Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

Full story: Newsday 52,427
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Read more
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#35222 Apr 18, 2013
i hoodwink u wrote:
the COLD 2013 spring PROVES Global Cooling has arrived.
Arctic temperatures above the 80th parallel have been above normal for ~180+ out of the last 230 days. That proves that global warming has arrived.

Actually, that is y u r cold. Extra energy AGW warm fronts push hard into the Arctic, warming the NP. Simultaneously, Arctic cold fronts are pushed south, onto populated southern areas. Arctic cold fronts can be pushed as far south as Mexico, Central America, China & India.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#35223 Apr 18, 2013
i hoodwinked u wrote:
Snowing like he11 here.
Temperatures are in the minus mid-twenties degC. on the north shores of Hudson Bay. You should be cold. However, temperatures from the southern tip of Greenland to northern Russia are above freezing & as high as +17degC.(+63degF).

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35224 Apr 18, 2013
Updates on the carbon economy. Report from UK
Hundreds of billions of dollars in fossil fuel investments would be stranded, triggering a potential economic crisis, if companies continue to invest in fossil fuels while governments introduce stronger policies to limit global warming, a new report says. the joint study from UK-based Climate Tracker Initiative and the Grantham Institute finds that $674 billion was spent on exploring and developing new fossil fuel reserves around the world in 2012.
But the groups found the greenhouse gas emissions associated with current and planned fossil fuel development will easily eclipse what can be emitted to limit global warming to 2 degrees – the target agreed by countries at United Nations climate talks.
The Grantham Institute's Lord Nicholas Stern – who wrote the the landmark 2006 Stern Review on the costs of climate change for the UK government – writes that the findings show a "gross inconsistency between current valuations of fossil fuel assets and the path governments have committed to take in order to manage the huge risks of climate change".
The report warns the inconsistency could lead to a financial "carbon bubble".
"Smart investors can already see that most fossil fuel reserves are essentially unburnable because of the need to reduce emissions in line with the global agreement [on climate change]," he said.
The report estimates the plant's proven fossil fuel reserves, including those owned by state owned companies, have potential emissions of 2860 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide.
Companies listed on the stock exchange represent about a quarter of those potential emissions, at 762 billion tonnes. But if all future development flagged by global resource companies goes ahead then those emissions will double to 1541 billion tonnes.
Modelling used by the groups indicates that to have a 50 to 80 per cent chance of keeping global warming to 2 degrees, emissions to 2050 will have to be capped at 1075 to 900 billion tonnes.
Climate Tracker says the difference reflects a stark contradiction between capital markets and climate change policy, and fossil fuel investment continues unabated without recognising potential future constraints on its use.
It says once fossil fuels from state owned projects is factored in, private firms will need to leave unused 60 to 80 per cent of the coal, oil and gas they are developing if the 2 degree target is to be met. Climate Tracker's research director James Leaton said: "The message we want to get out there is that with every dollar you put into developing more you are making the problem worse. We really want shareholders to push companies to give more scrutiny on where they are spending their money," Mr Leaton said. The report says financial regulators and investors should reassess their definitions of risk to account for the "carbon bubble", and push for greater transparency around the financial exposure of companies and markets to future constraints on greenhouse gas emissions. An Australian analysis of the "unburnable carbon" by Citibank, released earlier this month, found investments worth about 14 per cent of the value of the Australian Stock Exchange was exposed to future limits on fossil fuel emissions. But the report, by Citibank analyst Elaine Prior, said it was more likely the world will have greater fossil fuel use, and subsequently a greater degree of warming, than it was to keep global warming to 2 degrees.
Obama-hoodwinked -YOU

Minneapolis, MN

#35225 Apr 18, 2013
Interesting photos of Greenland. Photos of the melting icepack were first available in 2000 AD.

So all this fear of ice melt is based on 12 years of history?

Are you kidding?
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#35226 Apr 18, 2013
i hoodwink u wrote:
......12 years of history?
Greenland ice loss pre-dated 2000.

Your history is a lack of science & mathematics in your hi skule DEE-plooomaa. Of course, you have no science or mathematics degrees from University. Might not have a degree, at all. You do have a hi skule DEE-plooomaa?

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#35227 Apr 19, 2013
Obama-hoodwinked-YOU wrote:
Snowing like he11 here.
A year ago the warm spring was PROOF Global Warming was indeed here to stay.
OK by those rules the COLD 2013 spring PROVES Global Cooling has arrived.
The St. Paul Troll brings the same brilliant, incisive commentary to Climate science that he's always brought to politics.

