General Climate Discussion

[MORAY37]

And this is from the government that refuses to acknowledge a problem.

Source:http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2007

[john9001]

so global warming really means climate change which really means global warming which really means the weather is going to be wet and dry, cold and warm, windy and calm.

[CptTrips]

Originally posted by john9001
so global warming really means climate change which really means global warming which really means the weather is going to be wet and dry, cold and warm, windy and calm.

Don't you see?  Thats the beauty of it.  No matter the contradictory evidence, its still considered proof!  

I think Psychologists call that a Self-Reinforcing Delusion.

,
Wab

[lazs2]

but.. isn't it predicted that 2008 will be the coolest year in a decade?   there is global cooling.   the suns activity is in 200 year cycles and the russian study shows that man made co2 and greenhouse gas is insignificant compared to suns activity..  the russian study says... "IT'S THE SUN STUPID"  

I predicted that the "scientists" would not be talking about man made global warming this winter..  they will trot it out again after the first big heat wave next summer.

The only thing that is constant about the weather is that it is never average...

moray tells us how we should not take one small event and use it to say anything about the "global climate" and then... trots out a silly picture of a bunch of small weather events...  If you take the American continent for instance.. nasa data shows no real warming for almost two decades.. why get upset about "records"

Name one time in the history of weather that records were not broken.. it is the nature of weather records to be broken.

lazs

[Jackal1]

Plastic Al Bore statues are being ripped off the dashes of cars at an alarming rate.
Sidenote: Sales of Al Bore statues on eBay have fallen sharply.

I predict Global Gorelessness in 2009.
Cute cartoon charts and bogus statistics to follow shortly.

[MORAY37]

Originally posted by lazs2
but.. isn't it predicted that 2008 will be the coolest year in a decade?   there is global cooling.      .

The only thing that is constant about the weather is that it is never average...

moray tells us how we should not take one small event and use it to say anything about the "global climate" and then... trots out a silly picture of a bunch of small weather events...  If you take the American continent for instance.. nasa data shows no real warming for almost two decades.. why get upset about "records"


lazs

Density is obviously the one physical property which cannot be overcome.

First...NASA RECORDS, for your debunking on your last line.

The eight warmest years in the GISS record have all occurred since 1998, and the 14 warmest years in the record have all occurred since 1990.   -National Aeronautics and Space Administration, GISS

When you have the "coolest year in a decade" (something which I have not checked up on, your statement), and then run into the fact below...how can you call that a good thing?

Including 2007, seven of the eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001 and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995. The global average surface temperature has risen between 0.6°C and 0.7°C since the start of the twentieth century, and the rate of increase since 1976 has been approximately three times faster than the century-scale trend

www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2007/ann/ann07.html

Second...
That map is not showing singular events only.  It is showing a detailed composite of an overall picture.  Single events are not, BY THEMSELVES  significant.  It is their application into an overall picture that gives them any weight.

Not that you'll read it but...it is only elementary statistics in application.

The simple theory behind the iid-test is that we have a number of N observations of the same object. If all the values represent a variable that follows the same distribution (i.e. exhibits the same behaviour), then the probability that the last observation is a record-breaking event (the highest number) is 1/N. It is then easy to estimate the expected number of record-events (E) for a series of length N: E = 1/1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + … + 1/N (the first observation being a 'record-event' by definition). It is also easy to estimate the likelihood that the number deviated from E by a given amount (i.e. using an analytical expression for the variance of E or so-called 'Monte-Carlo' simulations). The probability for seeing new record-events diminishes for an iid variable as the number N increases.  

Benestad, R.E. (2004) Record-values, non-stationarity tests and extreme value distributions Global and Planetary Change vol 44, issue 1-4, p.11-26

