Author Topic: General Climate Discussion  (Read 104938 times)

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1065 on: December 29, 2007, 02:50:02 PM »
2007 a Year of Weather Records in U.S.
 

By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP
4 hours ago
WASHINGTON — When the calendar turned to 2007, the heat went on and the weather just got weirder. January was the warmest first month on record worldwide — 1.53 degrees above normal. It was the first time since record-keeping began in 1880 that the globe's average temperature has been so far above the norm for any month of the year.

And as 2007 drew to a close, it was also shaping up to be the hottest year on record in the Northern Hemisphere.

U.S. weather stations broke or tied 263 all-time high temperature records, according to an Associated Press analysis of U.S. weather data. England had the warmest April in 348 years of record-keeping there, shattering the record set in 1865 by more than 1.1 degrees Fahrenheit.

It wasn't just the temperature. There were other oddball weather events. A tornado struck New York City in August, inspiring the tabloid headline: "This ain't Kansas!"

In the Middle East, an equally rare cyclone spun up in June, hitting Oman and Iran. Major U.S. lakes shrank; Atlanta had to worry about its drinking water supply. South Africa got its first significant snowfall in 25 years. And on Reunion Island, 400 miles east of Africa, nearly 155 inches of rain fell in three days — a world record for the most rain in 72 hours.

Individual weather extremes can't be attributed to global warming, scientists always say. However, "it's the run of them and the different locations" that have the mark of man-made climate change, said top European climate expert Phil Jones, director of the climate research unit at the University of East Anglia in England.

Worst of all — at least according to climate scientists — the Arctic, which serves as the world's refrigerator, dramatically warmed in 2007, shattering records for the amount of melting ice.

2007 seemed to be the year that climate change shook the thermometers, and those who warned that it was beginning to happen were suddenly honored. Former Vice President Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" won an Oscar and he shared the Nobel Peace Prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an international group of thousands of scientists. The climate panel, organized by the United Nations, released four major reports in 2007 saying man-made global warming was incontrovertible and an urgent threat to millions of lives.

Through the first 10 months, it was the hottest year recorded on land and the third hottest when ocean temperatures are included.

Smashing records was common, especially in August. At U.S. weather stations, more than 8,000 new heat records were set or tied for specific August dates.

More remarkably that same month, more than 100 all-time temperature records were tied or broken — regardless of the date — either for the highest reading or the warmest low temperature at night. By comparison only 14 all-time low temperatures were set or tied all year long, as of early December, according to records kept by the National Climatic Data Center.

For example, on Aug. 10, the town of Portland, Tenn., reached 102 degrees, tying a record for the hottest it ever had been. On Aug. 16, it hit 103 and Portland had a new all-time record. But that record was broken again the next day when the mercury reached 105.

Daily triple-digit temperatures took a toll on everybody, public safety director George West recalled. The state had 15 heat-related deaths in August.

Portland was far from alone. In Idaho, Chilly Barton Flat wasn't living up to its name. The weather station in central Idaho tied an all-time high of 100 on July 26, Aug. 7, 14 and 19. During 2007, weather stations in 35 states, from Washington to Florida, set or tied all-time heat records in 2007.

Across Europe this past summer, extreme heat waves killed dozens of people.

And it wasn't just the heat. It was the rain. There was either too little or too much.

More than 60 percent of the United States was either abnormally dry or suffering from drought at one point in August. In November, Atlanta's main water source, Lake Lanier, shrank to an all-time low. Lake Okeechobee, crucial to south Florida, hit its lowest level in recorded history in May, exposing muck and debris not seen for decades. Lake Superior, the biggest and deepest of the Great Lakes, dropped to its lowest August and September levels in history.

Los Angeles hit its driest year on record. Lakes fed by the Colorado River and which help supply water for more than 20 million Westerners, were only half full.

Australia, already a dry continent, suffered its worst drought in a century, making global warming an election issue. On the other extreme, record rains fell in China, England and Wales.

Minnesota got the worst of everything: a devastating June and July drought followed by record August rainfall. In one March day, Southern California got torrential downpours, hail, snow and fierce winds. Then in the fall came devastating fires driven by Santa Ana winds.