LOL!
ha

United States

#35228 Apr 19, 2013
ha
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#35229 Apr 19, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
No you haven't.
Temperatures are within the range of the models- no reason to doubt the models.
The chance of temperatures being where they are is about the same as throwing a double six in dice. Throw a couple of double sixes in a row and I'll start to believe the dice are bent.
Not impressed by the dangers? Well, fools are hardly ever concerned with risks, especially old fools who can leave other to suffer the consequences of their arrogance.
Let's quit fencing.

Here's an attempt for a straight, non-propagandized, non-cherry-picked data scientific answer from you:

1) Take the model predictions made 17 +/- years ago of what GAT would be today - the whole range band from most likely out to 3-sigma high and low. What were those values?

2) What are recorded GAT data currently saying?

3) How many sigma adrift from the "most likely" model prediction for current temps are those values now falling to the low side? What is the corresponding confidence value, assuming short-term deviations are normally distributed about the model predicted long-term mean trend?

It';s that simple. Straight data, no booolsheet, please. Then amybe we'll have the basis of a truly rational, scientific conversation about what that means.
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#35230 Apr 19, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Er, no pops.
That would make them observations.
Science really isn't your thing.
Tried gardening?
No, lame dodge, that would make them observations you are hypothesizing explain the delta between model predictions and actual observations.

Case not made.

Intellectually honest science really isn't your thing, is it?

Tried rhetoric and politics?
TrollBot

Houston, TX

#35231 Apr 19, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
(Another content-free juvenile and inane troll snipped)
Troll. Ignore.

"Helping ignore trolls until Topix lets you killfile the scum."
TrollBot

Houston, TX

#35232 Apr 19, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
(Another juvenile and inane troll snipped)
Troll. Ignore.

"Helping ignore trolls until Topix lets you killfile the scum."

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#35233 Apr 19, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
No, lame dodge, that would make them observations you are hypothesizing explain the delta between model predictions and actual observations.
Case not made.
Intellectually honest science really isn't your thing, is it?
Tried rhetoric and politics?
Sorry, you're wrong, they are observations, and in this case they agree with the models.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gr...

Of course, if you know better, feel free to publish in the scientific literature.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#35234 Apr 19, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's quit fencing.
Here's an attempt for a straight, non-propagandized, non-cherry-picked data scientific answer from you:
1) Take the model predictions made 17 +/- years ago of what GAT would be today - the whole range band from most likely out to 3-sigma high and low. What were those values?
2) What are recorded GAT data currently saying?
3) How many sigma adrift from the "most likely" model prediction for current temps are those values now falling to the low side? What is the corresponding confidence value, assuming short-term deviations are normally distributed about the model predicted long-term mean trend?
It';s that simple. Straight data, no booolsheet, please. Then amybe we'll have the basis of a truly rational, scientific conversation about what that means.
I gave you a straight answer: the chance of observing the temperatures we did was about the same as a double six in dice.

An improbable event, but hardly one that's going to make you think the dice are bent.

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#35235 Apr 19, 2013
TrollBot wrote:
<quoted text>
Troll. Ignore.
"Helping ignore trolls until Topix lets you killfile the scum."
Curious you don't go after REAL trolls, then, innit DoucheBot?:)
Obama-Hoodwinked -YOU

Minneapolis, MN

#35237 Apr 19, 2013
Not withstanding:

Snowing like he11 here.

A year ago the warm spring was PROOF Global

Warming was indeed here to stay.

OK by those rules the COLD 2013 spring PROVES Global Cooling has arrived.

The truth hurts don't it?
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#35238 Apr 19, 2013
i hoodwinked u wrote:
Snowing like he11 here.
Arctic temperatures above the 80th parallel have been above normal for ~180+ out of the last 230 days. That proves that global warming has arrived.

Actually, that is y u r cold. Extra energy AGW warm fronts push hard into the Arctic, warming the NP. Simultaneously, Arctic cold fronts are pushed south, onto populated southern areas. Arctic cold fronts can be pushed as far south as Mexico, Central America, China & India.

Temperatures are in the minus mid-twenties degC. on the north shores of Hudson Bay. You should be cold. However, temperatures from the southern tip of Greenland to northern Russia are above freezing & as high as +20degC.(+68degF).

