Ok, this global warming shit is getting out of hand...

[ron johnson]

Oh, BSL Ron. This is fucking hilarious. Do you know anything about the National Climate Assessment?

I know they are pushing an agenda, which I clearly demonstrated.

[MultiVerse]

Why are you trying to give a summary of the summary from the IPCC, but spinning it in a more suitable manner to yourself? They say that there is a likely increasing trend in heatwaves since the middle 20th century in Europe, Australia, and much of Asia. They have medium confidence that heatwaves are increasing on a global scale since the mid 20th century due to a lack of data in some regions. They make no attempt at deciphering heatwave trends starting prior to mid 20th century, but mention that there is evidence that some regions had more heatwaves during this time.



If you use HadCRUT, the Arctic did experience years of comparable warmth (slightly warmer to slightly colder) in the 1930's as well as a year in the early 1960's.



No, he posted the same NCA heatwave graphic that I did, which ignores the data pre 1960 to make it look like heatwaves are continuing to to trend worse every decade in the US.

It's funny how much you care about the higher low temperatures. I'm sure the last thing on anyone's global warming concerns list is going to be higher low temperatures. You could say global warming has caused US temperatures to become less extreme. Less hot days, less cold nights.


Not if your low temperatures keep increasing, but maximum temperatures don't. And who knows what effect the coming Grand Solar Minimum will have.

- Ron splitting hairs. No spin, just a brief account of the summary: the IPCC assessment of increasing heatwaves, apart from the U.S., heatwaves are likely increasing but they can't say so with high confidence because data is sparse or unreliable in some regions.

Or, there is a likely increasing trend in the frequency of heatwaves since the middle of the 20th century in Europe and Australia and across much of Asia, is fine too.

As far as prior to mid 20th century goes, in the 1930's it was warm in the United States, the Arctic, and parts of the Northern Hemisphere but globally temperatures were cooler than average for the 20th century.


-- Ron, no surprise, doesn't understand basic statistical concepts when he says something dumb like "not if low temperatures keep increasing, but maximum temperatures don't." Anybody with even a rudimentary understanding of statistics knows a shifting mean, associated with something like warming global temperatures, leads to large changes at the extremes, increases the odds of extreme heat events.


--- This is not just some academic statistical concept, either. Heat records in areas across the globe, including the United States, are falling like dominoes.

[ron johnson]

- Ron splitting hairs. No spin, just a brief account of the summary: the IPCC assessment of increasing heatwaves, apart from the U.S., heatwaves are likely increasing but they can't say so with high confidence because data is sparse or unreliable in some regions.

It doesn't say this. It's obviously splitting hairs, but I don't see why you feel the need to interpret something that doesn't need any interpretation.

Or, there is a likely increasing trend in the frequency of heatwaves since the middle of the 20th century in Europe and Australia and across much of Asia, is fine too.

It does say this.

-- Ron, no surprise, doesn't understand basic statistical concepts when he says something dumb like "not if low temperatures keep increasing, but maximum temperatures don't." Anybody with even a rudimentary understanding of statistics knows a shifting mean, associated with something like warming global temperatures, leads to large changes at the extremes, increases the odds of extreme heat events.

Climate a is bit more complicated than basic statistical concepts. If mean temperatures in the US have been increasing since the early 1900's, why did the first half of the 20th century see significantly more extreme heat than we we see today in the US?

Perhaps there are other factors at play? Perhaps there is more cloud cover today preventing heat dispersing at night and lower highs during the day? Perhaps the urban heat island effect is distorting night time temperature readings?

[MultiVerse]

- It does say, "However, confidence on a global scale is medium owing to lack of studies over Africa and South America but also in part owing to differences in trends depending on how heatwaves are defined." Or, in other words heatwaves are likely increasing (because record-breaking temperatures in recent decades substantially exceed what would be expected by chance) but they can't say so with high confidence because data is sparse or unreliable in some regions.

