Global Warming

[Rorschach]

Rubbish.
The so-called originator of Gaia Theory btw was a leading promoter of AGW... he has since changed his mind in regards to the alarmism.

(In 2012, Lovelock distanced himself from these conclusions, saying he had "gone too far" in describing the consequences of climate change over the next century in this book.)

[Outlaw Yogi]

Rubbish.
The so-called originator of Gaia Theory btw was a leading promoter of AGW... he has since changed his mind in regards to the alarmism.

(In 2012, Lovelock distanced himself from these conclusions, saying he had "gone too far" in describing the consequences of climate change over the next century in this book.)

Thanks for showing it's not rubbish.
Regardless of whether he's changed his tune/mind on GW doesn't alter the fact he used a Greek myth being Gaia as his metaphor to push his pro-nuke agenda.
And he pushed it on the grounds of being a CO2 free (which it's not) alternative to coal.

Changing one's mind on any given topic doesn't alter history or remove guilt.

[Rorschach]

You make nice scarecrows...
Now the point was that even the proponent of Gaia Theory... not Greek Mythology has changed his mind on AGW alarmism.
When will you and SN change yours?

[Outlaw Yogi]

You make nice scarecrows...

Thank you. I'll have to give it a try.
Currently I've got Sulfur Crested Cockatoos (white cockies - the ferals from West of the Great Divide) destroying my crops. They stole nearly all my passion fruit and are now wrecking my mandarines.

Now the point was that even the proponent of Gaia Theory... not Greek Mythology has changed his mind on AGW alarmism.

May be your point, which from my perspective is altering the tangent, but my point was in addressing this ...

.

It the left, so desperate for some kind of religion in their lives, they have adopted Gaia as their Lord and saviour and sinners (as they see it) against their beloved God will be punished in fire and brimstone (global warming) so they must repent their sins (buy carbon credits and champion a carbon tax) or their children will suffer an even worse fate.

When will you and SN change yours?

Can't speak for SN, or anyone else for that matter.
But I'll change my mind on this topic when the atmospheric and oceanic temps decrease, the polar and glacial regions refreeze, and the ocean levels subside.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Several year back (around 2007 from memory) DT was claiming NASA disputed GW was happening. Believing that he (DT) was misrepresenting NASA to promote his false argument,
I went through the 7 publicly available links at NASA's site, posted them in a PA GW related thread and challenged him to show where NASA had said any such thing. And of course he couldn't.

Later on Lord Christopher Monkton published a fake graph indicating that global temps were reducing not increasing, it was debunked withing 2 days. Notorious bullshit artist Andrew Bolt republished the fake graph knowing it had already been discredited, thus knowingly lying.
Despite prior debunking DT chose to post Bolt's reproduction of Monktons bogus graph, so of course I trashed it quick smart.

In recent times GW deniers have been claiming the British Met Office claims there has been a halt/hiatus/pause to GW for 16 years, despite the 10 hottest years on record being all since 1998. So naturally I said the claim was bullshit.

Now I get to gloat, saying "I told you so" because it's recently been published that the British Met Office has publicly claimed they never said there was a halt/hiatus/pause in GW, but what they did say was that "the rate of GW had slowed for 15 years". Meaning that GW was still happening, but the rate of heating was not as fast as it had been in recent decades.
Thus GW deniers had deliberately misrepresented the British Met Office or can't read English properly.

Anyway, I just perused the British Met Office site to confirm what they did or didn't have to say. Here's sme of their recent publications:

News release archives — 2015
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2015

An archive of Met Office news releases, going back three years.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive

2014 one of the warmest years on record globally
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releas ... emperature

26 January 2015 - Provisional full-year global mean temperature figures show 2014 was one of the warmest years in a record dating back to 1850.

The HadCRUT4 dataset (compiled by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit) shows last year was 0.56C (±0.1C*) above the long-term (1961-1990) average.

Nominally this ranks 2014 as the joint warmest year in the record, tied with 2010, but the uncertainty ranges mean it's not possible to definitively say which of several recent years was the warmest.

Colin Morice, a climate monitoring scientist at the Met Office, said: "Uncertainties in the estimates of global temperature are larger than the differences between the warmest years. This limits what we can say about rankings of individual years.

"We can say with confidence that 2014 is one of ten warmest years in the series and that it adds to the set of near-record temperatures we have seen over the last two decades."

Phil Jones, of the University of East Anglia, said: "2014 was an exceptionally warm year which saw warm tropical pacific temperatures, despite not being officially regarded as an El Niño."

2014 confirmed as UK's warmest year on record
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releas ... temps-2014

5 January 2015 - Provisional full year figures for 2014 show it is the UK's warmest and fourth wettest year in records dating back to 1910.

It is also the warmest year on record in the Central England Temperature series, which dates back to 1659 and is the world's longest running instrumental temperature series.
Warmest year on record

The UK's mean temperature for the year is 9.9 °C, which is 1.1 °C above the long-term (1981-2010) average and beats the previous record of 9.7 °C set in 2006.

