2010 is the warmest January-though-June on record

[shira]

Oh, gee. Another month, another record. June 2010 was the warmest June in recorded history, and the fourth-consecutive record-warm month. 2010 - still with 6 months to go - is now the first year in history to have four of the warmest months in history - 1998's Feb, July, and August formerly held the record. 2010 is - not surprising - now the warmest January-though-June year on record.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100715_globalstats_sup.html

Now, how's that again about "global cooling?"

 

[Elfear]

Huh. Looks like the natural cycle is on the way up.

 

[Genx87]

Personally loving it here in MN. Since the last two summers have been colder than hell. Nice heat and we are getting a lot of rain as well. Lakes are up and I barely have had to run my sprinkler system!

 

[yllus]

Is this supposed to be evidence of something?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Is this supposed to be evidence of something?

No, it's supposed to try to guilt people into supporting cap and tax - plus buying into the mmgw religion.

 

[shira]

Huh. Looks like the natural cycle is on the way up.

Isn't it interesting that that "natural cycle" never seems to deliver record-low years or even record-low single months?

 

[shira]

Is this supposed to be evidence of something?

Do you mean, does measuring global temperatures over time and determining that temperatures are getting warmer and warmer and warmer - and noting that the temperatures closely track the increase in CO2 levels, which in turn closely track mankind's use of fossil fuels - does all that constitute "evidence of something"? Only if you're not psychotic. But if you're committed to believing that this is all a conspiracy, it obviously proves nothing to you. Because those who believe in conspiracy theories are always pretty much immune to scientific evidence; because the scientific evidence is just part of the conspiracy, right?

 

[MotF Bane]

Isn't it interesting that that "natural cycle" never seems to deliver record-low years or even record-low single months?

/facepalm

 

[shira]

No, it's supposed to try to guilt people into supporting cap and tax - plus buying into the mmgw religion.

No, it's supposed to convince you that the climate is warming. And if you look a little deeper - and are honest with yourself - you become convinced that mankind is to blame. No guilt, just knowledge.

Now, as to what to DO about climate change, that's for society to decide.

 

[mmntech]

Is this supposed to be evidence of something?

NOAA wants a bigger budget.

They said the last four hurricane seasons were supposed to be more active and have stronger storms. They weren't. They said the last four years were supposed to be the hottest in history. They weren't. In fact last summer was one of the coolest and wettest on record.

 

[shira]

NOAA wants a bigger budget.

They said the last four hurricane seasons were supposed to be more active and have stronger storms. They weren't. They said the last four years were supposed to be the hottest in history. They weren't. In fact last summer was one of the coolest and wettest on record.

The denial is strong in this one.

 

[BoberFett]

Save the planet Shira. Sacrifice yourself. Preferably from a cliff or bridge.

 

[cubby1223]

Convert the unbelievers!

 

[Jaskalas]

2010 is the warmest January-though-June on record

The problem with the above map: data quality and data manipulation.

Joseph D'Aleo, drop cold temperature stations, keep warm ones, voilà, global warming

In short, your religion manufactures great headlines during El'Nino years, but your time is over.

 

[MotF Bane]

The denial is strong in this one.

Ignore facts, Shira!

 

[Fingolfin269]

Isn't it interesting that that "natural cycle" never seems to deliver record-low years or even record-low single months?

Wow.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Isn't it interesting that that "natural cycle" never seems to deliver record-low years or even record-low single months?

The Fail is strong in this one...

 

[shira]

The problem with the above map: data quality and data manipulation.

Joseph D'Aleo, drop cold temperature stations, keep warm ones, voilà, global warming

In short, your religion manufactures great headlines during El'Nino years, but your time is over.

How devastating. Not:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Watts_(blogger)#SurfaceStations.org

In 2007 Watts launched the "SurfaceStations.org" project, whose mission is to create a publicly available database of photographs of weather stations, along with their metadata, in response to what he described as "a massive failure of bureaucracy to perform something so simple as taking some photographs and making some measurements and notes of a few to a few dozen weather stations in each state".

On July 6, 2009 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued a preliminary report that charted data from 70 stations that SurfaceStations.org identified as 'good' or 'best' against the rest of the dataset surveyed at that time, and concluded, "clearly there is no indication from this analysis that poor station exposure has imparted a bias in the U.S. temperature trends." Watts issued a rebuttal in which he asserted that the preliminary analysis excluded new data on quality of surface stations, and criticized the use of homogenized data from the stations, which in his view accounts for the creation of two nearly identical graphs. Since then NOAA has released a detailed peer reviewed study confirming both reliability of the surface stations reviewed. The results show that poor stations produce a slight cooling bias, in stark contrast to Watts claim, but also that after corrections both poor and highly rated stations align very well.

Watts publishes non-peer-reviewed data and opinions on a blog. NOAA produces peer-reviewed data and studies. Of course, you believe Watts.