-- If you look at the chart on the previous page only about 50% of the United States experienced extreme heat around 1934 or so. Whereas post 2010 50% of the United States has also experienced extreme heat and 60% also experienced extreme hot daily lows compared with about 35% in 1934. In other words the United States is experiencing both significant extreme heat (extreme hot daily highs) and extreme hot daily lows which is why mean temps are up.

--- The troposphere is warming making night-time temperatures more sensitive to warming than daytime temps. In other words, hot daily lows are a signature of greenhouse warming in part due to downward radiation associated with CO2 and other greenhouse gas wavelengths.

[Timberridge]

Y'all are still going at it I see.

[ron johnson]

- It does say, "However, confidence on a global scale is medium owing to lack of studies over Africa and South America but also in part owing to differences in trends depending on how heatwaves are defined." Or, in other words heatwaves are likely increasing (because record-breaking temperatures in recent decades substantially exceed what would be expected by chance) but they can't say so with high confidence because data is sparse or unreliable in some regions.

This is the dumbest argument we have ever had.

Your quote is referring to the time period post 1950. I have never taken issue with heat waves increasing post 1950. I have taken issue with making claims about heatwave trends that include the period pre 1950.

-- If you look at the chart on the previous page only about 50% of the United States experienced extreme heat around 1934 or so. Whereas post 2010 50% of the United States has also experienced extreme heat and 60% also experienced extreme hot daily lows compared with about 35% in 1934. In other words the United States is experiencing both significant extreme heat (extreme hot daily highs) and extreme hot daily lows which is why mean temps are up.

Mean temps are up because of warmer daily lows. If you look only at hot daily highs in your chart, there isn't much of a trend to be found. That chart is "unusual" heat, not "extreme" heat. I'm not sure what the difference is, but if you look at warm spells, heat wave magnitude index, warmest temperature, and heat wave index, the 1920's to 1950's are unprecedented in the US.

[MultiVerse]

- I don't know what Ron is upset about now. Here's the section we're discussing in case anyone wants to see for themselves:

There has been a likely increasing trend in the frequency of heatwaves since the middle of the 20th century in Europe and Australia and across much of Asia where there are sufficient data. However, confidence on a global scale is medium owing to lack of studies over Africa and South America but also in part owing to differences in trends depending on how heatwaves are defined

-- Indexes are not the same thing as temperature. And time spatial variability means the hottest day somewhere in Missouri or Iowa might have been in 1934 but in Reno, for example, the hottest day on record was July 12, 2002 when the temperature hit 108.0°F.

In 2017 Albuquerque, Cleveland, Dallas, Phoenix, and Tampa had their hottest year on record. The U.S. also experienced its warmest consecutive 24, 36, and 48 months on record, with more than 33,000 record highs set in the preceding three years.

Heat wave indexes don't tell us much about winter, either.

That's why it makes more sense to look at annual mean temperatures.

[BmillsSkier]

Y'all are still going at it I see.

Did the little girl at the UN get the plane to take off the treadmill?

[Timberridge]

^^ Don't get me started on that.

Because if the world heats up, warm air provides less lift so the treadmill needs to go faster to generate the same lift. More energy = more CO2= more warming = less lift = more energy, etc.

That's a problem not being addressed here yet.

[BmillsSkier]

What if it’s just the little girl on the plane? Surely she weighs less than the force required by increased speed in the treadmill belt to get the plane airborne, no?

[SumJongGuy]

- Ron's got it backwards. My interpretation is the correct interpretation. Ron is seeing what he wants to see, but he's wrong. Here's the section we're discussing in case anyone wants to see for themselves:

There has been a likely increasing trend in the frequency of heatwaves since the middle of the 20th century in Europe and Australia and across much of Asia where there are sufficient data. However, confidence on a global scale is medium owing to lack of studies over Africa and South America but also in part owing to differences in trends depending on how heatwaves are defined

-- Indexes are not the same thing as temperature. And time spatial variability means the hottest day somewhere in Missouri or Iowa might have been in 1934 but in Reno, for example, the hottest day on record was July 12, 2002 when the temperature hit 108.0°F.

