2000s: hottest decade on record; dangerous blizzard pounds Midwest

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:33 PM GMT on December 09, 2009

Share this Blog
4
+

The end of the decade is upon us, and this decade was the warmest decade on record, according to NOAA and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The decade of the 2000s was 0.17°C (0.31°F) warmer than the 1990s, according to NOAA. The "official" scientific assessments on climate change, the IPCC reports, have been predicting that Earth's temperature rise should average about 0.19°C per decade, due to human-caused global warming. Thus, the warming over the past decade is about 10% below predictions--well within the uncertainties that natural variation in the climate can bring. Of course, one can look at shorter time periods and say that no warming is occurring. The hottest year on record globally was 1998, according to the UK's HadCRUT3 data set, and was 2005, according to the data sets maintained by NASA and NOAA. It is apparent from the plot of global temperature anomalies (Figure 1) that the global temperature rise has flattened out since 2005. One can correctly say that global temperatures have not increased since 2005. However, climate is measured on time scales of decades, so it is incorrect to say that the climate has not warmed since 2005. It is meaningless to any statement about climate on any time scale less than ten years. Thirty years is better, since the atmosphere has natural multi-decadal oscillations, and the solar cycle of 11 years is also important. Global average temperature oscillates 0.1°C between the maximum and minimum of the solar cycle, and we are currently in an unusually long minimum.


Figure 1. Change in global surface temperature anomaly as computed by NOAA (NCDC Dataset), NASA (GISS data set) and combined Hadley Center and Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia (UK) (HadCRUT3 data set). Uncertainty in the HadCRUT3 data is shown in gray. Image credit: WMO.

Mass front-page climate change editorial published in 45 countries
An unprecedented joint editorial urging action on climate change appeared in 56 newspapers in 45 countries yesterday. Many of the papers carried the editorial on the front page. The editorial began: "Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been becoming apparent for a generation. Now the facts have started to speak: 11 of the past 14 years have been the warmest on record, the Arctic ice-cap is melting and last year's inflamed oil and food prices provide a foretaste of future havoc. In scientific journals the question is no longer whether humans are to blame, but how little time we have got left to limit the damage. Yet so far the world's response has been feeble and half-hearted.". According to Editor & Publisher, the editorial was published in 20 languages including Chinese, Arabic and Russian. The text was drafted by the UK newspaper, The Guardian, in conjunction with editors from more than 20 of the papers involved. A number of U.S. papers supported the project and agreed with everything in the editorial, but only one--the Miami Herald--was brave enough to publish it.

Posts on the hacked climate scientists' emails
If you haven't read my posts on the hacked email affair, my attitude on the matter can best be summed up by a highly amusing political cartoon by Houston Chronicle cartoonist Nick Anderson. While an investigation is needed into whether the scientific data involved was properly withheld from other scientists, there is nothing in the hacked emails that affects the validity of any of the published peer-reviewed science on climate change. "Climategate" is a manufactured scandal designed to take attention away from the scientific consensus that human-caused global warming is responsible for most of the observed warming in recent decades, and that this warming will increase dramatically in coming decades. My posts on the affair:

Don't shoot the messenger
Embattled UK climate scientist steps down
The Manufactured Doubt industry and the hacked email controversy
Is more CO2 beneficial for Earth's ecosystems?

Ricky Rood in Copenhagen
Our Climate Change expert, Dr. Ricky Rood, is in Copenhagen for the COP15 climate change summit. Check out his blog over the next two weeks to hear an insider's view of what's going on.

Major winter storm blasts the Plains and Western U.S.
It's a bad day to be in Iowa, unless you happen to be a polar bear. I'll back up that startling claim with some hard data: at 4:35 am CST, Carroll, Iowa reported heavy snow, sustained winds of 38 mph, gusting to 48, visibility 350 yards, a temperature of 9°F, and a windchill of -17°F. The mighty storm responsible was centered over Lake Michigan this morning, and is bringing blizzard conditions to Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and northern Michigan. The storm has brought very high winds to large portion of the country. Sustained winds of 53 mph, gusting to 77 mph were reported in Ruidiso, New Mexico yesterday afternoon, and hurricane-force wind gusts were reported in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas yesterday. A peak gust of 105 mph was reported in Texas' Guadeloupe Mountains. Heavy rain from the storm has also brought localized flooding to California, Arizona, and Louisiana.

