Fourth warmest May on record

[Kid Fish]

Reading the entire article you posted is usually in your best interest my friend.

I read it all, but thanks for the advice junior.

The title of the article synopsises the story, so there you have it.

 

[Saving Hawaii]

I still do not understand the big deal about Global Warming.
Hasn't science shown that there were more animals and plants around back in the "warmer" dinosaur age than now? If that is the case then the way I see it is Global Warming is the best thing that has happened for the planet in a long time.

Science is also acutely aware that humans, our crops, our domesticated livestock, and just about everything else we rely on wasn't around in the "warmer" dinosaur age.

 

[AirPo]

I still do not understand the big deal about Global Warming.
Hasn't science shown that there were more animals and plants around back in the "warmer" dinosaur age than now? If that is the case then the way I see it is Global Warming is the best thing that has happened for the planet in a long time.

The big deal is there were a lot less people back in the "warmer" dinosaur age as well.

 

[JustOneWay]

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says

But by all means, let's pass Cap and Trade so we can destroy industries and the personal fiscal wealth of every single citizen. By Obama's own words Gateway Pundit: Obama Admits Cap & Trade Will Cause Electricity Rates to Skyrocket (Video)

Stop the insanity. For God's sake.

GE owns MSNBC "go green" and is positioned to win huge from Obama's plans. So strange they are also the administration's loudest cheerleader.

I know there are smart people out there willing to set aside party politics and engage their minds. Go on Democrats, be smart, think about the truth and the ramifications of what is in our future if we act precipitously.

translation:

If you think like me then you are smart

nice, however a poor debate tactic, junior.

 

[AirPo]

I read it all, but thanks for the advice junior.

The title of the article synopsises the story, so there you have it.

And the title makes sense since there are no humans on Mars. Good job Kid.

 

[Saving Hawaii]

I read it all, but thanks for the advice junior.

The title of the article synopsises the story, so there you have it.

Well that was one whopper of a thorough defense for your viewpoints, wasn't it champ?

 

[Kid Fish]

It's funny to see people who are more interested in thinking they are right, than in actually thinking right.

It's okay. You find comfort in hubris and partisanship and so you live your lives based on what the DNC says. Too bad for you though that you don't follow the money for green the same way you do for oil.

 

[Anovah]

62 and rain in Utah today. I gotcher global warming right here buddy.

So in other words you're not familiar with what is meant by "global warming"?

 

[Saving Hawaii]

It's funny to see people who are more interested in thinking they are right, than in actually thinking right.

It's okay. You find comfort in hubris and partisanship and so you live your lives based on what the DNC says. Too bad for you though that you don't follow the money for green the same way you do for oil.

Once again, rather than defending a single one of your ideological viewpoints, you simply dismiss everybody here, denouncing them with cries of "hubris" and "partisanship" and then implying that nobody here is "thinking right" (which I assumed means "thinking like you").

Let's do a little point by point here.

• In this thread and the energy thread which has featured a similar discussion, several participants have provided numerous scientific studies and have relied upon the testimony of many scientists who concur with the overlying consensus.
• Other participants have relied upon magazine articles, radio hosts, celebrities, and random blogs to defend their viewpoints.
• The first group has utilized scientific papers and commentary from well-qualified researchers to support their viewpoints in responding to these magazine articles and blogs.
• The latter group then responds to this articulate defense of a sound theory by simply demeaning the first group as "incapable of thinking" or "partisan".

By all rational thought, it would seem that a little first grade mocking rhyme would be most applicable in the present situation. You know, some kind of "I'm rubber and you're glue... whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you!"

 

[MichaelFJF]

So in other words you're not familiar with what is meant by "global warming"?

So in other words, you've never talked to anyone from New York.

 

[Billnew]

MFJF: If we don't do something drastic now, there might be a reason to do it later!
I think a quote in my sig sums up GW.

You never want a serious crisis(real or made up) to go to waste,
and what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you didn't think you could do before.

The options that GW followers give us, show thier true intentions.

Reduce certain emissions by mandating goverment costs into the price of goods that produce emmisions.
Reduce free travel (by above)
reduce the luxuries, average people can afford(temp control), both heat and cooling.
reduce energy use by the average person.
restrict options of people, so they will buy the new product(that is more efficeint, and less emisions.)

If you see the pattern, restrict the comon man, while the rich could care less about
an addition small cost to use the luxury. The comon man lives in a home temp of 85f.
While the rich can wear coats and keep the temp at 60f. The average person drives a small compact car or new design full of flaws, while the rich travels in limos and Hummers.
Increasing costs, just mean the rich are more elite. Its all about leveling the playing field, for others. Meaning the upper middle class and lower will be lowered to low income, and the rich will be the elite class.
Dang, and Republicans were going about this all the wrong way.

Global warming is all about power to control people, and making everyone equal except the special elite. (I offer Al Gore's hyper-electric homes, and his use of a private jet to fly all over the world to tell people about how bad using fossil fuels are, while burning lots of jet fuel.) Everyone else needs to change, but the elite will be in charge and therefore will not have to change.

 

[DaisyDay]

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says

Did you read the article?