In 2017 Albuquerque, Cleveland, Dallas, Phoenix, and Tampa had their hottest year on record. The U.S. also experienced its warmest consecutive 24, 36, and 48 months on record, with more than 33,000 record highs set in the preceding three years.

Heat wave indexes don't tell us much about winter, either.

That's why it makes more sense to look at annual mean temperatures.

And those average temperatures included the extremes logged in the US during that earlier period.. So, being above average includes being above averages that have that data included. The threshold for "heatwave" went up after those hot spells.

[Timberridge]

What if it’s just the little girl on the plane? Surely she weighs less than the force required by increased speed in the treadmill belt to get the plane airborne, no?

She's from like Norway, right? So you just move the treadmill to the equator and she'll weigh like 5 oz less. Duh.

[MultiVerse]

^^ Don't get me started on that.

Because if the world heats up, warm air provides less lift so the treadmill needs to go faster to generate the same lift. More energy = more CO2= more warming = less lift = more energy, etc.

That's a problem not being addressed here yet.

MCAS? Then take your question to the Boeing thread.

[BmillsSkier]

She's from like Norway, right? So you just move the treadmill to the equator and she'll weigh like 5 oz less. Duh.

If we move the treadmill to the equator for just this one girl aren’t we just enhancing her white privilege? Never mind the additional carbon footprint by dragging the damned thing halfway across the globe?

Why aren’t we moving treadmills for those POC from places like Trenton or Detroit? How will they ever get off the ground in this new hot air hellhole?

[WMD]

"Climate change means wild weather. Does that include snowstorms?"

But could the Montana storm have been caused or exacerbated by climate change? Yes. Meteorologists and atmospheric scientists caution that more research is required to know exactly how big a role climate change played in this weekend’s storm, specifically. But it’s possible, and even likely, that climate change contributed to, and intensified, the conditions that made a storm this big possible.

The first mechanism by which climate change could have affected the storm is pretty basic: Warming temperatures lead to evaporating water, which leads to a wetter atmosphere, which leads to more precipitation.

"All storms are influenced to some degree by climate change because the environment is warmer and moister than it used to be,” said Kevin Trenberth, a scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Since weather events are determined by factors specific to each situation, Trenberth didn’t think it was accurate to say the storm’s strength was entirely due to climate change — however, “the potential for bigger snowfalls in spring and fall is one of the signatures of climate change.” (Heavy snowfall in Montana this early in the fall is unusual, but not entirely unprecedented — the first snow of the season in 1992 in Great Falls was on August 22.)

There might be another, slightly more convoluted way climate change is affecting the weather that basically boils down to this: Rising Arctic temperatures are messing with the jet stream.

https://grist.org/article/climate-ch...de-snowstorms/

[WMD]

Damn, the little girl is right! My manhood is threatened!!

"The Earth is warming. Here are the top warning signs, according to experts"

The amount of greenhouse gases being emitted into Earth's atmosphere has reached such a high level that it will take major changes around the world to mitigate the effects on climate change, experts say.


Greenhouse gasses such as carbon dioxide, which trap the sun's heat, are the "most significant driver of observed climate change since the mid-20th century," according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The amount of greenhouse gases being emitted into Earth's atmosphere has reached such a high level that it will take major changes around the world to mitigate the effects on climate change, experts say.


Interested in Climate Change?


Add Climate Change as an interest to stay up to date on the latest Climate Change news, video, and analysis from ABC News.
Climate Change Add Interest
Greenhouse gasses such as carbon dioxide, which trap the sun's heat, are the "most significant driver of observed climate change since the mid-20th century," according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The warning signs of climate change


The climate crisis is construed by some as a far-off event (or one that is not happening at all), but it's crucial to understand that the negative impacts are already happening, according to experts.