Some snow amounts from the storm so far (with distances in miles from the city included, where appropriate):

...ARIZONA...
FLAGSTAFF 7.8 SSW 30.4
JACOB LAKE 24.0
WILLIAMS 0.4 SW 20.0
GRAND CANYON SOUTH RIM 18.0

...CALIFORNIA...
KIRKWOOD SKI AREA 48.0
ALPINE MEADOWS 45.0
SODA SPRINGS 40.0
KINGVALE 1.3 WSW 37.0
NORTHSTAR 36.0
CISCO 5 ENE 35.0
SOUTH LAKE TAHOE 8 SSW 31.0
MAMMOTH LAKES 14.0

...COLORADO...
PAGOSA SPRINGS 9.1 NNW 33.0
CARBONDALE 8.2 S 24.8
CRESTED BUTTE 6.2 N 24.5
DURANGO 24.0
BAYFIELD 7 N 23.5
DOLORES 22 NE 23.0
GREELEY 2.3 SE 22.0
PAGOSA SPRINGS 3 SE 22.0

...IDAHO...
WESTON 4.0
POCATELLO AIRPORT 3.7
BOISE 6.7 SE 3.5

...KANSAS...
MARYSVILLE 14.0
LINCOLN 5 NE 12.0
CONCORDIA 5 SSE 11.0
HAYS 13 WNW 9.0
SALINA 8.0
ABILENE 5 SSW 7.0
MANHATTAN 7.0

...NEBRASKA...
TECUMSEH 13.5
ORD 12.0
OMAHA 3 N 8.6
KEARNEY 8.0
INDIANOLA 6.0

...NEW MEXICO...
LAS VEGAS 8.4 NW 8.0
SANTA FE 3.3 NE 5.5
TAOS PUEBLO 2.8 NW 5.2
GALLUP 8.1 NNW 4.8

...NEVADA...
HEAVENLY VALLEY 34.0
MT ROSE SKI AREA 23.0
CARSON CITY 1.3 NW 18.0
RENO 7.1 N 13.7
SUN VALLEY 0.9 N 10.5

...SOUTH DAKOTA...
SIOUX FALLS 6.0

...UTAH...
VERDUE 8 WNW 25.0
SPRINGDELL 23.0
ORDERVILLE 19.0
SPRINGVILLE 10.0

...WYOMING...
SAND LAKE 11.0
DIVIDE PEAK 9.0
LARAMIE 27.3 WSW 6.0
CHEYENNE 26.7 NE 4.3

Next post
I'll have a new post Thursday; there's a lot going on.

Jeff Masters

Snow in Angels Camp. (Isolino)
Woke up this morning to snow. We don't get snow in Angels Camp very often. It made for some difficult driving.
Snow in Angels Camp.
Frost (thebige)
More frost on our car. This photo wasn't cropped or edited.
Frost

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 945 - 895

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20Blog Index

Quoting vbscript2:
"Take cars for instance - the MOST efficient internal combustion engine wastes roughly 70% of its potential energy, dissipating that energy as heat. As an illustrative example, the 200hp engine in your car generates approximately 149kW of power. That is with 70% wasted energy. If that exact same engine was 100% efficient, you would suddenly get 665hp out of the same engine (in theory - some energy would still be lost via friction)<BR>
The same concept of power efficiency is true for all power generation, from coal to nuclear power."

LOL! You haven't studied mechanical engineering, have you? There is no such thing as anything close to a 100% efficient mechanical process. You will never get 100% of the mechanical power that you put into a system out of it as mechanical power (unless, of course, you aren't putting any into it...) Once you do figure out these 100% efficient power generation methods, though, please publish your results. There's a Nobel Prize in Physics waiting for you upon publication.

