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

Full story: Newsday

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.

Comments (Page 1,942)

Showing posts 38,821 - 38,840 of43,159
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41303
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>LOL.
Are you a serial sensationalist?
LOL.
never! I leave that to the doomsday warmists. Why would I try to steal your " thunder", son? That's all you have!
Cut n Paste

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41304
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

"Cowtan & Way investigate the claim of a global surface warming 'pause' over the past 16 years by examining the trends from 1997 through 2012. While HadCRUT4 only estimates the surface warming trend at 0.046°C per decade during that time, and NASA puts it at 0.080°C per decade, the new kriging and hybrid data sets estimate the trend during this time at 0.11 and 0.12°C per decade, respectively."

Yes, the latest ESTIMATES prove that as CO2 (the main driver in CC) goes up so do Temps. Further validation of the scientific consensus in AGW theory.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41305
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>never! I leave that to the doomsday warmists. Why would I try to steal your " thunder", son? That's all you have!
hahahaha awwwww

Aren't you a lovely sensationalist!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41306
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Cut n Paste wrote:
"Cowtan & Way investigate the claim of a global surface warming 'pause' over the past 16 years by examining the trends from 1997 through 2012. While HadCRUT4 only estimates the surface warming trend at 0.046°C per decade during that time, and NASA puts it at 0.080°C per decade, the new kriging and hybrid data sets estimate the trend during this time at 0.11 and 0.12°C per decade, respectively."
Yes, the latest ESTIMATES prove that as CO2 (the main driver in CC) goes up so do Temps. Further validation of the scientific consensus in AGW theory.
Facts and numbers are of no interest to you!

What do you mean by your last sentence? Your ideology is peeking with its nose again..
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41307
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Global warming since 1997 more than twice as fast as previously estimated, new study shows
A new paper published in The Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society fills in the gaps in the UK Met Office HadCRUT4 surface temperature data set, and finds that the global surface warming since 1997 has happened more than twice as fast as the HadCRUT4 estimate.[skepticalscience.com ]
The contradictions continue....

Bozo just posted a link lamenting short term trends, "Also; The public debate about the alleged “warming pause” was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years"

...then you cite what?

A study of a short term trend.

LOL
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41308
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Cut n Paste wrote:
<quoted text>
All this 'cut and paste' is a diversion from the point: It is a 'FACT' that CO2 is the MAIN driver of Global Warming and in the past 15+ years atmospheric CO2 has been rising at an Unprecedented Rate!!!
The theory is simple... and every science academy in the world agrees that temps must go up as CO2 goes up.
The contradictions continue....

Bozo just posted a link lamenting short term trends, "Also; The public debate about the alleged “warming pause” was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years"

...then you recite what?

A short term trend.

LOL
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41309
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are simple in your ignorance.. A new paper published in The Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society fills in the gaps in the UK Met Office HadCRUT4 surface temperature data set, and finds that the global surface warming since 1997 has happened more than twice as fast as the HadCRUT4 estimate.
Both of their new surface temperature data sets show significantly more warming over the past 16 years than HadCRUT4. This is mainly due to HadCRUT4 missing accelerated Arctic warming, especially since 1997.
Cowtan & Way investigate the claim of a global surface warming 'pause' over the past 16 years by examining the trends from 1997 through 2012. While HadCRUT4 only estimates the surface warming trend at 0.046°C per decade during that time, and NASA puts it at 0.080°C per decade, the new kriging and hybrid data sets estimate the trend during this time at 0.11 and 0.12°C per decade, respectively.
These results indicate that the slowed warming of average global surface temperature is not as significant as previously believed. Surface warming has slowed somewhat, in large part due to more overall global warming being transferred to the oceans over the past decade. However, these sorts of temporary surface warming slowdowns (and speed-ups) occur on a regular basis due to short-term natural influences.
The results of this study also have bearing on some recent research. For example, correcting for the recent cool bias indicates that global surface temperatures are not as far from the average of climate model projections as we previously thought, and certainly fall within the range of individual climate model temperature simulations. Recent studies that concluded the global climate is a bit less sensitive to the increased greenhouse effect than previously believed may also have somewhat underestimated the actual climate sensitivity.
Do you get it? Of course, NOT. It is your ideology.
There are many factors that influence our climate change knowledge and attitudes, including education, scientific literacy and personal experience. Political ideology has a significant influence on climate change beliefs. A striking demonstration of the powerful effect of ideology is the finding that as education levels increased, Democrats became more concerned about climate change while Republicans became less concerned. Ideology rather than education is the hand at the wheel driving climate attitudes.
The contradictions continue....