The earth is warming


Temperatures on Earth are already happening, Smerdon said.


As the surface temperature rises, the amount of ice and snow is decreasing, and the number and intensity of heat waves are increasing, Smerdon said.


With the increase of storage of energy within the earth's systems comes the increase in holding capacity of moisture in the atmosphere, he explained, which leads to bigger downpours, stronger hurricanes and unprecedented rain events.


"One-in-thousand-year events are happening every couple of years," Smerdon said.


"Temperatures are rising, snow and rainfall patterns are shifting, and more extreme climate events – like heavy rainstorms and record high temperatures – are already happening," the EPA says on its website. "Many of these observed changes are linked to the rising levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, caused by human activities."

Rainforests are burning at unprecedented levels


Setting fire to rainforests has been a method farmers have been using to clear land in Brazil for decades, but now because of drought conditions that have been affecting Brazil, they are burning hotter, longer and faster, Allen said.


Then, not only is a major source of carbon absorption and fresh water reservoir destroyed, but so is the biological diversity that resides within it, she said.


1 million species are at risk of extinction


Up to one million animal and plant species are being threatened with extinction due to human activity, some within decades, according to a United Nations report on the state of biodiversity and ecosystems published in May.


(MORE: 'You are failing us': Teen climate change activist gives a passionate speech at the UN)
More than 40% of amphibians, nearly 33% of coral reefs and about a third of marine mammals are threatened, according to the report. An estimated 10% of the insect population is being threatened.


Food supply could dwindle


As droughts and downpours continue to impact agricultural areas, it will severely impact food supply, Smerdon said. Prices may also eventually be impacted, the EPA said.


Consumers will also feel those effects on their pocket books as jobs are lost and supply chains are disrupted, Smerdon said.


Currently, more than a third of the world's land surface and nearly 75% of freshwater resources are devoted to crop or livestock production, a UN report released Wednesday found.


Oceans are rising


The sea levels continue to rise as ice in the arctic continue to melt at a rapid pace, said Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson, a marine biologist, environmental policy expert and founder of the Urban Ocean Lab, a think tank for urban coastal cities.


Oceans could rise by 1-2 feet by 2100, even if greenhouse gas emissions are sharply reduced, the UN report said.


Rising levels will then threaten coastal cities and islands with severe flooding. According to the EPA, the rate of flooding is increasing along areas of the East and Gulf Coasts.


Carbon dioxide levels have also risen in the oceans over the past couple of decades, according to the EPA, leading to an increase in acidity. Higher carbon dioxide levels have also led to a lower concentration of aragonite, which makes it more difficult for some marine animals to build their skeletons or shells, the EPA said.

Climate impacts are creating crises in the developing world


As the effects of climate change hits developing countries, it creates millions of climate refugees and exacerbates political instability, according to the experts.


The climate emergency is also a human rights issue, Allen said, and research shows a connection between higher climate temperatures to more conflict, Smerdon said.


(MORE: World Ocean Day 2019: Ocean plastics problem isn't going away, but here's what you can do to help)
This creates "complicated, cascading effects" of social structures and government structures, he said, and creates refugees as people leave their homes for safer climates, Johnson said.


"It is wrong to create hundreds of millions of climate refugees and then close our borders when they seek shelter on our shores," Johnson said.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/earth-warm...qY5p7mMUr6WORg

[Vt-Freeheel]

I keep hearing about the country being "locked in a heat wave" with schools closed and shit. Currently 40` here, 1/2 a days drive away.

[ron johnson]

- I don't know what Ron is upset about now. Here's the section we're discussing in case anyone wants to see for themselves:

There has been a likely increasing trend in the frequency of heatwaves since the middle of the 20th century in Europe and Australia and across much of Asia where there are sufficient data. However, confidence on a global scale is medium owing to lack of studies over Africa and South America but also in part owing to differences in trends depending on how heatwaves are defined

You said this: "So to summarize the IPCC assessment of increasing heatwaves, apart from the U.S., heatwaves are likely increasing but they can't say so with high confidence because data is sparse or unreliable in some regions."

