The Global Warming Pause

[tschu]

 

My statement was tongue in cheek. Short term temperature swings prove nothing.

 

If you don't see a problem with global warming, then you need to look at the macro level not the micro of you're immediate surroundings.

At a rate of 1.8 degrees every 100 years you and I will be long dead before this is a problem of any consequence.

 

That's the spirit. f#*k you, grandchildren, you f'ing pricks deal with it. Good luck!

[ZRod]

 

My statement was tongue in cheek. Short term temperature swings prove nothing.

 

If you don't see a problem with global warming, then you need to look at the macro level not the micro of you're immediate surroundings.

At a rate of 1.8 degrees every 100 years you and I will be long dead before this is a problem of any consequence. I'd rather see research grants go to scientists who can actually solve a problem in the next 20/30 years. Ebola, cancer, aids or heart disease which kills more of us than most of the rest of them combined. Another solvable problem is the one we have with radical Muslims and all the other terrorists out there who would rather kill us than not. War because you give your God a different name than I do, what a worthless cause.

Wake up ZR and go after something you can do something about rather than something that may effect your great, great, great, great grand children. They won't even know your name.

T_O_B

 

We have 7 billion people on this planet, I think we can safely focus on all the areas you mention in your paragraph and not neglect one of them. I'm not going to argue with you because you've made it abundantly clear that you're too short sighted or selfish, whatever it maybe, to realize that our ultimate goal should always be to provide a better future for the next generation.

[T_O_Bull]

 

 

My statement was tongue in cheek. Short term temperature swings prove nothing.

 

If you don't see a problem with global warming, then you need to look at the macro level not the micro of you're immediate surroundings.

At a rate of 1.8 degrees every 100 years you and I will be long dead before this is a problem of any consequence. I'd rather see research grants go to scientists who can actually solve a problem in the next 20/30 years. Ebola, cancer, aids or heart disease which kills more of us than most of the rest of them combined. Another solvable problem is the one we have with radical Muslims and all the other terrorists out there who would rather kill us than not. War because you give your God a different name than I do, what a worthless cause.

Wake up ZR and go after something you can do something about rather than something that may effect your great, great, great, great grand children. They won't even know your name.

T_O_B

 

We have 7 billion people on this planet, I think we can safely focus on all the areas you mention in yoys a bit of levity in my argumentsur paragraph and not neglect one of them. I'm not going to argue with you because you've made it abundantly clear that you're too short sighted or selfish, whatever it maybe, to realize that our ultimate goal should always be to provide a better future for the next generation.

 

"short sighted or selfish" I may be but you are who you are. I worry more about things that do and will continue to effect the family and friends that I know and love. Is that what you mean by short sighted or selfish? If so then I will wear those words as a medal of honor. I will, for a few years, have flowers put on my grave. You can leave a map behind so that your great, great, great, great, grand children can find where your grave is and leave flowers behind. We can watch from that Great Husker Stadium in the sky, have a few ice cold beers (I do so hope God allows beer in Heaven.) and see how things turn out. Hopefully our Muslim brothers next door will keep the noise down during their party with the 71 virgins. (Always a bit of levity in my arguments.)

T_O_B

[Moiraine]

Worldwide famine and irreversable damage to the earth vs. another war among thousands of wars before and after it.

 

It's a toss up.

[ZRod]

Worldwide famine and irreversable damage to the earth vs. another war among thousands of wars before and after it.

 

It's a toss up.

That famine mumbojumbo is going to lead to some pretty serious disagreements, yeah? We could just have those wars without the famine and such, that would be more fun I think.

[Mavric]

So NOAA is "correcting" the data in a way that shows continued warming when other agencies around the world don't seem to agree.

NOAA:

Abstract: Much study has been devoted to the possible causes of an apparent decrease in the upward trend of global surface temperatures since 1998, a phenomenon that has been dubbed the global warming “hiatus.” Here we present an updated global surface temperature analysis that reveals that global trends are higher than reported by the IPCC, especially in recent decades, and that the central estimate for the rate of warming during the first 15 years of the 21st century is at least as great as the last half of the 20th century. These results do not support the notion of a “slowdown” in the increase of global surface temperature.

 

Response:

The greatest changes in the new NOAA surface temperature analysis is to the ocean temperatures since 1998. This seems rather ironic, since this is the period where there is the greatest coverage of data with the highest quality of measurements – ARGO buoys and satellites don’t show a warming trend. Nevertheless, the NOAA team finds a substantial increase in the ocean surface temperature anomaly trend since 1998.

In my opinion, the gold standard dataset for global ocean surface temperatures is the UK dataset, HadSST3. A review of the uncertainties is given in this paper by John Kennedy http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst3/uncertainty.html. Note, the UK group has dealt with the same issues raised by the NOAA team. I personally see no reason to the use the NOAA ERSST dataset, I do not see any evidence that the NOAA group has done anywhere near as careful a job as the UK group in processing the ocean temperatures.

I am also unconvinced by NOAA’s gap filling in the Arctic, and in my opinion this introduces substantial error into their analysis. I addressed the issue of gap filling in the Arctic in this recent publication: Curry JA, 2014: Climate science: Uncertain temperature trends. Nature Geoscience, 7, 83-84.

Link

[TGHusker]

Meanwhile on the global cooling front - look to buy some heavy coats during the 2030s

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/616937/GLOBAL-COOLING-Decade-long-ice-age-predicted-as-sun-hibernates