'Why do we need to march for climate change?'

Post Reply New Topic

I made a hasty mistake by linking one source I was looking at when I needed to link a different one. But I can just as easily retrieve a recent analysis of satellite data, so I will do that now:
Look under Global Temperature Changes / Satellite Data.
http://www.justfacts.com/globalwarming. ... -satellite

These explain the supposed satellite discrepancy you're referring to:
http://www.washington.edu/news/2012/05/ ... ls-closer/
http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/09 ... ture-rise/

I have heard references to a temperature plateau (not decrease), but not without discussion of ocean dynamics which are temporarily absorbing the excess heat.
Since we are now making efforts to slow our emission of greenhouse gasses, any claim that global warming is plateauing or cooling also has to take into account that we're actively trying to fix the problem, and possibly having some success with that, which, while good, does not mean that warming never happened.

If the surface weather stations and satellite measurements disagree with each other, then we need to account for why, and we also have to ask why most scientists continue to conclude that human-made global warming is still occurring.


My apologies. In my haste, I thought you were linking articles he authored, not another author's articles on studies he authored. The first article's author is Richard A. Lovett. But you are correct that I made an error in that.

However, in that same article in the 2nd paragraph, we find this:
He and his team would not be controlling for climate change in their study unless they accepted its validity, as most scientists do.
Mike Lockwood the scientist in question says this:
So, Mike Lockwood who is primarily interested in solar wind and EM conditions, may actually have been working on this in order to simply explain some of the few anomalies they observe within the overall observed trend of global warming.


I don't remember using the term Blocking Events myself, but I am going to suppose you mean events which influence whether Arctic air stays at the North Pole or escapes south. Is that correct?
My whole point was that it is possible, and even more likely in fact, for extreme local differences to happen even though the global average temperature continues to rise.


The question I was referring to was in regards to Mike Lockwood's page of 64 published papers, most of which had to do with EM conditions caused in space by the sun, and their interaction with Earth's upper atmosphere. They did not appear at first to have anything to do with global temperatures; none of the paper titles on the page you linked referenced that.
My question was: "Which paper of these 64 is your source?"
How is that 'wrong'?


I should have said "solar wind", but I thought that if I did, you might think I meant wind in Earth's atmosphere as influenced by the sun. I did not. I meant EM weather in space between the sun and the earth.

I see what you're saying about blocking events and the influence of space weather on freak occurrences.
But you cannot argue both that single-year ultra-violet blocking events (via Mike Lockwood's research) caused an abnormally cold winter in the US AND simultaneously hold the contradictory position that "global cooling" caused it. They are not the same thing. One would cause cooler temperatures in a series of years, the other can only cause cooler temperatures in isolated events, if and when they happen. And you are saying that both are the source of the record lows in the US.

The winter of 2013-2014 was a "blocking event" in Europe, but a "flowing event" in North America. Arctic air 'flowed" into the Northern Plains on a consistent basis.

Arctic air (at least for the UK) was blocked. I don't think it went below about minus 4 Celsius in London all winter. I don't believe there were more than 5-6 ground frosts the entire winter.

he previous winter, there were days which were about minus 8-9 Celsius in London, and the majority of days from December through February had ground frosts.

Quite recently (I'm not sure which year, but it was after 2010), the winter was compared to the winter of 1962-1963 (which froze the Thames solid).

CO2 emissions have never been higher. 40 billion tons this year, according to reports. CO2 is arguably vindicated.


Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Block_(meteorology)


Or fall.


I don't remember. I read it a couple of years ago. You'll find several papers if you google solar activity + jet streams


I don't remember saying that.

But the ocean is still soaking up heat to offset some of the land warming, and I know CO2 is rising faster than ever, but if it were not for efforts to curb it, it could be rising faster still. The US and China have both made some progress in peaking emissions. If the emissions had not been reigned in at all, the ocean may not even be able to absorb the heat fast enough.



Not with this frequency. Our CO2 levels and temperature are not holding constant, and so conditions keep changing, sometimes abruptly and dramatically.
The global average temperature is not falling either, according to both ground-based data and satellite data, as I have already worked to demonstrate, and corrected in my previous post.


Well in any case, you still completely ducked my question about which article in that link you gave me it was.


