2016 Hit Records For Global Temperature And Climate Extremes

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

August 10, 20179:00 PM ET

SCOTT NEUMAN

Twitter

 

A field cleared of sunflowers destroyed by drought is seen in Padina, Serbia, on Thursday.

Marko Drobnjakovic/AP

The year 2016 was the warmest on record for the planet as a whole, surpassing temperature records that date back 137 years, according to an annual report compiled by scientists around the globe.

For global temperatures, last year surpassed the previous record-holder: 2015.

According to the annual, peer-reviewed State of the Climate report, it was also a year of other extremes and records, including the highest sea levels and lowest sea ice in the Arctic and Antarctica. And, it was one of the worst years for droughts.

The 299-report, published by the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, relies on the work of hundreds of scientists in 60 countries. It shows that 2016 was "very extreme and it is a cause for concern," says NOAA climate scientist Jessica Blunden, a co-editor of the report.

e."

[jg121783 3,915]

 

Every year is "the most extreme on record" for the carbon Nazis. Because 137 years of records is a good representation of millions of years of Earth's existence.

[Going through 5,671]

I read the title of this thread and immediately thought of vinyl music records and that you wanted to make up a playlist for the Summer heat.

 

I think I'm showing my age.  Or my tiredness---been up since 3am.

[Dashinka 24,514]

Were they using the same data manipulation as the Australians?

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

2 hours ago, Going through said:

I read the title of this thread and immediately thought of vinyl music records and that you wanted to make up a playlist for the Summer heat.

 

I think I'm showing my age.  Or my tiredness---been up since 3am.

 

[Going through 5,671]

Wonderful.  Now that will be stuck in my head all day long.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

 

[Going through 5,671]

Believe it or not, never heard that song before...

[Teddy B 17,252]

4 hours ago, jg121783 said:

 

Every year is "the most extreme on record" for the carbon Nazis. Because 137 years of records is a good representation of millions of years of Earth's existence.

 

I'm not fully sold on how devastating this current climate change will be if at all, but when that's pretty much all you have, isn't it prudent to use what data is available rather than stick your fingers in your ears while singing "la la la la"?

 

 

[IAMX 3,055]

4 hours ago, jg121783 said:

 

Every year is "the most extreme on record" for the carbon Nazis. Because 137 years of records is a good representation of millions of years of Earth's existence.

 

Just waiting for any of these doom and gloom climate scenarios to start happening already.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

4 hours ago, jg121783 said:

 

Every year is "the most extreme on record" for the carbon Nazis. Because 137 years of records is a good representation of millions of years of Earth's existence.

  Humans wouldn't have survived during many of the millions of those years. Neither did 98% of all the other species that ever existed. I'm not sure why people always bring this up as if it's pertinent to the current discussion of global warming.  

 

  Five hundred years ago, the earth would not have been able to support 7 billion people. Not sure why a million years ago matters. The discussion is not about the ability of the earths climate to adapt to change and the variance that exists within that parameter, it's about what happens to the enormous population of humans when it does. 

[IAMX 3,055]

6 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

  Humans wouldn't have survived during many of the millions of those years. Neither did 98% of all the other species that ever existed. I'm not sure why people always bring this up as if it's pertinent to the current discussion of global warming.  

 

  Five hundred years ago, the earth would not have been able to support 7 billion people. Not sure why a million years ago matters. The discussion is not about the ability of the earths climate to adapt to change and the variance that exists within that parameter, it's about what happens to the enormous population of humans when it does. 

Well no, the discussion is about how much humans control the Earths climate and how simply forcing environmental regs (i.e. carbon credits) and driving hybrids+electric vehicles, regardless of the lack of economic feasibility, would save the planet.

 

What you discuss is the more science-based aspect, something that, if discussed more frequently, might lead to more logical discussion, but we're stuck in hysteria mode -- very befitting for leftist topics since last year. Hence why it was only appropriate Al Gore made a sequel to his film, to promote more of that hysteria while trying in countless ways to siphon money from gullible lefties.

Edited August 11, 2017 by IAMX

[Dashinka 24,514]

6 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Well no, the discussion is about how much humans control the Earths climate and how simply forcing environmental regs (i.e. carbon credits) and driving hybrids+electric vehicles, regardless of the lack of economic feasibility, would save the planet.

 

What you discuss is the more science-based aspect, something that, if discussed more frequently, might lead to more logical discussion, but we're stuck in hysteria mode -- very befitting for leftist topics since last year. Hence why it was only appropriate Al Gore made a sequel to his film, to promote more of that hysteria while trying in countless ways to siphon money from gullible lefties.

We need to put more children to work in the Congo!

[Dashinka 24,514]

I guess they did do some manipulation.

 

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/08/09/us-climate-report-edits-out-highly-embarrassing-section/

[Steeleballz 7,550]

Just now, IAMX said:

Well no, the discussion is about how much humans control the Earths climate and how simply forcing environmental regs (i.e. carbon credits) and driving hybrids+electric vehicles would save the planet.

  Firstly, the planet will survive. For another billion years or so anyway. Saving the planet is not really the issue. The discussion is about how humans will survive on that planet. Temperature is just one aspect of that discussion, in that the more temperature varies from the small range of ideal conditions that support current human existence, the less likely that existence can continue unabated. Whether that's good or bad is another discussion. Obviously if we were not on course to reach a global population of ~9 billion, the impact humans have on climate would not be as important of an issue.

 

  As to the current topic, seems to be several years in a row that the average temperature has been the highest on record. At some point we will reach critical mass. Whether that's caused by climate, population or something else remains to be seen. When that happens, humans being what they are, I'm sure everyone will all aboard the ecology train. Not much to be done at that point though.