Bozo just posted a link lamenting short term trends, "Also; The public debate about the alleged “warming pause” was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years"

...then you cite what?

A study of a short term trend.

LOL
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41310
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
jackass loon
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41311
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Cut n Paste wrote:
"Cowtan & Way investigate the claim of a global surface warming 'pause' over the past 16 years by examining the trends from 1997 through 2012. While HadCRUT4 only estimates the surface warming trend at 0.046°C per decade during that time, and NASA puts it at 0.080°C per decade, the new kriging and hybrid data sets estimate the trend during this time at 0.11 and 0.12°C per decade, respectively."
Yes, the latest ESTIMATES prove that as CO2 (the main driver in CC) goes up so do Temps. Further validation of the scientific consensus in AGW theory.
The contradictions continue....

Bozo just posted a link lamenting short term trends, "Also; The public debate about the alleged “warming pause” was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years"

...then you cite what?

A study of a short term trend.

LOL
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41312
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Facts and numbers are of no interest to you!
And being a global warming hypocrite means nothing to you.

Do your part... sit in the dark.

LOL
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41313
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Irrational troll ignored!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41314
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

This is a beautiful new study by an English and a Canadian:

Incomplete global coverage is a potential source of bias in global temperature reconstructions if the unsampled regions are not uniformly distributed over the planet's surface. The widely used HadCRUT4 dataset covers on average about 84% of the globe over recent decades, with the unsampled regions being concentrated at the poles and over Africa. Three existing reconstructions with near-global coverage are examined, each suggesting that HadCRUT4 is subject to bias due to its treatment of unobserved regions.


Two alternative approaches for reconstructing global temperatures are explored, one based on an optimal interpolation algorithm and the other a hybrid method incorporating additional information from the satellite temperature record. The methods are validated on the basis of their skill at reconstructing omitted sets of observations. Both methods provide superior results than excluding the unsampled regions, with the hybrid method showing particular skill around the regions where no observations are available.


Temperature trends are compared for the hybrid global temperature reconstruction and the raw HadCRUT4 data. The widely quoted trend since 1997 in the hybrid global reconstruction is two and a half times greater than the corresponding trend in the coverage-biased HadCRUT4 data. Coverage bias causes a cool bias in recent temperatures relative to the late 1990s which increases from around 1998 to the present. Trends starting in 1997 or 1998 are particularly biased with respect to the global trend. The issue is exacerbated by the strong El Niño event of 1997-1998, which also tends to suppress trends starting during those years.

You can also read about it in other sites such as

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warmin...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41315
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
This is a beautiful new study by an English and a Canadian:
Incomplete global coverage is a potential source of bias in global temperature reconstructions if the unsampled regions are not uniformly distributed over the planet's surface. The widely used HadCRUT4 dataset covers on average about 84% of the globe over recent decades, with the unsampled regions being concentrated at the poles and over Africa. Three existing reconstructions with near-global coverage are examined, each suggesting that HadCRUT4 is subject to bias due to its treatment of unobserved regions.
Two alternative approaches for reconstructing global temperatures are explored, one based on an optimal interpolation algorithm and the other a hybrid method incorporating additional information from the satellite temperature record. The methods are validated on the basis of their skill at reconstructing omitted sets of observations. Both methods provide superior results than excluding the unsampled regions, with the hybrid method showing particular skill around the regions where no observations are available.
Temperature trends are compared for the hybrid global temperature reconstruction and the raw HadCRUT4 data. The widely quoted trend since 1997 in the hybrid global reconstruction is two and a half times greater than the corresponding trend in the coverage-biased HadCRUT4 data. Coverage bias causes a cool bias in recent temperatures relative to the late 1990s which increases from around 1998 to the present. Trends starting in 1997 or 1998 are particularly biased with respect to the global trend. The issue is exacerbated by the strong El Niño event of 1997-1998, which also tends to suppress trends starting during those years.
You can also read about it in other sites such as
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warmin...
Also from skeptical science;


How to use short timeframes to distort reality: a guide to cherrypicking

http://www.skepticalscience.com/cherrypicking...