It was implied.
First, you started by stating that global cooling was the reality, over a 16 year period. And that the record low temperatures of 2013 in the US midwest were evidence of that.
Then, you stated that the Sept. 2013 record low temperatures across the US midwest were caused by sun activity.
Well then, bring it all together and reconcile it. Are you saying that the sun is causing global cooling all by itself? Solar variations occur on an 11-year cycle, what happens when the cooling portion of this one ends and our CO2 is still rising?

I asked where specifically is it happening ? You should be able to provide me a name of a location.

It appears that no warming is happening for the US from 1895 to present, see NOAA chart ...especially considering we are told that winter 2015 will be worse than the brutal cold of 2014. Note chart is not updated for 2014 which according to NOAA is the coldest year since 1993.

Last edited by LoveNotHate on 02 Oct 2014, 10:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I meant on a global basis. I didn't need to provide a specific location. Various Greenland glaciers are melting at a fantastic rate.

It seem as if global warming is most intense in the Arctic. Look up the average temperatures, say, for Barrow, Alaska over the last ten years. Also look up the date of the breakup of the ice.

If you look at the average temperature for the year in NYC over the past 20 years, it is much higher than the previous 20 years.

Site below: "Listed here are a set of historical temperature graphs from a large selection of mostly non-urban weather stations in both hemispheres. This data originated with the NASA Goddard Institute (GISS) in the USA and the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, Norwich, England".

Looks like Barrow, Alaska is not warming.

source:
http://www.john-daly.com/stations/stations.htm#Alaska

You should read anecdotal accounts which state that whale hunting is adversely affected by recent earlier melting and later freezing of the sea ice in Barrow.

The hunters are bemoaning the warmer weather. They don't need graphs to inform then that their whale hunt is affected by climate change--nor do the polar bears who are losing their habitat.


The lack of ice formation in October in recent years has rendered early autumn much warmer than normal. Winter temperatures, after the ice formation, are not as anomalous, though they are warmer than in the past. A couple of years ago, there were about 9 straight months of above-normal temps, per the Alaska Climate Research Center.

Also: your graph ends in 2001; how about the next 13 years? Even the graph shows a trend towards warmer summer temps.

Correct.


I have never made such statements.

Ok, stop right there.
The planet Earth, the globe taken as a whole, is the location

Global average surface temperature = taking the data from every weather station on earth and averaging it together every year.

What that tells you is what the change in earth's total thermal energy retention from sunlight is.

That's the thing we're concerned with. When the planet's entire average surface temperature goes up, weird things start to happen.

Also, every time you all keep saying "it apears NOAA / NASA data shows no warming / shows cooling" we keep having to squint to see what in the heck you're talking about. Are our eyes playing tricks on us? Most NASA / NOAA data out there which either of us can find for ourselves shows a continuing upward trend of temperature. You and Humanaut don't even agree on what time scale warming hasn't occurred. You say none since 1895. He says none since 1998, but that there was warming prior to that. You can't both be right.

This is your statement that you claimed not to have made.

You state cooling from 1998 until now.

So, do blocking events explain every 'cooler' year from 1998 until now?

Really, I think you're just a professional troll with a professionally-selective memory.

I'm not sure what you are referring to.

Last edited by Humanaut on 03 Oct 2014, 2:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

Then you said:

To which I said:



And then you responded:


And you linked articles from a scientist who primarily does solar sun-spot type research, and another article in which he is interviewed and says that ultraviolet radiation from solar activity can cause abnormal local cooling.

So.......... did a solar storm weaken the polar circulation in the winter of 2013-2014, as you cited research for, or was that winter part of your 1998-2014 cooling trend?

Last edited by ThetaIn3D on 03 Oct 2014, 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yes?

Post is complete now. I had to go back to one of your posts because the forums wouldn't let me view both at the same time. You may respond to my completed update.

That.

What you did just there, and in many of your other replies.

I didn't say this, I didn't say that. I made no such statements. I don't remember. I don't know what you're talking about.

By the way, there's a popular term which has found its way into use in clinical psychology for that behavior you're exhibiting: It's called gaslighting. Say something, then claim you didn't say it and the other person is crazy.

Well then, what are you saying? What is ensuring that global warming is not happening?