Please, continue your fantasy that this is all a vast conspiracy.

 

[yllus]

Do you mean, does measuring global temperatures over time and determining that temperatures are getting warmer and warmer and warmer - and noting that the temperatures closely track the increase in CO2 levels, which in turn closely track mankind's use of fossil fuels - does all that constitute "evidence of something"?

I don't agree with what I view as willful cherry-picking and misrepresentation of data. You are presenting anecdotal evidence in favour of your position yet you dismiss anecdotal evidence to the contrary. Why are you right and they are wrong?

In fact, I do believe that climate change is occurring in the positive. I just dislike fanboys of any type, especially when they don't even know how to argue a position.

Cold streak sets new record

How's this for cold comfort? Sask-atoon's deep freeze is likely the longest streak of low temperatures below -25 C that has numbed this city since record-keeping began in 1892.

The 24-day streak started cruelly Dec. 13 after relatively mild temperatures and continued at least through Monday, said David Phillips, Environment Canada's senior climatologist.

...

Phillips said he couldn't find a longer cold snap in Saskatoon's recorded weather history during a look through the records Monday. Even during the infamous January of 1950, when temperatures hit -46 and -45 (not counting any wind chill), the cold streak of -25 or lower lasted "only" 21 days.

London colder than Antarctica

The capital reached a high of 37F (3C) yesterday, which was the same as Nuuk, the capital of Greenland.

At Antarctica's Jubany Scientific Station, which is home to 60 people, 16,000 penguins and 650 sea lions, a relatively balmy high of 41F (5C) was recorded.

MeteoGroup UK said that on Sunday night temperatures reached 18F (-8C) in northern Scotland and 21F (-6C) in parts of England and Wales.

The lowest temperature ever recorded in England was -15F (-26.1C) on Jan 10, 1982 in Shropshire.

NCDC: The U.S. has cooled down by 0.49 °F per decade

What you see if you do a linear regression is a cooling trend by 0.49 °F = 0.27 °C per decade. The cooling between 2006 and 2008 was more dramatic: from 55 °F to 53 °F, by a whopping two degrees Fahrenheit!

 

[shira]

I don't agree with what I view as willful cherry-picking and misrepresentation of data. You are presenting anecdotal evidence in favour of your position yet you dismiss anecdotal evidence to the contrary. Why are you right and they are wrong?

In fact, I do believe that climate change is occurring in the positive. I just dislike fanboys of any type, especially when they don't even know how to argue a position.

Cold streak sets new record



London colder than Antarctica



NCDC: The U.S. has cooled down by 0.49 °F per decade

You cite the temperatures of individual cities as evidence of global trends? You cite an alleged temperature profile over two years and make a grand conclusion about what's been happening over decades?

Do you even pretend to understand the scientific method?

 

[flexy]

You actually should be concerned that even WITH those cold-streaks there IS an avg. increase in temperatures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

Do you think this is all made up?

Furthermore..what is there to debate anyway? June/July 2010 had the highest temps recorded since the beginning of weather recordings in the mid 1800s. Period. Fact. We can spend another 20 pages "debating"...it will still stand as a fact.

 

[Fear No Evil]

And the only solution is higher taxes!

 

[Fear No Evil]

You actually should be concerned that even WITH those cold-streaks there IS an avg. increase in temperatures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

Do you think this is all made up?

Furthermore..what is there to debate anyway? June/July 2010 had the highest temps recorded since the beginning of weather recordings in the mid 1800s. Period. Fact. We can spend another 20 pages "debating"...it will still stand as a fact.

The debate is OVER! Nevermind the fact we have volcanoes spewing out tons and tons of CO2 this year as well.. Its man! And higher taxes are the only answer!

 

[yllus]

You cite the temperatures of individual cities as evidence of global trends? You cite an alleged temperature profile over two years and make a grand conclusion about what's been happening over decades?

Do you even pretend to understand the scientific method?

I sure am, though I didn't mean it to be a direct repudiation of the original link provided in this thread. You pointed to a very narrow time period - six months - and presented us with the conclusion that global warming is occurring. Why can't I point to one country over two years and say the opposite? One city and its extreme lows over one week? Tell me the difference. Seriously. Specifically, tell me about the scientific method and how one differs from the other.

I bet you can't.

Now, in general, let's talk a little bit about understanding.

Do you understand you sound like a total douchebag? You're not winning any converts and it's not because we're too dumb to get it - it's because humans are naturally disinclined to agree with people they see as assholes. Drop the prissy attitude and you might actually see people come and agree with you.

 

[NoWhereM]

I'm really not sure I understand the concept of a carbon footprint. If someone believes that the only way to slow down climate change is by reducing their carbon footprint, and that if they don't reduce their carbon footprint climate change will increase geometrically, does that mean that if that person spends an inordinate amount of time on the internet warning the rest of us about climate change they are subconsciously trying to kill us?