25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
This conversation was about California, the drought in California was worse then the Dust Bowl for California.
But if you want to move the discussion into all of the US....
We won't be able to judge for sure until its done, and it sadly looks nowhere close to being done.
Right now 39% of the US is in drought, at the peak the Dust Bowl hit 80% of the US. Another hot summer could push us into a drought through the US that could rank the Dust Bowl nationally. It probably won't have the same effect, irrigation is better and farmers are smarter, but its still going to hurt.
What's your link?
Mine, the NOAA, has the year to date at 0.82ºC, with March at 0.85ºC.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201503
Maybe we should discuss upping the bet?
El Nino confirmed.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/el-nino-weather-system-appears-for-1st-time-since-2010-1.3070776
Only good news there is traditionally that leads to a wetter California.
Otherwise it just means another hotter year for us.
Sea levels rising faster.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/sea-level-rise-is-accelerating-1.3070635
Hey moviefan, how come you don't want to up the stakes for your bet?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/el-nino-weather-system-appears-for-1st-time-since-2010-1.3070776
Only good news there is traditionally that leads to a wetter California.
Otherwise it just means another hotter year for us.
Sea levels rising faster.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/sea-level-rise-is-accelerating-1.3070635
Hey moviefan, how come you don't want to up the stakes for your bet?
April's results are out, Moviefan.
You are correct, they went down slightly, to 0.75ºC anomaly globally.
http://www.reportingclimatescience....nasa-april-2015-was-second-warmest-april.html
Does that mean you're willing to up the stakes?
Or are you now really worried, since April went down but is still the second warmest April ever on record?
When you lose this bet and have to admit that the IPCC predictions are spectacularly right, will finally acknowledge that climate change is a reality?
You are correct, they went down slightly, to 0.75ºC anomaly globally.
http://www.reportingclimatescience....nasa-april-2015-was-second-warmest-april.html
Does that mean you're willing to up the stakes?
Or are you now really worried, since April went down but is still the second warmest April ever on record?
When you lose this bet and have to admit that the IPCC predictions are spectacularly right, will finally acknowledge that climate change is a reality?
Looking at an 18 year graph of global temps is like being one inch away from a massive redwoods trying to describe the forest.
Explain to me where all the carbon dioxide and pollution that man is creating is going and why is it not affecting the environment.
It is affecting the environment, we have increased the temperature of the globe by 0.8ºC or so right now.
Extreme weather, drought, ice melts....
And to answer your other question, a lot of the CO2 has ended in the oceans, which has now increased its acidification to the point where we have to be concerned about the viability of shellfish.
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean+Acidification's+impact+on+oysters+and+other+shellfish
What, me worry?
The GISS 12-month average at the end of 2014 was an anomaly of 0.68 degrees.
As of today, the 12-month average is 0.72 degrees above.
The first four months of this year have been warm, but only 0.02 degrees higher than where we were at this time in 2010 (NASA's numbers show the average so far at 0.79, not 0.82. At this time in 2010, it was 0.77).
The question is whether or not the difference will increase from 0.72 degrees above to 0.83 degrees above by the end of this year. If I were a betting man, I know which way I would bet.
Actually, I am a betting man. And I like my odds.
(By the way, if a huge El Nino push is needed to try to get the temperatures close to what the IPCC predicted, that confirms the IPCC's predictions have been spectacularly wrong).
Last edited:
Oh i believe you
Those were questions directed at the none believers in climate change.
Essentially it is carbonation the water. Sure not as fizzy aspop. Carbonation was used to help preserve food by making it less hospitable for bacteria. I hear that is great for ecosystems since bacteria and other microorganisms is probably at the base of the food chain in some form.
Really, but are you willing to up the bet?
As for the El Nino quote, you've used the last El Nino in your arguments that warming has 'paused' when its behaving as predicted. All the next one will do is to blow your bet out of the water. Your bet is betting short term volatility against predictions that are long term. You are going to be proven wrong about the IPCC, El Nino or not. Trying to prepare excuses for losing now won't help.
No, I wasn't preparing excuses. I was correcting your false assertion that a super El Nino would prove the IPCC's predictions were "spectacularly right."
If there is a super El Nino and the end result is that the temperature in 2015 barely squeaks past the IPCC prediction, it will prove the opposite. Even more so in the years that follow.
I also wouldn't overlook the possibility that there could be a super El Nino and the final temperature is still below the IPCC prediction.
By the way, the pause dates back to late 1996.
I'm satisfied with the existing terms of the bet and continue to like my odds. I'll stick with the bet as is.
No it wouldn't.
Last year was the warmest on record before El Nino hit.
14 of the 15 warmest fucking years on record have happened this century.
That means we've only had one non record hot year this century.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/02/14-15-hottest-years-record-2000-un-global-warming
Its a pattern, a very, very simple pattern.
Global temperature is going up.
El Nino is a 4-5 year cyclical event.
It happens, most of the time its a smaller event with a moderate effect.
But when its a strong El Nino, like in 1997, it brings a lot of heat into the air and does have an effect on the global temperature.
http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/eln/rcnt.rxml
I've already explained all of this to you.
The temperatures in the 21st century have been "flattening," to use NASA's phrase. Temperatures have not been increasing in any statistically significant way.
The fact that most of the warmest temperatures (according to NASA and NOAA) have been in this century merely reflect the fact that the plateau was reached at about the turn of the century.
No it isn't 'flattening'.
Last year was the warmest year on record, how the fuck is that 'flattening'?
You still can't read a chart, can you?
Go ahead and read this chart and point out where the horizontal line is, if you can't find it then you need to admit that its going up.
Got it?
You have repeatedly demonstrated ignorance and innumeracy, is a more accurate statement.
The data from the 21st century shows a slower climb than the prior 20 years, but 20 year intervals aren't all that significant and the massive rise in global temperature caused by human activity has had other similar flat areas in the course of its overall skyrocketing levels.
Only if you limit yourself to a statistically insignificant number of data points, which is obviously a stupid, innumerate, ignorant thing to do.
And we have had other brief plateaus in the impact of human activity on global temperature. There is no doubt that we caused a rise in temperature and no doubt that we will continue to impact temperature by our actions.
Here's the "warmest year" news release from NASA, with the exact quote (bolded emphasis added by me):
"These phenomena warm or cool the tropical Pacific and are thought to have played a role in the flattening of the long-term warming trend over the past 15 years."
Seventh paragraph: http://www.nasa.gov/press/2015/january/nasa-determines-2014-warmest-year-in-modern-record
The important part of that sentence is 'long-term warming trend'. As in it is still warming.
You've kept pushing your claim based on using the cherry picked 1997, super El Nino, as a starting point. It can be seen as a spike in the graph you still can't read. But you can also see that had you started a few years earlier where there was a spike down your arguments would be the opposite, that warming was increasing faster then IPCC claims. But now when you look at the chart, with the last couple of years of data included, you can't even point to the part of the chart where you claim warming was 'flattened' or look at the chart and honestly say that the line has stopped going up. Your argument was wrong to begin with and now its even more wrong.
Try reading the chart this time.
Talk about "cherry picking." Let's extract the part of the sentence we don't like to completely change the context of the full sentence. :biggrin1:
NASA says the Earth's temperature has been "flattening" over the past 15 years. If you think NASA has it wrong, say so.
Stop falsely trying to attribute the quote to me.
