More than 130 Iowa scientists issue s...

More than 130 Iowa scientists issue statement that 2012 drought is a sign of climate change

There are 58 comments on the The Washington Post story from Nov 19, 2012, titled More than 130 Iowa scientists issue statement that 2012 drought is a sign of climate change. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

This year's drought is consistent with predictions that global climate change would bring about weather extremes including more frequent droughts, said a report released Monday.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#23 Dec 29, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Talk about useless babble. Do show all your science work big mouth. The only thing you display is zero education.
What happened to you? Were you always like this in this forum?

FairGame does not need my help but you need to be told: You are a bore.

Is it so very hard for you to start digesting that some people are authentic and concerned truly about the manmade global climate change?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#24 Dec 29, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>What happened to you? Were you always like this in this forum?
FairGame does not need my help but you need to be told: You are a bore.
Is it so very hard for you to start digesting that some people are authentic and concerned truly about the manmade global climate change?
Your delusion with your cut and paste data seems to confuse you. Why don't you show your work on manmade climate change? Read your own useless babble and you will be bored.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#25 Dec 29, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Your delusion with your cut and paste data seems to confuse you. Why don't you show your work on manmade climate change? Read your own useless babble and you will be bored.
Look at what you posted.

Back at you.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#26 Dec 29, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Look at what you posted.
Back at you.
More of the same no answer. Back at you.
litesong

Everett, WA

#27 Dec 29, 2012
fun farts wrote:
There was drought ........again since 2010.
Lots of toxic topix AGW deniers(including you) glued themselves to the cold year of 2008, saying that global cooling was beginning. You also glued yourself, entering into 2009, to the solar minimum TSI, saying the 100 year record-breaking TSI low, would cause depression of temperatures in the future.

You finally got all the glue off your keyboard, but now glue yourself to some other toxic topix AGW denier fairytale.
litesong

Everett, WA

#28 Dec 29, 2012
Here's 'fun farts' take from 2009:

The PDO switched from positive to negative in 2002. If the pattern persists as it has in the past the next 30 years +/-, will be cooler.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#29 Dec 30, 2012
pinheadlitesout wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of toxic topix AGW deniers(including you) glued themselves to the cold year of 2008, saying that global cooling was beginning. You also glued yourself, entering into 2009, to the solar minimum TSI, saying the 100 year record-breaking TSI low, would cause depression of temperatures in the future.
You finally got all the glue off your keyboard, but now glue yourself to some other toxic topix AGW denier fairytale.
The only fairytale out there is to expect some intelligent response from you. You deny change no change through the cut and paste method. Now if you could get the only two brain cells unglued and work independently maybe you can show your own work.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#30 Dec 30, 2012
LOL.

ph'd does not know what cut and paste is. He does it himself w/o knowing.

haha
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#31 Dec 30, 2012
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of toxic topix AGW deniers(including you) glued themselves to the cold year of 2008, saying that global cooling was beginning. You also glued yourself, entering into 2009, to the solar minimum TSI, saying the 100 year record-breaking TSI low, would cause depression of temperatures in the future.
You finally got all the glue off your keyboard, but now glue yourself to some other toxic topix AGW denier fairytale.
Excellent.

ff will flounder without dirt. LOL.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#32 Dec 30, 2012
litesong wrote:
Here's 'fun farts' take from 2009:
The PDO switched from positive to negative in 2002. If the pattern persists as it has in the past the next 30 years +/-, will be cooler.
Excellent, too.

ff flounders for a while, LOL.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33 Dec 30, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
LOL.
ph'd does not know what cut and paste is. He does it himself w/o knowing.
haha
Spaced out I do.Its learned behavior. And I thank all you higher educated people for being an excellent teacher. Unfortunately you missed the point. It’s easier to dazzle you with cut and paste B.S. than explain how the real climate change actually works. So put on your big boy pants and explain climate change without that cut and paste thing you are famous for.
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#34 Dec 30, 2012
litesong wrote:
Here's 'fun farts' take from 2009:
The PDO switched from positive to negative in 2002. If the pattern persists as it has in the past the next 30 years +/-, will be cooler.
Looks like that's what has happened

The warm season of 2012 as compared to 1995. 2012 is .22*C warmer than 1995.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

Same 2012 warm season, compared to 1996. 2012 .32*C warmer than 1996
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

Same comparisons, 1997. 2012 .13*C warmer than 1997
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

1998 2012 same as 1998
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

1999 2012 .26 warmer than 1999
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2000 .25*C warmer
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2001 .08*C warmer
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2002,.09*C warmer
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2003,.05*C
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2004,.15*C
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2005,-.01 cooler
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2006,.05*C
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2007,.09*C
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2008,.13*C
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2009,.01*C
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2010,.01*C
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...

2011,.08*C
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#35 Dec 30, 2012
You might be able to say it is warmer than it was in 1950. But you can't say that it has warmed much since 1995.

Remember 2012 the warmest summer? Well since 1995 the most the 2012 temps were warmer was by .32*C, three tenths of a degree, in 1996.

