a hoax (vs. 15% who would be more likely). 2014 was either the hottest year since record keeping began, or one of the hottest years since record keeping began. It’s a distinction without a difference- 2014 was HOT. The GOP line has evolved from “its not happening” to “I’m not a scientist”.

  2. The data is reliable, but we’re in the middle of a warming period. This idea is more popular with the public, but still doesn’t represent the majority view (and certainly not the scientific consensus). 61% of Americans believe in climate change and want SOME action to be taken. That’s from a 2014 NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.

  3. Humans are partly (are solely) to blame. This is where the public is currently at. The question is, how serious is it, how much are we to blame, and what do we do about it, if anything?

Here’s link for graph, since image didn’t come out: Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

Come to the high desert Sam. I’ve been wearing a t-shirt, shorts and sandals for about a week.

I live in the High Desert! Where you at?

Closest big city is Truth or Consequences.

1 Like

Ahh, I thought that was a joke! Never heard of that place. I live in California High desert (Mojave). Just bout 50 miles North of L.A. T-shirt and shorts weather lately.

[quote=“Swaggy_D, post:19, topic:45830”]
Ahh, I thought that was a joke! Never heard of that place. I live in California High desert (Mojave). Just bout 50 miles North of L.A. T-shirt and shorts weather lately.
[/quote]Victorville, Apple Valley, Hesperia, Lancaster, Palmdale?