United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Was 2010 The Warmest Year Ever?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.thepiratescove.us/2010/1 ... as-2010-the-warmest-year-ever/
Published: Dec 13, 2010
Author: thepiratescove.
Post Date: 2010-12-13 19:17:48 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 11946
Comments: 27
Reality, and science, is starting to roll in. As Europe is locked in a massive cold snap (oh, sorry, I forgot, cold is now caused by greenhouse gases), and America is seeing lots of early snowfall and cold temperatures, people are looking at the real data, and The Observatory provides this bit of knowledge If the media headlines are to be believed 2010 is heading to be either the warmest or in the top three warmest years since the instrumental global temperature records began 150 years ago, and proof that the world is getting ever warmer. But looking more closely at the data reveals a different picture. 2010 will be remembered for just two warm months, attributable to the El Nino effect, with the rest of the year being nothing but average, or less than average temperature. With November and December¹s data still to come in (that will account for 16% of the year¹s data) the UK Met Office estimates the temperature anomaly (with respect to the end of the 19th century) for 2010 so far as 0.756 deg C. As it has been cooling for the past 4 months we can expect that figure to decline below the 2005 0.747 deg C level and the El Nino influenced 1998 of 0.820 deg C. 2010 will therefore be no higher than the third warmest year, possibly lower. March and June were much warmer than normal, thanks to a weak El Nino. FYI for all you alarmists, it’s a natural process. Then there is this Actually, with the exception of 1998 – a ‘blip’ year when temperatures spiked because of a strong ‘El Nino’ effect (the cyclical warming of the southern Pacific that affects weather around the world) – the data on the Met Office’s and CRU’s own websites show that global temperatures have been flat, not for ten, but for the past 15 years. They go up a bit, then down a bit, but those small rises and falls amount to less than their measuring system’s acknowledged margin of error. They have no statistical significance and reveal no evidence of any trend at all. Reality’s a bitch.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
BTW, It's in the teens here tonight. Can somebody tell me where the thermostat is to turn on this "global warming"?
It's nearly that time of year called "winter", the coldest season of the year. Don't take my word for it. You could look it up.
"I've really enjoyed meeting this community. They are so full of joy," - Sarah Palin to the thousands of cholera victims in Haiti
You stick with the blogs from idiots, i'll stick with the science and the data.
Don't worry, he will.
"I've really enjoyed meeting this community. They are so full of joy," - Sarah Palin to the thousands of cholera victims in Haiti
2010 will therefore be no higher than the third warmest year, possibly lower. March and June were much warmer than normal, thanks to a weak El Nino. FYI for all you alarmists, it’s a natural process. Then there is this Actually, with the exception of 1998 – a ‘blip’ year when temperatures spiked because of a strong ‘El Nino’ effect (the cyclical warming of the southern Pacific that affects weather around the world) – the data on the Met Office’s and CRU’s own websites show that global temperatures have been flat, not for ten, but for the past 15 years. Facts you can't refute.
The preliminary figure for January to October 2010 is 0.52 °C above the long-term average on the Met Office – Climatic Research Unit (HadCRUT3) dataset, placing it equal with the record-breaking 1998. The Met Office annual global temperature forecast for 2010, Climate could warm to record levels in 2010, issued at the COP15 talks in Copenhagen, predicted that the year was “more likely than not” to be the warmest year. Dr Adam Scaife, head of long range forecasting at the Met Office said, “The three leading global temperature datasets show that, so far, 2010 is clearly warmer than 2009 despite El Niño declining and being replaced by a very strong La Niña, which has a cooling effect.” Although La Niña has stabilised, it is still expected to affect global temperature through the coming year. This effect is small compared to the total accrued global warming to date, but it does mean that 2011 is unlikely to be a record year according to the Met Office prediction based on the three main datasets. Nevertheless an anomaly of 0.44 °C is still likely — with the range very likely to be between 0.28 °C and 0.60 °C. The middle of this range would place 2011 among the top 10 warmest years on the record. Dr Vicky Pope, the Met Office’s head of climate science advice said, “Our annual prediction of global temperatures for the next year combined with our monitoring of the observed climate helps people to put the world’s current climate into context.” http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2010/pr20101202b.html Facts you can't refute
The above claim is FALSE: Do you even pay attention to what you post? This is the same data I just debunked. And these clowns are already backtracking. Look at the title: Near record temperatures in 2010 to be followed by cooler 2011 Already hedging their bets. tsk tsk
Let me know when some claims the earth with linearly warm every year. Pay attention: Let me know when the range of temperature deviations is out of norm with the historical standard deviations with the history of the earth as we know it. Let me know when according to Lambert-Beer equations that it has even been demonstrated that an increase in current quantities of CO2 could even cause any known increase in the greenhouse effect.