And yet none of those events worried scientists as much as what was going on in the Arctic in the summer. Sea ice melted not just to record levels, but far beyond the previous melt record. The Northwest Passage was the most navigable it had been in modern times. Russia planted a flag on the seabed under the North Pole, claiming sovereignty.

The ice sheets that cover a portion of Greenland retreated to an all-time low and permafrost in Alaska warmed to record levels.

Meteorologists have chronicled strange weather years for more than a decade, but nothing like 2007. It was such an extreme weather year that the World Meteorological Organization put out a news release chronicling all the records and unusual developments. That was in August with more than 145 sizzling days to go.

Get used to it, scientists said. As man-made climate change continues, the world will experience more extreme weather, bursts of heat, torrential rain and prolonged drought, they said.

"We're having an increasing trend of odd years," said Michael MacCracken, a former top federal climate scientist, now chief scientist at the Climate Institute in Washington. "Pretty soon odd years are going to become the norm."

___

On the Net:

U.S. National Climatic Data Center's searchable records web site:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/records/

U.S. National Climatic Data Center on August heat wave: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2007/aug/aug-heat-event.php. rec ords

World Meteorological Organization on 2007 weather extremes:

http://www.wmo.ch/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_791_e.html

The record for shrinking sea ice: http://nsidc.org/news/press/2007_seaiceminimum/20071001_pressrelease.html

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1066 on: December 29, 2007, 03:07:02 PM »
google SETH BORENSTEIN

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1067 on: December 29, 2007, 03:17:43 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
google SETH BORENSTEIN


Yep...he's a science writer.  He writes about scientific stuff.  He isn't writing opinion pieces.  He's writing about science.  Science, like, biology and climateology and paleontology and alot more -ologies than I care to list.  He isn't a researcher.....he's a writer.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1068 on: December 29, 2007, 03:44:53 PM »
Quote
Utilities Paying Global Warming Skeptic

Utilities giving big bucks to global warming skeptic

WASHINGTON, Jul. 27, 2006
By SETH BORENSTEIN AP Science Writer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(AP) Coal-burning utilities are passing the hat for one of the few remaining scientists skeptical of the global warming harm caused by industries that burn fossil fuels.


Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

"One of the few remaining" is possibly maybe a slightly slanted phrase which gives clues as to the opinion of the writer.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1069 on: December 29, 2007, 04:04:45 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

"One of the few remaining" is possibly maybe a slightly slanted phrase which gives clues as to the opinion of the writer.



Wow... 400... huh.  That's an aweful lot, from "more than two dozen countries".  Especially when compared with this...

Quote
In the United States the estimated population of science doctorates[1] in 1995 was 542,500
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1070 on: December 29, 2007, 05:19:40 PM »
We have half a million climate scientists?  wow.:rolleyes:

400 to sign a paper and put their names into the skeptics column is more than a few.

when I googled "Population of science doctrorates", I came up with this interesting quote:

The estimated population of science and engineering doctorates [1] in 1995 was 542,500.

Now I am sure you didn't edit that...
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline AKH

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1071 on: December 29, 2007, 05:29:37 PM »
How having a B.A in Classics, a B.Sc in Chemistry, or a B.Arch. makes someone a prominent scientist confounds me.

Going by those criteria, we must have lots of prominent scientists on this board.
AKHoopy Arabian Knights
google koan: "Your assumptions about the lives of others are in direct relation to your naďve pomposity."

Offline SIG220

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 694
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1072 on: December 29, 2007, 05:45:34 PM »
All of this debate is going to be totally irrelevant if we do not get the growing world population under control.   There is only so much one can do to reduce pollution, and conserve on energy.

The simple fact is this: the more people you have, the more energy you will need for them to be able to live.  And more things like food, housing, and consumer products will be needed

Unless we can figure out a way to stop people from having so much sex, the world is doomed.   We simply have to stop making so many babies.

Urban population growth is really growing out of control.   World wide major city dwelling population back in 1900 was only 220 Million.   By 1999 it was 2.8 Billion.   In 2007, it is now 3.3 Billion.   Predictions for as early as 2030 are looking very grim.   By 2050, population levels may make the world a much different place to live in, compared to how things are today.

Mass Starvation and diseases could start to limit population growth by then.  Or the pressures caused by such overpopulation could perhaps eventually contribute to the start of major new wars, as nations compete for the meager resources that are still available.  