Hmmm... 1997 to date... sounds like a 'short term trend' analysis.

d'Oh!

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41316
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
The contradictions continue....
Bozo just posted a link lamenting short term trends, "Also; The public debate about the alleged “warming pause” was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years"
...then you cite what?
A study of a short term trend.
LOL
I suspect that you have a reading comprehension problem.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41317
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
This is a beautiful new study by an English and a Canadian:
Incomplete global coverage is a potential source of bias in global temperature reconstructions if the unsampled regions are not uniformly distributed over the planet's surface. The widely used HadCRUT4 dataset covers on average about 84% of the globe over recent decades, with the unsampled regions being concentrated at the poles and over Africa. Three existing reconstructions with near-global coverage are examined, each suggesting that HadCRUT4 is subject to bias due to its treatment of unobserved regions.
Two alternative approaches for reconstructing global temperatures are explored, one based on an optimal interpolation algorithm and the other a hybrid method incorporating additional information from the satellite temperature record. The methods are validated on the basis of their skill at reconstructing omitted sets of observations. Both methods provide superior results than excluding the unsampled regions, with the hybrid method showing particular skill around the regions where no observations are available.
Temperature trends are compared for the hybrid global temperature reconstruction and the raw HadCRUT4 data. The widely quoted trend since 1997 in the hybrid global reconstruction is two and a half times greater than the corresponding trend in the coverage-biased HadCRUT4 data. Coverage bias causes a cool bias in recent temperatures relative to the late 1990s which increases from around 1998 to the present. Trends starting in 1997 or 1998 are particularly biased with respect to the global trend. The issue is exacerbated by the strong El Niño event of 1997-1998, which also tends to suppress trends starting during those years.
You can also read about it in other sites such as
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warmin...
See the abstract, folks.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41318
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
I suspect that you have a reading comprehension problem.
Not at all dimwit.

Just trying to hold warmists to some sort of standards.

LOL
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41319
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

LOL. Look at the troll action. WOW. They love those judgeits with their trolling action.

Nice.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41320
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

SpaceBlues wrote:
LOL. Look at the troll action. WOW. They love those judgeits with their trolling action.
Nice.
You think so little of litesong.

Don't feel bad -- I don't either.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41321
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Speaking of short term trends...

Every month SpaceBlues was citing NOAA temperature records with glee... cuz they were showing increases.

But he stopped doing that. Wonder why?

"The average temperature for the contiguous United States during October was 53.6°F, 0.6°F below the 20thcentury average, making it the 37th coolest October on record."

"The year-to-date contiguous U.S. temperature was 55.7°F, 0.7°F above the 20th century average, and the 32nd warmest January-October on record."

"When comparing the national temperature departure from average for the January-October period as calculated by NCDC's operational dataset (USHCN) to the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), the USHCN temperature anomaly was 0.05°F less than the USCRN anomaly value. The USHCN-based temperature was 0.16°F below the 1981-2010 average and the USCRN-based temperature was 0.11°F below the 1981-2010 average."

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2013/1...

37th, 23rd... not even Top 10 stuff here.

Shucks... nothing like some inconvenient 'truth', is there?

LOL
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41322
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

motheaten wrote:
jackass loon
Jackalope......

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 38,821 - 38,840 of43,159
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

61 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 4 min Catfish Hunter 96,269
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min woodtick57 1,036,660
Abby 4-23 20 min PEllen 29
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 22 min Jacques from Ottawa 167,716
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 28 min _Zoey_ 4,040
Amy 4-23 47 min cheluzal 40
8 shot across Chicago in less than seven hours 1 hr hands on AR 4
ask amy 4-22 7 hr Sublime1 69
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••