Let me know where in the NASA data CO2 is discussed.
"I've really enjoyed meeting this community. They are so full of joy," - Sarah Palin to the thousands of cholera victims in Haiti
Both of you guys know what is happening. Global Warming is a FACT. Unfortunately many posters and the minions at large in society misrepresent or mischaracterize Global Warming phenomena similarly as political pundits (Al Gore) or governmental institutions that have twisted the core arguments into political action plans. I have given up on attempting to debate these idiots that can't separate political fiction from scientific fact; it is a waste of my time ... but carry on... if you guys weren't around correcting those same idiots; it wouldn't be much fun on a chit-chat forum.
If you are too stupid to know that these matters are all politically motivated, you are beyond help. I asked scientific questions, since you leftards insist this all about science.
Yes. 3.5 degree rise baked in. Unless, of course, the World's Civlizations collapse. Rapidly. "On the front of economic meltdown, the Pentagon is ratcheting up its plans to deal with civil unrest. In itself, this is not news. What’s new is that the Pentagon is not hiding it. The news broke on CNBC, which is hardly a fringe player in the realm of the blogosphere."
I should have added you to post#13, too. Good to see you are still addressing serious issues with a smile.
Let's see, who do I go with for science? You, and a website called Orthodoxnet.com blog, or NASA. BTW, have you tried their conservative dating service yet? Let us know how it works out for you.
"I've really enjoyed meeting this community. They are so full of joy," - Sarah Palin to the thousands of cholera victims in Haiti
Good decision. It's almost as pointless as dealing with the birthers, who seem to be the same people.
"I've really enjoyed meeting this community. They are so full of joy," - Sarah Palin to the thousands of cholera victims in Haiti
Why don't you simply answer my question, genious? You should be able to Google up some fellow leftard dumbass answer.
Awesome and genuine perspicacity; that perception never dawned on me.
Jingle Bells and Laughing All the Way. 8D
This is the same data I just debunked. And these clowns are already backtracking. Look at the title: Near record temperatures in 2010 to be followed by cooler 2011 Already hedging their bets. Yep. What I find hilarious are those citing data from 150 years ago to come up with a 'baseline'. If you begin THERE, you have to factor in the 'margin of error' for the first 75 years which is plus or minus 3 degrees due to the KNOWN INACCURACIES of the data measuring techniques and equipment employed.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
If you begin THERE, you have to factor in the 'margin of error' for the first 75 years which is plus or minus 3 degrees due to the KNOWN INACCURACIES of the data measuring techniques and equipment employed. so how do you explain rapid warming since 1970 which correlates with rising atmospheric CO2 and a solar minimum?
The fact that you can't even spell makes me suspicious of your "data" from your RNC sites.
"I've really enjoyed meeting this community. They are so full of joy," - Sarah Palin to the thousands of cholera victims in Haiti
If it was 'rising atmospheric CO2' we would have all died in the wake of Mt St Helens, which put more of that into the atmosphere than the entire Industrial Revolution.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
what on earth are you talking about? The after effects of Mt St Helen, which debunks one of the more laughable claims of you global cooling will kill us all (circa 1970) global warming will kill us all (1990s foward) fright night types like to shriek.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#2. To: no gnu taxes (#1)
It's in the teens here tonight. Can somebody tell me where the thermostat is to turn on this "global warming"?
