North Pole will be warmer than Western Texas today

[eieio 1,594]

i cant help it that I find it offensive when religIons try to shove their beliefs down other people throats. The religion of man made global warming is at the top of the list.

How above keeping your religious beliefs to yourself? Is that to much to ask?

[Dakine10 5,452]

Highest actual or highest tweaked? You stay tuned. That article is dated feb, 2015. Be sure to pick up that thermometer today.

The Forbe's article is dated 8/2013. The link I posted is includes data through Dec 2015, however it is interactive, so you may have to select the correct month and date and update the data.

The 0.87°C figure is the GMT for the entire year 2015, listed as change above the 20th century average. It's the actual measured data obtained by NOAA. I prefer to get data from the NOAA site, or sometimes I use NASA. If you prefer using the "notalotofpeopleknowthat" blog, well I'm sure that's a reliable source too. Regardless, the end result is the same.

[Dakine10 5,452]

i cant help it that I find it offensive when religIons try to shove their beliefs down other people throats. The religion of man made global warming is at the top of the list.

How above keeping your religious beliefs to yourself? Is that to much to ask?

On this site, it is, unless you recently bought the site from Ewok or something.

You could probably start your own site and make a TOS that includes only discussing your own narrow viewpoint. On this site, if you are posting just to disrupt the topic, you may want to go back and read this site's TOS. No one forces you to click on the topic and post nothing - this is all your choice.

[Expat1 971]

The Forbe's article is dated 8/2013. The link I posted is includes data through Dec 2015, however it is interactive, so you may have to select the correct month and date and update the data.

The 0.87°C figure is the GMT for the entire year 2015, listed as change above the 20th century average. It's the actual measured data obtained by NOAA. I prefer to get data from the NOAA site, or sometimes I use NASA. If you prefer using the "notalotofpeopleknowthat" blog, well I'm sure that's a reliable source too. Regardless, the end result is the same.

That's funny, I use NASA too. Not that hack Hanson who was screaming about global cooling in the 70's and screams about global warming now, but his colleagues. 49 of them. Who say:

"We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself."

http://www.cfact.org/2012/04/10/astronauts-and-scientists-send-letter-to-nasa-stop-global-warming-advocacy/

“The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.”

“We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated.”

“We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject.”

You can publish all of the tweaked data you want to. Hanson, in his 1999 report, said that "there is no evidence of global warming using the global temperature data" then in 2001 declared 1998 as the hottest year ever, after revisiting the temperature data.

[Dakine10 5,452]

That's funny, I use NASA too. Not that hack Hanson who was screaming about global cooling in the 70's and screams about global warming now, but his colleagues. 49 of them. Who say:

"We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself."

http://www.cfact.org/2012/04/10/astronauts-and-scientists-send-letter-to-nasa-stop-global-warming-advocacy/

“The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.”

“We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated.”

“We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject.”

You can publish all of the tweaked data you want to. Hanson, in his 1999 report, said that "there is no evidence of global warming using the global temperature data" then in 2001 declared 1998 as the hottest year ever, after revisiting the temperature data.

That's a letter to NASA. Using NASA's data as your source means something different.

The charge that NASA is relying too heavily on computer models to predict future change is a fair one. There isn't really a better alternative, and the scientists who wrote this letter certainly haven't offered one.

As far as NOAA's temperature data, that's not a future prediction, that's historical data. I've been using that site since 2006, and the recorded data they have listed there does not change.

[Expat1 971]

That's a letter to NASA. Using NASA's data as your source means something different.

The charge that NASA is relying too heavily on computer models to predict future change is a fair one. There isn't really a better alternative, and the scientists who wrote this letter certainly haven't offered one.

As far as NOAA's temperature data, that's not a future prediction, that's historical data. I've been using that site since 2006, and the recorded data they have listed there does not change.

http://www.cfact.org/2015/01/19/nasa-keeps-telling-warmest-lies/

Astrophysicist Dr. David Whitehouse said, “The NASA press release is highly misleading…talk of a record is scientifically and statistically meaningless.” He was joined by climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer, who said, “We are arguing over the significance of hundredths of a degree.”

Do you believe that a hundredth of a degree makes a difference? Well, it does if you are a government agency desperately trying to keep the global warming hoax alive. Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels asked, “Is 58.46 degrees distinguishable from 58.45 degrees? In a word, NO.”