Only three years was 2012 warmer by more than two tenths of a degree.

Three years 2012 was warmer by one tenth of a degree.

Nine of the years between 1995 and 2012 were less than one tenth of a degree warmer in 2012.

And 2012 was a very warm summer, wasn't it? So our very warm summer was less than 3 tenths of a degree warmer than 15 of the prior 16 years. Less than one tenth of a degree warmer than nine of the prior 16 years.

Not much warmING going on anymore.

And remember these are adjusted values produced by NASA/GISS. To be within one tenth of a degree in an equation that covers the entire globe, is a pretty small variance.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36 Dec 30, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Spaced out I do.Its learned behavior. And I thank all you higher educated people for being an excellent teacher. Unfortunately you missed the point. It’s easier to dazzle you with cut and paste B.S. than explain how the real climate change actually works. So put on your big boy pants and explain climate change without that cut and paste thing you are famous for.
I did explain.

And you did not answer the questions I asked above.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#37 Dec 30, 2012
Repeating to ph'd:

What happened to you?

Were you always like this in this forum?

Is it so very hard for you to start digesting that some people are authentic and concerned truly about the manmade global climate change?
Fun Facts

Huntsville, AL

#38 Dec 30, 2012
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of toxic topix AGW deniers(including you) glued themselves to the cold year of 2008, saying that global cooling was beginning. You also glued yourself, entering into 2009, to the solar minimum TSI, saying the 100 year record-breaking TSI low, would cause depression of temperatures in the future.
You finally got all the glue off your keyboard, but now glue yourself to some other toxic topix AGW denier fairytale.
It has. http://www.solen.info/solar/images/comparison...

In fact SDIC has labeled November 2011 as the solar max for cycle 24 and the SSN values are looking like February 2012 for the max.

NASA is now predicting a 14 year cycle 24. If that's true, then we've got about a decade of lower solar output before we hit the minimum. If cycle 24 does last 14 years then cycle 25 will be lower and longer resulting in even lower solar energy input to our system.

I have seen cycle 24 lengths predicted at 17 years. That would produce Maunder Minimum type solar values.

This is exactly what was predicted by solar physicists. It is unfolding just as they said it would. To have missed this info, you would have to have put your fingers in your ears, covered your eyes and chanted 'na na na na'.

But there are none so blind as those who will not see, and who can see with their eyes closed.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#39 Dec 30, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
Repeating to ph'd:
What happened to you?
Were you always like this in this forum?
Is it so very hard for you to start digesting that some people are authentic and concerned truly about the manmade global climate change?
What happened to you? Were you always slow at understanding a simple answer? No question about authentic and concerned about so called manmade global climate cooling warming. Your issue is you refuse to show your own work and count on the cut and paste thing. You elect to pick a side that is fashionable and with the majority. Just as a smart member of the GOP coined a phrase you’re a sheeplebots. I bet when your side takes a hit you will change your new fashionable position.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#40 Dec 30, 2012
Fun Facts wrote:
You might be able to say it is warmer than it was in 1950. But you can't say that it has warmed much since 1995.
A lie of course.

The two warmest ever years this decade; the previous decade the warmest ever; ocean heat content continuing to rise.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#41 Dec 30, 2012
Fun Facts wrote:
That would produce Maunder Minimum type solar values.
Joanna Haigh, a solar physicist at Imperial College London, has spent a fair bit of research time investigating mechanisms that could potentially amplify solar changes into meaningful temperature variations on human timescales on Earth.

She summed up the importance of the latest research like this:

"In a future grand minimum, the Sun might perhaps again cool the planet by up to 1C.

"Greenhouse gases, on the other hand, are expected to raise global temperatures by 1.5-4.5C by 2100.

"So even if the predictions are correct, the effect of global warming will outstrip the Sun's ability to cool even in the coldest scenario.

"And in any case, the cooling effect is only ever temporary. When the Sun's activity returns to normal, the greenhouse gases won't have gone away."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment...

What solar physicists are telling you is that *even if* there were Maunder Minimum type solar values, the absolute minimum warming from added CO2 would exceed it.

We're not going to see cooling.

Only more warming.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#42 Dec 30, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Look at what you posted.
Back at you.
So where is the question? Note a question generraly ends with a question mark(???).

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.

Natural Disasters Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Forest fires and climate change: causes, conseq... 4 hr Smokey 1
News TRACKING: Flash flood warning issued for Meckle... 17 hr true 1
News Record rain brings river flooding; several Amis... (Mar '11) Mon ??? 4
News Did A Tornado Touch Down In West Liberty? (Mar '12) Sun Messenger 69
News Magnitude 6.5 Quake Strikes Off Coast Of Japan'... Sep 25 Ainu 8
News La. senator defends 'hostage' comment about Fli... Sep 25 Desirezzzz4251 2
News Looking back at the 1983 flood that sent a rive... Sep 24 Lydia 2
More from around the web