This year's record means that eight of the UK's top ten warmest years have happened since 2002.

Looking in more detail across the UK, it was the warmest year on record for all countries and regions apart from Northern Ireland - which had its joint third warmest year behind 2007 and 2006.

Despite the record breaking warmth, no months through the year saw records for temperature - instead each month was consistently warm, with only August seeing below average temperatures.

It was also marginally the warmest year on record in the CET series from 1659 with a mean temperature of 10.93 °C narrowly ahead of the previous record of 10.87 °C set in 2006.

[Outlaw Yogi]

The inspiration for checking the British Met Office site was due to a Weekend Australian published article regarding the US's National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's latest research indicating claims of a halt/hiatus/pause in GW is wrong.

Climate scientists warm to new brawl
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 7385456622
Bugga ... to read it at the Australian site, copy it quick, other wise the pay wall takes over.
No matter, it's published elsewhere ...

Hmmm, OK entirely different slant .. not same article, but considerably more info.

Global Warming's Great Hiatus Gets Another Debunking
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/04062 ... vAodWjcAkw

"The rate of temperature increase during the last half of the 20th century is virtually identical to that of the 21st century," said Tom Karl, director of NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information and lead author of the study.

The NOAA scientists found that the world warmed 0.086 degrees Celsius per decade between 1998 and 2012, more than double the previous estimates. When the researchers included 2013 and 2014—when record-breaking heat spread across the globe—warming per decade jumped to 0.116 degrees Celsius.

The "newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA's NCEI do not support the notion of a global warming 'hiatus,'" wrote the study authors.

"The fact that such small changes to the analysis make the difference between a hiatus or not merely underlines how fragile a concept it was in the first place," said Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist and director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies who was not involved in the research.

Scientists aren't holding their breath that the findings published this week will sway climate denialists from claiming there is a hiatus or pause in warming.

"There will be a very predictable chorus of 'data manipulation' and 'fraud' as they see a talking point disappear, and so it will just continue as before," said Schmidt. "Just remember, their objections have little or nothing to do with science."

Tried numerous links, but The Australian's digital subscription program keeps blocking access.

I've also noticed recently that GW denialist journalists are yet again misrepresenting NASA by claiming NASA supports the halt/hiatus/pause in GW claims, which they don't.

Now the US's NOAA and UK's British Met Office are working together on GW science.

Met Office collaborates with US on severe storm prediction
http://blog.metoffice.gov.uk/2015/05/28 ... rediction/

[Super Nova]

Well.... I wonder what our denialist have to say about this...........



Climate change ‘hiatus’ is a myth after all

Rumours of global warming’s death have been greatly exaggerated, scientists have claimed.

A re-analysis of global temperature records has found that the so-called “hiatus”, in which the climate had not appeared to have significantly warmed since the beginning of the century, is nothing of the sort.

After correcting for changes in the way data had been collected in the past, and expanding the number of measurements used, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration concluded that global temperatures had been systematically underestimated over the past 15 years.

Although the correction was small, the study, published in the journal Science, showed that the temperature trend since 2000 almost precisely matched that in previous decades.

Thomas Karl, the director of NOAA, said: “Our analysis suggests that the apparent hiatus may have been largely the result of limitations in past datasets, and that the rate of warming over the first 15 years of this century has, in fact, been as fast or faster than that seen over the last half of the 20th century.”

In past years, climate scientists have struggled to explain an apparently flat global temperature, which contradicted the predictions made in some of their models. Climate sceptics have used this as an argument that global warming had been exaggerated.

For the new study, the scientists took account of a change in the way sea temperatures were collected. Before the 1970s measurements were taken from ships, while after that buoys were used.

The scientists said ship measurements were consistently warmer and this needed to be accounted for, meaning past estimates of temperature were revised down. When this was added to updated data, the “hiatus” disappeared.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environme ... 462281.ece

[Rorschach]

So what you are saying is that they are once more fudging figures or moving goalposts to once more fit their agenda.
They have already proven they are untrustworthy and dishonest.

[Outlaw Yogi]

No, they're saying the claims of a hiatus in GW is bullshit, which it is.

I don't know why you denialists are so determined to ignore the obvious.

I think we should embrace GW. The world's overpopulated and here's the best chance short of WW3 we've got to have a cull without lifting a finger.

Yeah OK, the climate wars which the Pentagon speculates will begin in Africa over water shortages will probably spread and trash the global economy, but in my part of the world,
I'm getting more rain in what used to be a dry place, so food's getting easier to grow.
And I look forward to less cold winters.

See, GW is a blessing in disguise.

[Rorschach]

Well none of us have argued otherwise, in fact we've mentioned many times that some warming will be good for us all.
As for the fudging... so far that's all it is. You alarmists will cling onto anything.
BTW I'm no denier... nor are most people and scientists who are not in the alarmist camp.