It does not say that. An appropriate statement would be to say that "heatwaves are likely increasing globally since the mid 20th century, but they can't say with high confidence because data is sparse or unreliable in some regions." There is no need to exclude the US from your statement because heatwaves have been increasing in the US since the mid 20th century.

They then go on to make no claims about trends starting before the mid 20th century, but mention that some regions (e.g., USA) had more heatwaves, and in other regions (e.g., Western Europe and the Mediterranean) heatwave trends may have been underestimated due to poor quality and/or consistency of data.

-- Indexes are not the same thing as temperature. And time spatial variability means the hottest day somewhere in Missouri or Iowa might have been in 1934 but in Reno, for example, the hottest day on record was July 12, 2002 when the temperature hit 108.0°F.

In 2017 Albuquerque, Cleveland, Dallas, Phoenix, and Tampa had their hottest year on record. The U.S. also experienced its warmest consecutive 24, 36, and 48 months on record, with more than 33,000 record highs set in the preceding three years.

Heat wave indexes don't tell us much about winter, either.

That's why it makes more sense to look at annual mean temperatures.

We have been talking about heat waves and extreme heat. That is why we are looking at warm spells, heat wave index, and warmest temperatures. Not mean temperatures. I don't know where you are getting the 33,000 record highs set in the past three years from. Take a look at the record high temperatures by state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._s...ature_extremes

For the 21st century I see only 1 record high (South Carolina 2012) and one tied record high (South Dakota 2006). Most of the record highs are set pre 1950.

Heat waves and extreme heat were considerably more intense between 1920 and 1950 in the US compared to today.

[ron johnson]

And those average temperatures included the extremes logged in the US during that earlier period.. So, being above average includes being above averages that have that data included. The threshold for "heatwave" went up after those hot spells.

You are still clueless.

Maybe try again next week.

[SumJongGuy]

You are still clueless.

Maybe try again next week.

From you this is an enormous complement, thanks!

[k2skier112]

Y'all are still going at it I see.

RJ finished sucking off the few goats, back to post bullshit

[WMD]

"Climate change isn’t a debate. It’s already here, whether deniers like it or not."

Last month, I tweeted that people should ignore climate change deniers on twitter, block them, and move on with their lives. Because for years now, those who deny the damage that burning fossil fuels is doing to our planet and ourselves have demanded to be taken seriously, despite the increasingly ridiculous nature of their claims.

With extreme weather events including superstorms, droughts and heat waves worsened by climate change, and sea level rise regularly inundating coastal communities, the impacts of carbon pollution can already be seen all around us. One of the first lines of last year’s National Climate Assessment, the US federal government’s summary of climate research, reads that “the impacts of climate change are already being felt in communities across the country."

But apparently my tweet pointing out the pointlessness of climate deniers was an invitation for one of them to prove my point in an op-ed in the Lexington Herald-Leader. In that piece, Phillip Goggans, a general contractor, misrepresents the original exchange (which involved climate misinformation from a conspiracy theorist who posts under a fake identity and not only denies evidence of climate change but subscribes to reprehensible “truther” conspiracies about the tragic Sandy Hook massacre of schoolchildren.)

Goggans rattles off long-debunked denier talking points. He claims “many eminent scientists” reject the science of climate change. In an attempt to rebut a survey showing 97% of climate scientists agree climate change is caused by human activity, he cites a survey of the American Meteorology Society, also from 2013, showing only 52% of respondents agree that climate change is real and human-caused.

But AMS is more than just meteorologists, meteorologists aren’t climate scientists, and most importantly, the 2016 replication of the survey found that 96% of them recognized warming was happening, and only 5% thought it was from natural causes. Not exactly 97%, but pretty close!