Marc Morano, the editor of CFACT’s ClimateDepot.com, said, “There are dueling global datasets—surface temperature records and satellite records—and they disagree. The satellites show an 18-year-plus global warming standstill, and the satellite was set up to be ‘more accurate’ than the surface records.” As for the NASA claim, Morano dismissed it as “simply a political statement not based on temperature gauges.” Morano, a former member of the staff of the U.S. Senate Environmental & Public Works Committee, is working on an upcoming documentary “Climate Hustle.”

You and your pal go hustle somewhere else. You've got nothing but a few last holdouts who are desperate to protect their funding in an agency that can't even get people back and forth to a space station anymore. The temperature data is proven to be tweaked. Before it was tweaked, there was global cooling. After it was tweaked, there was global warming. It has not been untweaked since 2006, but as per my first post, it is not matching what the people who live in the countries where temperature is reported to be rising is measuring. That's how the tweaking was caught in the first place, that's when the big controversy started, and that's when people started looking into global warming and global warming suddenly became a new terrible event called global climate change and NASA scientists started distancing themselves from what NASA nutjobs were reporting. Nutjobs that you follow without question.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Expat1

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

As far as I'm concerned the global warming community needs to practice reading thermometers and writing the numbers down before they make any more slick brochures.

One possible training exercise is for us to pass a bill to fund and pass out thousands of rectal thermometers that they can practice using with each other.

Oil two years ago was over 100 dollars a barrel

Since then daily averages have gone UP over 100 times *and* there have been instances of 20 times in a row of solid price gains

Today Oil is at 36 dollar a barrel.

That's the beauty of cherry picking local changes - we can state total truths and still be totally wrong about what is really happening.

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

The problem is that the models are guessing too much on the total CO2 forcing factors. Many put way too much weight on the CO2 and ignore solar activity completely. There were ice ages that showed much higher levels of CO2 than today (see article). So to put the entire cause of periodic climate change on the back of CO2 seems like a really big stretch. My biggest concern is that leaders tend to over-react to minor effects and make statement ps regarding the need to end carbon emissions. Do they really think before they speak? Ending all carbon emissions would require the elimination of all life on this earth.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/CO2-was-higher-in-late-Ordovician.htm

Models might be putting too much emphasis on CO2 - all the means is we could be wrong about the rate. We know CO2 traps energy, we know the rate is increasing beyond the point where the planet can naturally balance it, we know how much *we* are putting into the atmosphere.

My personal gut reaction is that we are over reacting on the rate of change and we probably have a couple hundred years and not a few decades. I'm not an expert, the experts are looking at the problem and giving their best estimates with imperfect (but ever improving) models. If I was in charge I would be listening to the recommendation of the vast majority of experts and not my gut because my gut is biased.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

I hate it when threads turn to long drawn out discussion of facts

[Expat1 971]

Oil two years ago was over 100 dollars a barrel

Since then daily averages have gone UP over 100 times *and* there have been instances of 20 times in a row of solid price gains

Today Oil is at 36 dollar a barrel.

That's the beauty of cherry picking local changes - we can state total truths and still be totally wrong about what is really happening.

Yeah, like let's take Boise last year. In 1934, the average mean temperature was 13 C. Last year, the average mean was also 13 C. Supposedly much more heat is trapped in the atmosphere, right? Shouldn't there be a sustainable uptick in temperature like Al Gore's chart says?

Is Boise exempt from global warming phenomena? Would you like to pick another place? Pick one, anywhere on the planet then tell me why Hanson at NASA is reporting statistical changes in global temperatures but thermometers that are in different places around the world are not.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Expat1

[Teddy B 17,252]

I hate it when threads turn to long drawn out discussion of facts

I know, so boring!

Pull my fingah ya bloke!

[Expat1 971]

Models might be putting too much emphasis on CO2 - all the means is we could be wrong about the rate. We know CO2 traps energy, we know the rate is increasing beyond the point where the planet can naturally balance it, we know how much *we* are putting into the atmosphere.

My personal gut reaction is that we are over reacting on the rate of change and we probably have a couple hundred years and not a few decades. I'm not an expert, the experts are looking at the problem and giving their best estimates with imperfect (but ever improving) models. If I was in charge I would be listening to the recommendation of the vast majority of experts and not my gut because my gut is biased.

Is CO2 in the atmosphere trapping energy or are the oceans trapping energy? Thought it was the oceans a few posts ago.

[smilesammich 10,727]

this thread is too many line cooks in a gourmet kitchen if ya ask me..

[Ban Hammer 13,716]

this thread is too many line cooks in a gourmet kitchen if ya ask me..

where's my sammich?

[Expat1 971]

Val before you bring us more beer make charles a dam sammich.