#3. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
(Edited)
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2010/giss-nov-anomaly-0-74c/
On January 3, 2011 the GOP assumes responsibility for deficit spending.
#4. To: go65 (#3)
You stick with the blogs from idiots, i'll stick with the science and the data.
#5. To: go65 (#3)
With November and December¹s data still to come in (that will account for 16% of the year¹s data) the UK Met Office estimates the temperature anomaly (with respect to the end of the 19th century) for 2010 so far as 0.756 deg C. As it has been cooling for the past 4 months we can expect that figure to decline below the 2005 0.747 deg C level and the El Nino influenced 1998 of 0.820 deg C.
#6. To: no gnu taxes (#5)
Global temperature has warmed to near record levels in 2010 say climate scientists from the Met Office and the University of East Anglia. Provisional figures for the three main global temperature datasets put 2010 on track to become first or second warmest in the instrumental record.
On January 3, 2011 the GOP assumes responsibility for deficit spending.
#7. To: no gnu taxes (#5)
(Edited)
Actually, with the exception of 1998 – a ‘blip’ year when temperatures spiked because of a strong ‘El Nino’ effect (the cyclical warming of the southern Pacific that affects weather around the world) – the data on the Met Office’s and CRU’s own websites show that global temperatures have been flat, not for ten, but for the past 15 years.
On January 3, 2011 the GOP assumes responsibility for deficit spending.
#8. To: go65 (#6)
#9. To: Skip Intro (#2)
On January 3, 2011 the GOP assumes responsibility for deficit spending.
#10. To: no gnu taxes (#8)
Near record temperatures in 2010 to be followed by cooler 2011
The middle of this range would place 2011 among the top 10 warmest years on the record.
On January 3, 2011 the GOP assumes responsibility for deficit spending.
#11. To: go65 (#10)
Let me know when some claims the earth with linearly warm every year.
#12. To: no gnu taxes (#11)
(Edited)
#13. To: go65, Skip Intro (#9)
#14. To: Skip Intro (#12)
#15. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
Was 2010 The Warmest Year Ever?
#16. To: mcgowanjm (#15)
#17. To: no gnu taxes (#14)
I asked scientific questions, since you leftards insist this all about science.
#18. To: buckeroo (#13)
I have given up on attempting to debate these idiots that can't separate political fiction from scientific fact; it is a waste of my time ... but carry on..
#19. To: Skip Intro (#17)
#20. To: Skip Intro (#18)
It's almost as pointless as dealing with the birthers, who seem to be the same people.
#21. To: buckeroo, All (#16)
Good to see you are still addressing serious issues with a smile.
#22. To: no gnu taxes (#8)
Do you even pay attention to what you post?
#23. To: Badeye (#22)
What I find hilarious are those citing data from 150 years ago to come up with a 'baseline'.
On January 3, 2011 the GOP assumes responsibility for deficit spending.
#24. To: no gnu taxes (#19)
Why don't you simply answer my question, genious?
#25. To: go65 (#23)
so how do you explain rapid warming since 1970 which correlates with rising atmospheric CO2 and a solar minimum?
#26. To: Badeye (#25)
(Edited)
If it was 'rising atmospheric CO2' we would have all died in the wake of Mt St Helens, which put more of that into the atmosphere than the entire Industrial Revolution.
AP: March, 2004.
Volcanic gases bubble out of magma as it rises to the surface, and the amount and type of emissions depend on the chemical makeup of the molten rock. In addition to sulfur dioxide, volcanoes also release smaller amounts of other noxious gases, including hydrogen sulfide and hydrogen chloride.
They also release carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that's primarily blamed for global warming. Mount St. Helens produces between 500 and 1,000 tons a day of carbon dioxide, Gerlach estimates.
Worldwide, people and their activities pump 26 billion tons of carbon dioxide a year into the atmosphere, he said. The total from volcanoes is about 200 million tons a year — or less than 1 percent of the man-made emissions.
On January 3, 2011 the GOP assumes responsibility for deficit spending.
#27. To: go65 (#26)
what on earth are you talking about?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]