Hi! If you would actually read the entire part that you QUOTED, you would see that I wrote "In theory" and that some energy would be lost via friction. When you quote someone and try to dispute them, it helps to actually read what you are quoting.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Are there any examples of examples of governmental scientific organizations that deny the position that anthropogenic sources of CO2 effect climate?
This is a question posed on this blog in 2006. I'd like to see the list.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting mikatnight:


Blast it all! Orka, did you put me on ignore? Oh, wait a minute...people you respect, leaves me totally in the clear. I tell ya, I never get any respect. Why, just the other day I was looking out my window, and I got arrested for mooning!


Hey I respect you mik. Those were some classic photo posts, and on topic to boot!
Member Since: August 28, 2006 Posts: 6 Comments: 2899
Quoting StormW:
Good morning!

Morning
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting trinigal:


But don't you see the left does that too? I see the left and the right equally guilty of the same things, as you've just demonstrated. Do you think maybe rather than throw dust on the ones throwing dust, there might be a better way that brings you above the fray?


That's not true. The right just represents blind opposition and fake outrage now. They don't want to come up with solutions to our problems, they want to champion the same old tired ideas that failed miserably for the last 8 years. If there were fresh alternative ideas that represented practical solutions to major problems coming from the right I'd be the first to recognize them. I think the right needs to sit on the sidelines for a while and see if Obama's ideas work. So far, they've had more success than anything the right did for 8 years under Bush. If in 3 more years the Obama administration has left this country worse then what they inherited (impossible) then I'd be the first to concur that he wasn't necessarily a good President. Seeing as how the country has already improved measurably since his taking office, I think slow improvement will continue. Considering what he inherited, it's a miracle we are where we are right now. Having said that, I would love to see Republicans and Democrats work together meaningfully but I don't see it happening.
Member Since: August 28, 2006 Posts: 6 Comments: 2899
Quoting pinehurstnc:
sorry to go off topic,, but just curious about the weather system that may or may not affect the east coast on dec 16 or 17th,, any thoughts , tyia, gregg


Thats not off topic this is a weather blog after all. =)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
...also...Dr. Masters engaging in the blog dialogue has been very useful to me as I try to sort out exactly what I think about all this...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting atmoaggie:

Yeah, we have been talking a little about this. Dr. M came on and said he would cover it in his next post...likely sometime soon...today.


Atmo, thanks.

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.


Although our seasonal hurricane forecast scheme has shown significant real-time skill for our early June and early August predictions, we have yet to demonstrate real-time forecast skill for our early December forecasts that have been issued for the last 18 years (1992-2009).
Our initial 6-11 month early December seasonal hurricane forecast scheme (Scheme A) (Gray et al. 1992), although demonstrating appreciable hindcast skill for the
7
period from 1950-1990, did not give skillful results when utilized for 10 real-time forecasts between 1992-2001. This was due to the discontinuation of the strong relationships we had earlier found between West African rainfall and the stratospheric quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) with Atlantic basin major hurricane activity 6-11 months in the future. We did not expect these African rainfall and QBO predictive relationships that had worked so well during the 41-year period from 1950-1990 to stop working. We do not yet have a good explanation. We have discontinued this earlier 1 December forecast scheme and have developed two new 1 December forecast schemes (Schemes B and C) since that time.
Beginning with the 2002 December forecast for the 2003 season, we relied on a new early December forecast scheme (Scheme B) (Klotzbach and Gray 2004) which did not utilize West African rainfall and gave less weight to the QBO. This newer statistical scheme, although showing improved hindcast skill, did not demonstrate real-time forecast skill for the four years from 2003-2006. A slightly modified scheme was used in 2007.
We developed a new statistical forecast methodology for our early December prediction in 2007 for the 2008 Atlantic hurricane season (Scheme C). We developed this forecast due to the fact that our real-time forecasts issued in early December from 1992-2007 did not show skill in real time. For full details on the new forecast methodology, please refer to the published paper (Klotzbach 2008). Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of our two most recent 1 December forecast schemes.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Orcasystems.... you've got mail
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
WunderPoll Results:
The "official" word on climate change, the 2007 report from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), concluded that there was a greater than 90% chance that most of the observed global warming in the past 50 years was due to emission of greenhouse gases by human activity. Do you agree with the IPCC?


