NOAA: Past Decade Warmest on Record According to Scientists in 48 Countries

[shira]

The climate-change deniers are going to need to reach a new level of intellectual self-delusion to avoid seeing the truth in NOAA's latest report.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100728_stateoftheclimate.html

The climate-change denial crowd is actually pretty pathetic. Show them the results of the combined efforts of more than 300 climatologists from around the globe on 10 independent measures of warming, and they dismiss it as fake. But show them a blog by ONE non-climatologist making an unsubstantiated claim about ONE area of measurement, and they do a victory dance. It's kind of like they're losing a basketball game 97 to 0, and then they recover a turnover with 2 seconds on the clock and imagine they're winning.

Oh, here's a link to the actual report.

Oh, bye the bye: Notice that the deniers oft-repeated claim that the last decade was one of cooling is just out and out false. As the report makes clear, the ten years 2000 through 2009 were MUCH warmer than 1990 through 1999, which were in turn MUCH warmer than 1980 through 1989.

And in case you need more evidence that the anti-MMCC argument is bunk, see the companion thread I've just posted where the EPA categorically rejects that claim.

The 2009 State of the Climate report released today draws on data for 10 key climate indicators that all point to the same finding: the scientific evidence that our world is warming is unmistakable. More than 300 scientists from 160 research groups in 48 countries contributed to the report, which confirms that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the Earth has been growing warmer over the last 50 years.

Based on comprehensive data from multiple sources, the report defines 10 measurable planet-wide features used to gauge global temperature changes. The relative movement of each of these indicators proves consistent with a warming world. Seven indicators are rising: air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature, air temperature over oceans, sea level, ocean heat, humidity and tropospheric temperature in the “active-weather” layer of the atmosphere closest to the Earth’s surface. Three indicators are declining: Arctic sea ice, glaciers and spring snow cover in the Northern hemisphere.

“For the first time, and in a single compelling comparison, the analysis brings together multiple observational records from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the ocean,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “The records come from many institutions worldwide. They use data collected from diverse sources, including satellites, weather balloons, weather stations, ships, buoys and field surveys. These independently produced lines of evidence all point to the same conclusion: our planet is warming,”

The report emphasizes that human society has developed for thousands of years under one climatic state, and now a new set of climatic conditions are taking shape. These conditions are consistently warmer, and some areas are likely to see more extreme events like severe drought, torrential rain and violent storms.

“Despite the variability caused by short-term changes, the analysis conducted for this report illustrates why we are so confident the world is warming,” said Peter Stott, Ph.D., contributor to the report and head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution of the United Kingdom Met Office Hadley Centre. “When we look at air temperature and other indicators of climate, we see highs and lows in the data from year to year because of natural variability. Understanding climate change requires looking at the longer-term record. When we follow decade-to-decade trends using multiple data sets and independent analyses from around the world, we see clear and unmistakable signs of a warming world.”

While year-to-year changes in temperature often reflect natural climatic variations such as El Niño/La Niña events, changes in average temperature from decade-to-decade reveal long-term trends such as global warming. Each of the last three decades has been much warmer than the decade before. At the time, the 1980s was the hottest decade on record. In the 1990s, every year was warmer than the average of the previous decade. The 2000s were warmer still.

“The temperature increase of one degree Fahrenheit over the past 50 years may seem small, but it has already altered our planet,” said Deke Arndt, co-editor of the report and chief of the Climate Monitoring Branch of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center. “Glaciers and sea ice are melting, heavy rainfall is intensifying and heat waves are more common. And, as the new report tells us, there is now evidence that over 90 percent of warming over the past 50 years has gone into our ocean.”

More and more, Americans are witnessing the impacts of climate change in their own backyards, including sea-level rise, longer growing seasons, changes in river flows, increases in heavy downpours, earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons in our waters. People are searching for relevant and timely information about these changes to inform decision-making about virtually all aspects of their lives. To help keep citizens and businesses informed about climate, NOAA created the Climate Portal at http://www.climate.gov. The portal features a short video that summarizes some of the highlights of the State of the Climate Report.

State of the Climate is published as a special supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society and is edited by D.S. Arndt, M.O. Baringer, and M.R. Johnson. The full report and an online media packet with graphics is available online: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/bams-state-of-the-climate.

 

[spidey07]

What happened to global warming? You have something that proves global warming, but yet you now call it "climate change"?

Why is that? So you can ignore the cooling periods and come to the stunning realization that the climate does indeed change?

You're religion has been exposed and you will NOT be allowed to alter the language for your prophecy is false.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Why should I care? I don't have any kids and the left has convinced me there is no god. Not my problem. YOU stop driving. I'm not.

 

[boomerang]

Someone, please make these posts stop.

 

[monovillage]

From the report:
"The report emphasizes that human society has developed for thousands of years under one climatic state, and now a new set of climatic conditions are taking shape."

Does not include the medieval warm period or the Little Ice Age. Making the statement false.

 

[Jaskalas]

You've gone back to the decade argument instead of trumpeting the first 6 months of 2010. Hey, it's a start, and I've got some news for you.

Note that this is not to discount that the previous decade was quite warm. Merely to suggest that the past few years have shown a turn around that will become quite evident as soon as El'Nino fades.

• Peru declares state of emergency amid plunging temperatures
  
• 'Over the past 3 or 4 years we have seen temperatures during the winter months get lower, and people are unable to survive this'

 

[JSt0rm]

well it was a little cool here this afternoon so...