SIG 220

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1073 on: December 29, 2007, 05:50:52 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKH
How having a B.A in Classics, a B.Sc in Chemistry, or a B.Arch. makes someone a prominent scientist confounds me.


Did you read the 400 link? Notice "former professor at Université Jean Moulin and director of the Laboratory of Climatology.." or "retired Senior Marine Researcher of the Geological Survey of Finland and former professor of marine geology at University of Helsinki," or "past president of the American Association of State Climatologists, and one of the climatologists who gathered at Woods Hole to review the National Climate Program Plan in July, 1979", or "president of the World Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna in Italy", or "director of the Danish National Space Centre, a member of the space research advisory committee of the Swedish National Space Board, a member of a NASA working group, and a member of the European Space Agency who has authored or co-authored around 100 peer-reviewed papers and chairs the Institute of Space Physics", or "a Ph.D meteorologist, a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project who has over 45 years experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, and who has published nearly 100 papers, reports, book reviews and a book on Ocean Wave Analysis and Modeling"

Several impressive resume's are listed among the 400...
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline AKH

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1074 on: December 29, 2007, 06:09:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Several impressive resume's are listed among the 400...

And many not so impressive, or did you fail to notice that they were included in the list of "Over 400 Prominent Scientists?"
AKHoopy Arabian Knights
google koan: "Your assumptions about the lives of others are in direct relation to your naďve pomposity."

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1075 on: December 29, 2007, 06:49:01 PM »
I saw it, I was just wondering whether you were seeing both sides.

So how many do you take out of the list?  Does it add up to more than just a few remaining?

Skepticism used to be good.  It used to be a significant part of science.  

In climate science, skepticism seems to be something that is unwelcome.

The consensus is that, the vast majority of scientists believe...

It doesn't matter what a scientist believes, it matters what he can prove.

That there is a debate at all shows that the science is not in.

There is no debate on the 2nd law of thermo.  There is no debate on Ohms law or F= Ma

Here the science has shown, you and I can come to agreement, we can use these tools to predict the future within several decimal places.

The chaotic system that is our weather and climate is still very much in debate.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline bj229r

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6735
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1076 on: December 29, 2007, 07:58:56 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Did you read the 400 link? Notice "former professor at Université Jean Moulin and director of the Laboratory of Climatology.." or "retired Senior Marine Researcher of the Geological Survey of Finland and former professor of marine geology at University of Helsinki," or "past president of the American Association of State Climatologists, and one of the climatologists who gathered at Woods Hole to review the National Climate Program Plan in July, 1979", or "president of the World Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna in Italy", or "director of the Danish National Space Centre, a member of the space research advisory committee of the Swedish National Space Board, a member of a NASA working group, and a member of the European Space Agency who has authored or co-authored around 100 peer-reviewed papers and chairs the Institute of Space Physics", or "a Ph.D meteorologist, a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project who has over 45 years experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, and who has published nearly 100 papers, reports, book reviews and a book on Ocean Wave Analysis and Modeling"

Several impressive resume's are listed among the 400...
Many of them look to be folks who no longer have an important position to protect by keeping their mouths shut---we've seen what happens to scientists who don't go along with the program
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers

http://www.flamewarriors.net/forum/

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1077 on: December 30, 2007, 02:13:25 AM »
Yes, including those who make reports for big corporations :D

Anyway:

"Unless we can figure out a way to stop people from having so much sex, the world is doomed. We simply have to stop making so many babies.

Urban population growth is really growing out of control. World wide major city dwelling population back in 1900 was only 220 Million. By 1999 it was 2.8 Billion. In 2007, it is now 3.3 Billion. Predictions for as early as 2030 are looking very grim. By 2050, population levels may make the world a much different place to live in, compared to how things are today."

1. you can shoot without hitting the target if you know what I mean.
2. with mostly urban population going too high, can we country folks keep....errr...copulating?

:D
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1078 on: December 30, 2007, 04:07:18 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
2. with mostly urban population going too high, can we country folks keep....errr...copulating?
 


Yes as long as you do it slowly so as not to raise the temperature globaly. :D
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1079 on: December 30, 2007, 04:07:48 AM »
Oh, that would be ....local...sir :D
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)