Yes, human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases are primarily responsible for global warming.

525 (55.2%)
No, natural causes are primarily responsible for global warming.

426 (44.8%)
Total: 951 (100%)

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nrtiwlnvragn:
I have not looked through the whole blog, but has anyone discussed the EXTENDED RANGE FORECAST OF ATLANTIC SEASONAL HURRICANE ACTIVITY AND LANDFALL STRIKE PROBABILITY FOR 2010 from Klotzbach and Gray?

ATLANTIC BASIN SEASONAL HURRICANE FORECAST FOR 2010
Forecast Parameter and 1950-2000
Climatology (in parentheses)
9 December 2009
Forecast for 2010
Named Storms (NS) (9.6)
11-16
Named Storm Days (NSD) (49.1)
51-75
Hurricanes (H) (5.9)
6-8
Hurricane Days (HD) (24.5)
24-39
Major Hurricanes (MH) (2.3)
3-5
Major Hurricane Days (MHD) (5.0)
6-12
Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) (96.1)
100-162
Net Tropical Cyclone Activity (NTC) (100%)
108-172
PROBABILITIES

I see they have changed to the NOAA type format of a range instead of a specific number.

Yeah, we have been talking a little about this. Dr. M came on and said he would cover it in his next post...likely sometime soon...today.
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting hurricanejunky:


Exactly. Lots of air pollution on here this morning. Most of it is insufferable which is why I don't even want to get started. Can't reason with the unreasonable. Morning to all the rational human beings on the blog this morning.


Morning junky! Is it foggy down there? Tampa is covered in fog now.
Member Since: April 26, 2009 Posts: 3 Comments: 3667
sorry to go off topic,, but just curious about the weather system that may or may not affect the east coast on dec 16 or 17th,, any thoughts , tyia, gregg
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I have to admit.. some of the post on here have made me rethink my views on this whole subject. Any group that insist they are right.. and EVERYONE else is wrong... and needs to be converted to the light... scares the begeezes out of me.

There are a few groups out there in this world that hold that opinion...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting presslord:
I hope Dr. Masters will continue to post frequently on this topic...there have been, actually, many flowers to be found among the weeds here...I am learning a great deal from both perspectives...it seems to me most any reasonable person can overlook the vitriol and gleen important informastion here...


I wholeheartedly agree.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting trinigal:


I'm very curious about it. Do you remember, roughly, what the results were?


Upper right under Dr. Masters picture are the poll results.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting FFtrombi:
I must say it is pretty obvious that the people who most vociferously deny global warming on this blog tend not to be able to concede any points with a simple:

You are right about this, thank you for correcting me.

Part of being intelligent and unbiased is the ability to admit when you are wrong, on both sides. There is no church going on, nobody on this blog trying to hoodwink others, the only people who might be doing that are the professionals, so acting civil towards each other should be common sense.


That goes both ways.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting IKE:


Maybe the better question is...what have you changed in your life because of it?

Also...maybe some wouldn't be so overweight if they would spend a smaller portion of their life sitting in a chair in front of a computer and more of it doing physical labor.




I don't think it's even been mentioned..lol.


The overweight part there just has me ROFL.
Member Since: April 26, 2009 Posts: 3 Comments: 3667
Quoting FFtrombi:
I must say it is pretty obvious that the people who most vociferously deny global warming on this blog tend not to be able to concede any points with a simple:

You are right about this, thank you for correcting me.