It is not possible to apply the iid-test to one single event, but the test can detect patterns in a series of events. The test requires a number of independent observations of the same variable over a (sufficiently long) period of time. Since climate encompasses a large number of different parameters (temperature, precipitation, wind, ice extent, etc), it is probable that a climate change would affect the statistics of a number of different parameters simultaneously. Thus, the iid-test can be applied to a set of parallel series representing different aspects of one complex system to examine whether its general state is undergoing a change. Satellite observations tend to be too short for concluding whether they are consistent with null-hypothesis saying there is no climate change (i.e. it being iid) or the alternative hypothesis that the climate is in fact changing (or the observations are not independent). Nevertheless, the record-low sea ice concentration is consistent with a shrinking ice-cap due to a warming. Rainfall observations tend to be longer and therefore more appropriate for such tests, but, such an analysis has not yet been done on a global scale to my knowledge. Results of an iid-test on series of maximum monthly 24-hour rainfall within the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark & Iceland) could not rule out the null-hypothesis (i.e. the possibility that there is no change in the rainfall statistics), but this case was on the border line and the signal could also be too weak for detection. In a recent publication, however, Kharin & Zwiers (2005) analysed extreme values from model simulations of a changing climate and found that an enhanced greenhouse effect will likely lead to 'more extreme' precipitation. This would imply an anomalously high occurrence of record-high rainfall amounts. They discussed the effect of variables being non-iid on the extreme value analysis, and after taking that into account, propose that changes in extreme precipitation are likely to be larger than the corresponding changes in annual mean precipitation under a global warming. Thus, new record-high precipitation amounts are consistent with the climate change scenarios.

[wrag]

Originally posted by lazs2
but.. isn't it predicted that 2008 will be the coolest year in a decade?   there is global cooling.   the suns activity is in 200 year cycles and the russian study shows that man made co2 and greenhouse gas is insignificant compared to suns activity..  the russian study says... "IT'S THE SUN STUPID"  

I predicted that the "scientists" would not be talking about man made global warming this winter..  they will trot it out again after the first big heat wave next summer.

The only thing that is constant about the weather is that it is never average...

moray tells us how we should not take one small event and use it to say anything about the "global climate" and then... trots out a silly picture of a bunch of small weather events...  If you take the American continent for instance.. nasa data shows no real warming for almost two decades.. why get upset about "records"

Name one time in the history of weather that records were not broken.. it is the nature of weather records to be broken.

lazs

Hey Laz go here and look at the link titled

http://www.drudgereport.com/

"Temperature Monitors Report Worldwide Global Cooling"

I tried to post it to the BBS but dang doesn't seem to work.

Anyways it states that the latest temps are way down and China is having it's coolest temps in over 100 years!

and this

"Record levels of Antarctic sea ice"

And

"No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously."

and

"Let's hope those factors stop fast. Cold is more damaging than heat. The mean temperature of the planet is about 54 degrees. Humans -- and most of the crops and animals we depend on -- prefer a temperature closer to 70.

Historically, the warm periods such as the Medieval Climate Optimum were beneficial for civilization. Corresponding cooling events such as the Little Ice Age, though, were uniformly bad news. "

Even has a part that talks about

"Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases. The dramatic cooling seen in just 12 months time seems to bear that out. While the data doesn't itself disprove that carbon dioxide is acting to warm the planet, it does demonstrate clearly that more powerful factors are now cooling it."

VERY INTERESTING.................. .......

[Vulcan]

Wow, the temperature of planet earth changes, such revelations:

[LePaul]

Following a rapid rise between 1978 and 1998 corresponding to exceptionally high solar activity, global temperatures were flat between 1998 and 2006 and the planet has just experienced its coldest January in 15 years. China is suffering through its coldest winter in 100 years, the same winter which saw the first snow ever recorded falling on Baghdad.  Antarctic ice is currently at record levels.  New Englanders are digging out nonstop from record snowfall.  And similar signs of a cooling trend are being reported worldwide.

Full article here:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/here_come_the_green_carjackers.html

Discuss!

[Angus]

Evil

[Wayout]

The sun can warm the Earth... Who would have though...

[eagl]

So, that makes Al Gore a hero for having a huge estate and for burning so much fuel travelling around the world?

Who woulda thunk he'd be a hero to both sides of the argument!

[rpm]

Not much of an arguement. But we won't be around to find out who's wrong.

[Jackal1]

Coming to a General Climate Discussion thread near you soon.

[Donzo]

Ah yes, global climate change (that is the correct terminology this week isn't it?).

Can't you see that this just means that man is responsible for making the globe cooler?

Maybe we should launch some satellites with massive mirrors to reflect sunlight on the earth constantly to warm it up...I mean MY GOD we HAVE to do something to combat this cooling that we caused by combating the warming!

Oh the humanity (or lack thereof).