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#35239 Apr 19, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Arctic temperatures above the 80th parallel have been above normal for ~180+ out of the last 230 days. That proves that global warming has arrived.
Actually, that is y u r cold. Extra energy AGW warm fronts push hard into the Arctic, warming the NP. Simultaneously, Arctic cold fronts are pushed south, onto populated southern areas. Arctic cold fronts can be pushed as far south as Mexico, Central America, China & India.
Temperatures are in the minus mid-twenties degC. on the north shores of Hudson Bay. You should be cold. However, temperatures from the southern tip of Greenland to northern Russia are above freezing & as high as +20degC.(+68degF).
Sooo, the temperature between the 80th and the North Pole dictate what the temperature is all over the Earth? According to NASA-MSFC (not NASA-GISS) the Earth troposphere has cooled one degree centigrade so far this century as measured by satellites. This compares to NASA-GISS which only measures the temperatures of LARGE cities.
Have you ever heard of the Urban Heat Island Effect? Yep, about two hundred years ago some true free thinkers got together in Boston and wondered if downtown was hotter than it was in the rural areas. So, they started to keep journals taking temperatures every six am and six pm and once a month they would meet in Boston and compare notes. And yes, it was hotter downtown than it was in the surrounding rural areas winter and summer.
Do you know where temperature is measured in Atlanta, GA? Well, at the same place it has been for over sixty year, at the Atlanta Airport. And even though the airport has not moved, the city is. The Atlanta Metro Area is now thirty miles south of the airport.
And all those extra cars, planes, trains, buildings, roads, air conditioners, etc. and the city not only continues to grow, but it gets hotter.
Yep, all Dr. James Hansen has done is document the Urban Heat Island Effect. Meanwhile Germany had it's coldest winter in 150 years. England and France, 50 plus years. China, Mongolia, Russia, etc. all too!!!
You know, the Bering Sea had it's worst winter in 35 years and last year Alaska had met it's coldest temperature ever recorded but the thermomiter broke for about four hours and they suspect it went even lower!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#35240 Apr 19, 2013
Bitter cold records broken in Alaska – all time coldest record nearly broken, but Murphy’s Law intervenes
Posted on January 30, 2012 by Anthony Watts
Jim River, AK closed in on the all time record coldest temperature of -80°F set in 1971, which is not only the Alaska all-time record, but the record for the entire United States. Unfortunately, it seems the battery died in the weather station just at the critical moment.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/30/bitter-...

Worst Alaska winter piles on more snow
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57358349/...

Jena Germany Sees Coldest March In 160 Years! Meteorologist Calls Arctic Warmth/Cold Winter Theory “Nonsense”
By P Gosselin on 9. April 2013
March was an extremely cold month in Europe, especially in the southern part of eastern Germany. Veteran meteorologist Thomas Globig of MDR television gave us the March data for that region in the following video:
http://notrickszone.com/2013/04/09/jena-germa...
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#35242 Apr 19, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Bitter cold records broken in Alaska
Arctic temperatures above the 80th parallel have been above normal for ~180+ out of the last 230 days. That proves that global warming has arrived.

Actually, that is y u r cold. Extra energy AGW warm fronts push hard into the Arctic, warming the NP. Simultaneously, Arctic cold fronts are pushed south, onto populated southern areas. Arctic cold fronts can be pushed as far south as Mexico, Central America, China & India.

Temperatures are in the minus mid-twenties degC. on the north shores of Hudson Bay. You should be cold. However, temperatures from the southern tip of Greenland to northern Russia are above freezing & as high as +20degC.(+68degF).

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#35243 Apr 20, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Political Opponents? No, Brain, we are you scientific opponents first.
I oppose climate and CO2 taxes. I also oppose government spending on climate change mitigation. We've spent and committed economic disruption in the name of pseudoscience. There's no demonstration, experiment or trial published in a peer reviewed journal for climate change mitigation.

There's almost no consensus for climate change mitigation; some people favor restricting man made carbon dioxide emissions and others favor publicly funded carbon sinks. All favor more research dollars for their own mitigation schemes.

We aren't scientific opponents because we agree experimental tests of climate change mitigation don't exist. We draw different conclusions from that shared knowledge.

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
The climate models work pretty well. They were tuned to predict past weather, and so work pretty well in the current situation. They tend to UNDERESTIMATE because these times are very different from past warming episodes.
Here we disagree; they work badly and underestimate as well as overestimate predicted climate change. Tuning climate models for past weather can be as simple as setting up a historic table of dates and events. The models can do whatever you program them too, except forecast future weather. Get real.

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
I'm looking for an experiment that shows that you are human, and not just another denierspambot.
I don't care to label opponents; this is where we differ. I'd prefer to deal with arguments, not personality.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 8 min flack 1,208,054
Amy 4-1-15 9 min moe green 4
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 14 min Penceative people 99,312
amy 3-31-15 51 min alice kravitz 10
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 1 hr Red_Forman 5,830
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Learn to Read 185,990
dear abby4-1-15 again. 2 hr PEllen 2
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]