Part of being intelligent and unbiased is the ability to admit when you are wrong, on both sides. There is no church going on, nobody on this blog trying to hoodwink others, the only people who might be doing that are the professionals, so acting civil towards each other should be common sense.


Excellent post!
Member Since: August 28, 2006 Posts: 6 Comments: 2899
As one of the few not recently laid off, I better get to work! Have fun all. Thanks for the stimulating debate the last day or so.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jeffs713:


He had one up at the start of this year, before hurricane season.


I'm very curious about it. Do you remember, roughly, what the results were?
Member Since: August 31, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 171
YOu didnt anwer the question tho. now back to lurking.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Me too press. Things get so personal...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CaneWarning:


Do yourself a favor and put that guy on ignore. You are wasting your time.


Exactly. Lots of air pollution on here this morning. Most of it is insufferable which is why I don't even want to get started. Can't reason with the unreasonable. Morning to all the rational human beings on the blog this morning.
Member Since: August 28, 2006 Posts: 6 Comments: 2899
Quoting nrtiwlnvragn:
I have not looked through the whole blog, but has anyone discussed the EXTENDED RANGE FORECAST OF ATLANTIC SEASONAL HURRICANE ACTIVITY AND LANDFALL STRIKE PROBABILITY FOR 2010 from Klotzbach and Gray?

ATLANTIC BASIN SEASONAL HURRICANE FORECAST FOR 2010
Forecast Parameter and 1950-2000
Climatology (in parentheses)
9 December 2009
Forecast for 2010
Named Storms (NS) (9.6)
11-16
Named Storm Days (NSD) (49.1)
51-75
Hurricanes (H) (5.9)
6-8
Hurricane Days (HD) (24.5)
24-39
Major Hurricanes (MH) (2.3)
3-5
Major Hurricane Days (MHD) (5.0)
6-12
Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) (96.1)
100-162
Net Tropical Cyclone Activity (NTC) (100%)
108-172
PROBABILITIES

I see they have changed to the NOAA type format of a range instead of a specific number.


What is the matter with you,bringing up tropical discussion,please don't go off topic!!
Oh wait a minute,this is a tropical discussion blog...nevermind!!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting trinigal:
I would love to see Dr. Masters include a poll or two about climate change beliefs. I'm really curious about overall sentiment of his readers. Of course, don't set up the polls in a 'Do you still beat your wife' sort of way. I think there are many lurkers and I'm curious as to what many believe here not just the loudest few.


He had one up at the start of this year, before hurricane season.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I dont spend nearly the time or effort you do here. Back to lurking.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
"Take cars for instance - the MOST efficient internal combustion engine wastes roughly 70% of its potential energy, dissipating that energy as heat. As an illustrative example, the 200hp engine in your car generates approximately 149kW of power. That is with 70% wasted energy. If that exact same engine was 100% efficient, you would suddenly get 665hp out of the same engine (in theory - some energy would still be lost via friction)

The same concept of power efficiency is true for all power generation, from coal to nuclear power."

LOL! You haven't studied mechanical engineering, have you? There is no such thing as anything close to a 100% efficient mechanical process. You will never get 100% of the mechanical power that you put into a system out of it as mechanical power (unless, of course, you aren't putting any into it...) Once you do figure out these 100% efficient power generation methods, though, please publish your results. There's a Nobel Prize in Physics waiting for you upon publication.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I hope Dr. Masters will continue to post frequently on this topic...there have been, actually, many flowers to be found among the weeds here...I am learning a great deal from both perspectives...it seems to me most any reasonable person can overlook the vitriol and gleen important informastion here...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
You always have your "bullet points" ready.
Got your own data base to mine as well.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I tried putting someone on ignore once, but I had to change 'em back - figured I was missing out on the entertainment. Felt like I was cutting off my nose to spite my face (which as I just mentioned, was recently involved in a horrible case of mistaken identity).
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting IKE:


Maybe the better question is...what have you changed in your life because of it?