The high degree of consensus among experts has been established by a number of independent studies. One article about the consensus among climate consensus papers found that at least 9 in ten experts agree humans are causing climate change. It’s been downloaded over half a million times, so I suggest Goggans make it half a million and one.

As for those 3% of “dissenting” studies that contrarians cite, researchers tried to replicate them and found they were rife with errors.

The op-ed cites “climategate,” the 2009 hack of climate scientists’ emails that were taken out of context, doctored, and otherwise misrepresented. Something like 10 different investigations all cleared scientists of any of the wrongdoings of which we had been accused. Anyone who read the emails in good faith quickly realized they had been had by a deliberate misinformation effort to use stolen emails to influence the political debate. (Sound familiar?)

He cites the supposed ‘70’s cooling scare, a myth that’s been debunked for over a decade. Scientists were unsure back then whether the regional cooling effect of certain pollutants or the warming effect of greenhouse gases from fossil fuel burning would ultimately win out. But we’ve since passed laws to limit that pollution, while greenhouse gasses have escalated. The planet has steadily warmed as a result. The real story is the exact opposite of what Goggans claims.

He then concludes that we’ll look back on climate “hysteria” with “a mixture of embarrassment and amusement.”

The only thing embarrassing about the climate conversation today is that people like Goggans are willing to argue things that don’t stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. Given that the science shows the difference between fighting climate change now or listening to people like him and ignoring it is saving millions of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars, it’s hardly amusing.

It is time for a serious conversation about climate change and what we’re going to do about it. And it’s time to listen to serious people, not carnival barkers.

Michael E. Mann is Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Pennsylvania State University. His most recent book, with Tom Toles, is The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial Is Threatening Our Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy (Columbia University Press, 2016).

https://www.kentucky.com/opinion/op-...#storylink=cpy

[Ripzalot]

You could at least post a meme if you are going to be part of the right wing media hive mind

Somehow my youtube clip got removed. Fixed it for ya.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

[Ripzalot]

Lies, damn lies, and cherry picked statistics.

HOW DARE YOU



Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

[MultiVerse]

And those average temperatures included the extremes logged in the US during that earlier period.. So, being above average includes being above averages that have that data included. The threshold for "heatwave" went up after those hot spells.

The United States stands out prior to 1950 because early 20th century warming (ETCW) anomalies largely come from summer in North American (Midwestern United States & southern Canada) and Arctic winter anomalies.* Otherwise, there isn't much evidence (according to the IPCC) of increasing heatwaves pre-1950, even though there were still heatwaves elsewhere.

The dust bowl droughts are kind of a fortunate/unfortunate set of circumstances. They were unfortunate for American Midwesterners at the time because a combination of a cool tropical Pacific Ocean and a warm tropical Atlantic Ocean produced a decrease in precipitation in the US Midwest and also warmed the North Atlantic Ocean, warming the Arctic.


It's a fortunate set of circumstances for deniers because even though globally temperatures were cooler than average for the 20th century at the time, and even though the U.S. is only about 2% of the planet, they can cherry pick pre-1950 America and make all kinds of specious arguments. What's weird though is why beat the drum so loudly if past changing Atlantic circulation patterns foreshadow what the future might look like.



And even though a lot of all time absolute highs were set during the ETCW, according to NOAAs NCEI data thousands of all time local max daily records for any given date are falling in recent decades. Yesterday, for example, in Baltimore temperatures hit 98 degrees setting a new record for the hottest day ever recorded in October. Washington also exceeded its hottest October temperature ever by hitting 98 degrees surpassing the old record of 96 degrees set on Oct. 5, 1941.


The bottom line is a rightward shift of average temperatures means heat records in areas across the globe, including pre-1950 U.S. records, will continue to fall like dominoes.


* Brönnimann, Stefan (2009) Early twentieth-century warming