Nope.Now, we're getting somewhere.
But the IPCC prediction at that time was made in 1995, not 1996.
Therefore, the bet is from 1995 to 2015 -- you won't have to wait, as we'll know the winner by early 2016.
Do we have a bet?
You are cherry picking.The IPCC report was released in 1995. The only way to make it fair and to avoid any concerns about "cherry picking" is to use 1995 as the starting date.
Otherwise, I might be more inclined to pick 1997 or 1998 as the starting dates.
But we can't cherry pick. The only way to make it fair is to pick 1995 as the starting date.
Do we have a bet?
We might get a bet, once you agree to use one chart for recording the results.
For example, your NASA chart that shows 1995 at 0.43 degrees Celsius put 2014 at 0.68 degrees in 2014: http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
If that's the chart you're saying will hit 0.83 at the end of 2015, we definitely have a bet.
Not at all true.Even if it is true global climate is slight increasing every decade a tiny fraction of a degree, it's going to take a long time before anything big happens. And if something big happens everyone on this forum and currently on Earth will be long gone. Maybe everyone's great great great grandkids will experience something out of the norm.
What's funny is that so many so-called scientists can't even predict global temperature changes even after being given decades of time to prove their point.
It's like the weatherman who can't even call a daily forecast correct tomorrow or the day after despite all the fancy technology available doing the work for them. lol
Not at all true.
39% of the US is in drought right now.
California is going through a dustbowl situation that will have major ramifications on food prices in the next while unless things drastically change, which isn't too likely.
This drought is worse then the dust bowl already, worst drought in 1000 years.The worst droughts in the history of the United States occurred during the 1930s and 1950s, periods of time known as 'Dust Bowl' years in which droughts lead to significant economic damages and social changes. In particular, relief and health agencies became overburdened and many local community banks had to close.
So what's your point,...???
FAST
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2015/04/14/climate-change-and-the-california-droughtClimate Change Caused California Drought
And there you have it folks,...1000 years ago,...there was a recorded drought in California,...!!!This drought is worse then the dust bowl already, worst drought in 1000 years,....
Discussions about climate change should be dealt with in the same way that some sporting events are scored... toss out the high and the low scores, and average the remaining ones. Same here... toss out the lunatic fringe on either end, and you will be left with a compelling body of scientific work that clearly, and beyond doubt indicates where we are heading.the same morons who tried to explain that cigarettes DON'T cause cancer , are the same morons who are being paid by big oil to say there is no climate change... look it up..ts virtually the same people and companies.. that tells me all i need to know..
If you thought that was funny, check out this ringer.And there you have it folks,...1000 years ago,...there was a recorded drought in California,...!!!
Thanks for that,...my best laugh today so far,...
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2015/04/14/climate-change-and-the-california-droughtA recent paleoclimate study found that, while precipitation levels throughout the drought were extremely low, it was largely the remarkable, record-high temperatures that made this drought stand out as the worst to hit the area in 1,200 years.
Read the IPCC reports, that's exactly what they do.Discussions about climate change should be dealt with in the same way that some sporting events are scored... toss out the high and the low scores, and average the remaining ones. Same here... toss out the lunatic fringe on either end, and you will be left with a compelling body of scientific work that clearly, and beyond doubt indicates where we are heading.
Maybe not. NASA has it lower and we did agree that we would use the NASA stats to decide the winner.Our year to date global temp anomaly is still at 0.82ºC.
Looks like I'm still winning the bet.
April might be a bit lower, but if you read the whole post you would have seen this:Maybe not. NASA has it lower and we did agree that we would use the NASA stats to decide the winner.
Also, the speculation so far is that April is down: http://davidappell.blogspot.ca/2015/04/estimated-giss-april-global-temperature.html
Can we start setting the terms for confirmation that you've read the books once the bet is over?The Reanalyzer shows the El Nino really gaining steam (so to speak), which suggests a likelihood of warmer months ahead:
I fixed your post for you.Can we start setting the terms for confirmation that I've read the books once the bet is over?
Hey, as of today, you are losing.I fixed your post for you.
You need to look at the NASA numbers. Currently, I'm winning.Hey, as of today, you are losing.
The drought of the 30's in the US,...not just one state,...is well documented,...the one 1200 years ago,...not so much.If you thought that was funny, check out this ringer.
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2015/04/14/climate-change-and-the-california-drought
It must be difficult being wrong so often, but at least you are fast.