While living in the Caribbean, I did stock up extra supplies for the occasional big storm as a result of this blog :)

Now, if you're wondering if my position has in any way changed on climate change as a result of this blog, the answer would be no. In the 90s and earlier in this decade, much of my studies involved climate change throughout geologic time. I developed my views then and haven't come across anything to change my mind...yet LOL.
Member Since: August 31, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 171
Do you get paid by the post JFLor?
Are you in the employ of George S?
Sure seems that way.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
906. IKE
Quoting trinigal:
I would love to see Dr. Masters include a poll or two about climate change beliefs. I'm really curious about overall sentiment of his readers. Of course, don't set up the polls in a 'Do you still beat your wife' sort of way. I think there are many lurkers and I'm curious as to what many believe here not just the loudest few.


Maybe the better question is...what have you changed in your life because of it?

Also...maybe some wouldn't be so overweight if they would spend a smaller portion of their life sitting in a chair in front of a computer and more of it doing physical labor.


Quoting nrtiwlnvragn:
I have not looked through the whole blog, but has anyone discussed the EXTENDED RANGE FORECAST OF ATLANTIC SEASONAL HURRICANE ACTIVITY AND LANDFALL STRIKE PROBABILITY FOR 2010 from Klotzbach and Gray?

ATLANTIC BASIN SEASONAL HURRICANE FORECAST FOR 2010
Forecast Parameter and 1950-2000
Climatology (in parentheses)
9 December 2009
Forecast for 2010
Named Storms (NS) (9.6)
11-16
Named Storm Days (NSD) (49.1)
51-75
Hurricanes (H) (5.9)
6-8
Hurricane Days (HD) (24.5)
24-39
Major Hurricanes (MH) (2.3)
3-5
Major Hurricane Days (MHD) (5.0)
6-12
Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) (96.1)
100-162
Net Tropical Cyclone Activity (NTC) (100%)
108-172
PROBABILITIES

I see they have changed to the NOAA type format of a range instead of a specific number.


I don't think it's even been mentioned..lol.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Blog Update
Humor in Comments
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I have not looked through the whole blog, but has anyone discussed the EXTENDED RANGE FORECAST OF ATLANTIC SEASONAL HURRICANE ACTIVITY AND LANDFALL STRIKE PROBABILITY FOR 2010 from Klotzbach and Gray?

ATLANTIC BASIN SEASONAL HURRICANE FORECAST FOR 2010
Forecast Parameter and 1950-2000
Climatology (in parentheses)
9 December 2009
Forecast for 2010
Named Storms (NS) (9.6)
11-16
Named Storm Days (NSD) (49.1)
51-75
Hurricanes (H) (5.9)
6-8
Hurricane Days (HD) (24.5)
24-39
Major Hurricanes (MH) (2.3)
3-5
Major Hurricane Days (MHD) (5.0)
6-12
Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) (96.1)
100-162
Net Tropical Cyclone Activity (NTC) (100%)
108-172
PROBABILITIES

I see they have changed to the NOAA type format of a range instead of a specific number.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting FFtrombi:
I must say it is pretty obvious that the people who most vociferously deny global warming on this blog tend not to be able to concede any points with a simple:

You are right about this, thank you for correcting me.

Part of being intelligent and unbiased is the ability to admit when you are wrong, on both sides. There is no church going on, nobody on this blog trying to hoodwink others, the only people who might be doing that are the professionals, so acting civil towards each other should be common sense.


Notice that you yourself chose the word 'deny'.

Deny suggests that we acknowledge the claims by the IPCC/AGW and simply deny it as true. The use of age old propaganda techniques bellows out of the halls of The Church of the IPCC/AGW.

Clever choice of words by the IPCC/AGW.

A much better word is 'dispute... Definition:1. To argue about; debate. 2. To question the truth or validity of'

We dispute the claims of the IPCC/AGW and declare them false.

Might I suggest that all you lurkers out there, who disagree with what the IPCC wants to do and with the falsified information, adopt the position it is a dispute.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting mikatnight:


Blast it all! Orka, did you put me on ignore? Oh, wait a minute...people you respect, leaves me totally in the clear. I tell ya, I never get any respect. Why, just the other day I was looking out my window, and I got arrested for mooning!