...
"His views are completely at odds with the mainstream scientific opinion," said Colin Wilson, a planetary physicist at England's Oxford University.
...
Amato Evan, a climate scientist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, added that "the idea just isn't supported by the theory or by the observations."​

 

[Shadowfax503]

2008 was actually a bit cooler than the past 8 years according to NASA. However they do think this is a new trend.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/

Summary: The Southern Oscillation and increasing GHGs continue to be, respectively, the dominant factors affecting interannual and decadal temperature change. Solar irradiance has a non-negligible effect on global temperature [see, e.g., ref. 7, which empirically estimates a somewhat larger solar cycle effect than that estimated by others who have teased a solar effect out of data with different methods]. Given our expectation of the next El Niño beginning in 2009 or 2010, it still seems likely that a new global temperature record will be set within the next 1-2 years, despite the moderate negative effect of the reduced solar irradiance.

{In laymans terms}
The biggest issue will be watching the southern oscillation and the rate at which greenhouse gasses continue to build, also solar output may contribute to the effect some but that is still questionable as to what extent that impact would be.

So what I get from NASA is that their BEST GUESS is that we are still warming up.

 

[chaim]

So you agree that the Earth is still warming and that the trend is largely driven by green house gases? I don't see anything in the GISS description saying anything about guessing.

2008 was actually a bit cooler than the past 8 years according to NASA. However they do think this is a new trend.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/

Summary: The Southern Oscillation and increasing GHGs continue to be, respectively, the dominant factors affecting interannual and decadal temperature change. Solar irradiance has a non-negligible effect on global temperature [see, e.g., ref. 7, which empirically estimates a somewhat larger solar cycle effect than that estimated by others who have teased a solar effect out of data with different methods]. Given our expectation of the next El Niño beginning in 2009 or 2010, it still seems likely that a new global temperature record will be set within the next 1-2 years, despite the moderate negative effect of the reduced solar irradiance.

{In laymans terms}
The biggest issue will be watching the southern oscillation and the rate at which greenhouse gasses continue to build, also solar output may contribute to the effect some but that is still questionable as to what extent that impact would be.

So what I get from NASA is that their BEST GUESS is that we are still warming up.

 

[chaim]

Bill, you are talking about two different issues here, one is climate change the second is the policy response to climate change. We can (and should) debate the policy responses to climate change, but to ignore and lie about the science (as many people on here do) because you don't like the policy response is intellectually dishonest (as well as being just plain old dishonest).

MFJF: If we don't do something drastic now, there might be a reason to do it later!
I think a quote in my sig sums up GW.


The options that GW followers give us, show thier true intentions.

Reduce certain emissions by mandating goverment costs into the price of goods that produce emmisions.
Reduce free travel (by above)
reduce the luxuries, average people can afford(temp control), both heat and cooling.
reduce energy use by the average person.
restrict options of people, so they will buy the new product(that is more efficeint, and less emisions.)

If you see the pattern, restrict the comon man, while the rich could care less about
an addition small cost to use the luxury. The comon man lives in a home temp of 85f.
While the rich can wear coats and keep the temp at 60f. The average person drives a small compact car or new design full of flaws, while the rich travels in limos and Hummers.
Increasing costs, just mean the rich are more elite. Its all about leveling the playing field, for others. Meaning the upper middle class and lower will be lowered to low income, and the rich will be the elite class.
Dang, and Republicans were going about this all the wrong way.

Global warming is all about power to control people, and making everyone equal except the special elite. (I offer Al Gore's hyper-electric homes, and his use of a private jet to fly all over the world to tell people about how bad using fossil fuels are, while burning lots of jet fuel.) Everyone else needs to change, but the elite will be in charge and therefore will not have to change.

 

[Shadowfax503]

So you agree that the Earth is still warming and that the trend is largely driven by green house gases? I don't see anything in the GISS description saying anything about guessing.

The reason I say best guess is because just like any weather prediction the further one predicts into the future the greater the chance for error. There are just too many variables some of which we can not control and to project new global temperatures within the next two years those variables would have to do what they expect them to do for a good bit of time.
So from historic data we have seen a rise in global temperature but to say for certain that this is a continuing trend, I stand by my statement that it is their best guess this trend will continue.

 

[Gracchus]

So, snow in ND in June, snow in Saudi Arabia, and Oklahoma wheat crops delayed by severe cold in April. But the globe is warming, and it can't be denied.

One of these things does not fit. Can you guess which one?

I'ld post the links, but kinda can't. So you'll just have to google them.

Of course you you had ever studied the universal gas law, the law of partial pressures, thermodynamics, and basic meteorology, you would know that that increasing the total temperature of the Earth, especially unevenly, is going to cause increasing climatic fluctuations, including instances of unseasonably cold weather, as well as stronger and more frequent storms.
If the warming stops the climate will stabilize, eventually, although it may not produce conditions that will support the level of life that the Earth is now able to support. Some species may even go extinct.
The simplest solution may be to remove our impact and dependence on the non-human environment, a closed system, where all waste is recycled.

 

[lemmings]

So, snow in ND in June, snow in Saudi Arabia, and Oklahoma wheat crops delayed by severe cold in April. But the globe is warming, and it can't be denied.

One of these things does not fit. Can you guess which one?

I'ld post the links, but kinda can't. So you'll just have to google them.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seasonal.extent.updated.jpg

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

62 and rain in Utah today. I gotcher global warming right here buddy.

What do you expect when they put eighty percent of the thermometers right around heat sources?

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

NCDC: Climate of 2009 - May Global Analysis

People can rationally argue about the relative contributions of man-made versus natural causes of global warming, but it still seems irrational to argue that global warming isn't happening....

Does any of that data come from the USHCN?

62 and rain in Utah today. I gotcher global warming right here buddy.

What do you expect when they put eighty percent of the thermometers right around heat sources?