ROFL, no it wasn't you
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I would love to see Dr. Masters include a poll or two about climate change beliefs. I'm really curious about overall sentiment of his readers. Of course, don't set up the polls in a 'Do you still beat your wife' sort of way. I think there are many lurkers and I'm curious as to what many believe here not just the loudest few.
Member Since: August 31, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 171
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Orcasystems:


I think thats the whole idea of them posting them. The more extremest views are the ones that get the most response from the other extreme.

A lot like baiting a troll.. and it seems to be working very well, they have taken over the blog.

I miss JFV :(


Ya this is a sad sight, where TDude with the troll spray.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Orcasystems:


I sure hope so... as a habit I don't put people on ignore if they are at least ontopic... we have had some post that are so far out there lately its insane. I added two people I normally respect to that list this morning...


Blast it all! Orka, did you put me on ignore? Oh, wait a minute...people you respect, leaves me totally in the clear. I tell ya, I never get any respect. Why, just the other day I was looking out my window, and I got arrested for mooning!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting JFLORIDA:
No internet, very little communication between disciplines.

I wonder how many even knew of solar flux readings or what colleagues were stating in Britain much less the soviet union.

And rich was responding to someone saying scientist WERE calling for cooling anyway.

That was false - thats the point here.


I started teh 70's thing last night, and I wasn't trying to say scientists personally said that their was a coming ice age, because being born in 71 I had no direct access to scientists, and Al gore had yet to make the internet that he "invented" available to we common folk. The average Joe back then had the media as their primary source of information (they were at least a little more trustworthy than they are today), and the media then reported that there was a concensus as demonstrated in the articles provided by another user of this site. There is also no concensus now, as evidenced by the 31,000 or more scientists who signed the petition against the freight train called AGM (or now climate change since AGW doesn't work so well in a period where the temps have stalled). 31,000 against vs. 2000 or so for is hardly a consencus. I don't know which side is correct, but changes should be made incrementally so as not to cripple our economy and those of other nations.That seems very easy to understand. Maybe we need an economist and a climate scientists to referee here. StSimons will surely ask as he did last night "are those scientists climate scientists?" The petition is readily available on the net, so see for yourself. One thing is for sure, their study was paid for by independent sources (or at least more independent than anything produced by IPCC or the petrol industry, Wall Street,or big green. It appears that "climate" sciences use methods and or info used by other branches of science such as geology etc., so do they really need to be "climate' scientists to count in this debate? Might there opinions be valuable anyway? 31,000 is a large number. My guess, yes guess, would be that even if you seperated out non-climate scientists from the petition that you would still come up with more than 2000 that say we need better & more research before making huge financial commitments that may or may not help, and may not be needed. StSimons may well be correct about there being no concensus in the 70's, but then we are also correct in saying there is no concensus now. Not everyone has access to old papers or new for that matter. If good verifiable science shows there is an issue, we will deal with it, and by extreme measures if we know for sure that is what is needed. In the mean-time make reasonable changes and ask those like Mr. Gore who make a MUCH larger carbon footprint than you & I to do the same. I drive a vehicle with a 4 cyl engine, I use florescent bulbs, run my heat/air & lights as little as possible. I leave my private jet at home when I can choose a less polluting method of travel (yeah, I wish)! I would like to see those guys in Copenhagen do the same before crashing the economy even further. I don't know about all of you, but I don't have the extra $3000 a year for energy bills that are expected as a consequence of these proposed changes (not to mention my concern over unintended consequences). I'v lived a minimalist life-style most of my life, but I don't want that forced upon me by people who don't live that way themselves
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 945 - 895

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Overcast
46 °F
Overcast

JeffMasters's Recent Photos

Lake Effort Snow Shower Over Windsor, Ontario
Sunset on Dunham Lake
Pictured Rocks Sunset
Sunset on Lake Huron