 

[cubby1223]

As the report makes clear, the ten years 2000 through 2009 were MUCH warmer than 1990 through 1999, which were in turn MUCH warmer than 1980 through 1989.

And the 1970s were pretty damn cold. But then again we all know that. You're funny, shira

 

[NoWhereM]

You've gone back to the decade argument instead of trumpeting the first 6 months of 2010. Hey, it's a start, and I've got some news for you.

Note that this is not to discount that the previous decade was quite warm. Merely to suggest that the past few years have shown a turn around that will become quite evident as soon as El'Nino fades.

Do you think there is some way we could generate enough green house gasses to keep any more of those poor people in South America from freezing to death? I can turn on all the lights and televisions here if that will help.

 

[Double Trouble]

And in case you need more evidence that the anti-MMCC argument is bunk, see the companion thread I've just posted where the EPA categorically rejects that claim.

Noooooo, that's shocking! The EPA, the organization that stands to gain the most of any organization in the US from the political wing of the global warming movement says MMGW is true. Absolutely shocking!

When you first posted one of these threads, it seemed informative. Now it just reeks of desperation. It just seems like someone desperately trying to get affirmation that his beliefs are valid.

Again, I don't know to what extent man is causing global warming trends or not, that's up to the scientists to figure out. I do know that I'm not on board with any of the proposed government-takeover "solutions" that are out there.

 

[monovillage]

and btw your claim in the OP,
"Show them the results of the combined efforts of more than 300 climatologists from around the globe on 10 independent measures of warming, and they dismiss it as fake."

isn't true either since a good number of the scientists quoted or mentioned in the article are not climatologists, but from a number of different fields. Dr. Lubchenco received her PH.d in Ecology. Not a big point, but you shouldn't claim credentials for scientists that don't have them.

 

[Double Trouble]

and btw your claim in the OP,
"Show them the results of the combined efforts of more than 300 climatologists from around the globe on 10 independent measures of warming, and they dismiss it as fake."

isn't true either since a good number of the scientists quoted or mentioned in the article are not climatologists, but from a number of different fields. Dr. Lubchenco received her PH.d in Ecology. Not a big point, but you shouldn't claim credentials for scientists that don't have them.

Shhhhhhhhh! You might get labeled a "denier".

 

[zsdersw]

Are the Earth's climates permanent for any given area? Not a chance.

Are humans responsible for some changes in the climate? Not to any significant degree, considering all of the other non-human influences that exist.

Are we, as a nation or as a race of lifeforms, ready to deal with the inevitable changes in climate? Not really.

One of the two resources we need the most to sustain us, arguably, is fresh water (energy being the other). Shifts in which areas of the Earth are wet, dry, too wet, and too dry will have significant biological, agricultural, and economic impacts toward which we are, for the most part, apathetic and indifferent.

There are two big-picture questions related to climate change: 1. What causes (or caused) it? and 2. How do we prepare for it? Much has been made of the first, and next to nothing of the second. That's a problem.

 

[FuzzyBee]

What do you think about our planet recently being a big chunk of ice? Do you think it's been warming up since then?

 

[FuzzyBee]

There are two big-picture questions related to climate change: 1. What causes (or caused) it? and 2. How do we prepare for it? Much has been made of the first, and next to nothing of the second. That's a problem.

We prepare for it by buying carbon offset credits, right?

 

[shira]

What happened to global warming? You have something that proves global warming, but yet you now call it "climate change"?

Why is that? So you can ignore the cooling periods and come to the stunning realization that the climate does indeed change?

You're religion has been exposed and you will NOT be allowed to alter the language for your prophecy is false.

The "CC" in IPCC stands for "Climate Change." The IPCC was formed in 1988. "Climate Change" has been the accepted term for over 20 years.

Now that you're informed, stop using this fraudulent argument.

 

[monovillage]

The NOAA has a budget of $4.6 BILLION courtesy of American taxpayers.
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/06/house-panel-fav.html
Climate skeptics like Steve McIntyre (featured so prominently in Climategate) when asked to give presentations in England depend on donations from readers of their blogs and stay with friends to defray costs. Just in case you were wondering about the polished media presentations from NOAA, you're paying for them.
http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/
and the Global Warmists are still stonewalling data inquiries.
http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/23/data-stonewalling-resumes/

 

[shira]

The NOAA has a budget of $4.6 BILLION courtesy of American taxpayers.
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/06/house-panel-fav.html
Climate skeptics like Steve McIntyre (featured so prominently in Climategate) when asked to give presentations in England depend on donations from readers of their blogs and stay with friends to defray costs. Just in case you were wondering about the polished media presentations from NOAA, you're paying for them.
http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/
and the Global Warmists are still stonewalling data inquiries.
http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/23/data-stonewalling-resumes/

So well-funded research must be false because . . . it's well funded.

Great argument.

 

[werepossum]

So well-funded research must be false because . . . it's well funded.

Great argument.

Let's all have a group hug as we contemplate all the times government has argued for itself to have less power and funding . . .

 

[monovillage]

So well-funded research must be false because . . . it's well funded.

Great argument.

No, but i gave you $4.6 BILLION reasons in 2010 (the $4.6 is only for their 2010 budget) why NOAA wants to keep the bureaucratic gravy train running with alarmist BS.

 

[FuzzyBee]

What do you think about our planet recently being a big chunk of ice? Do you think it's been warming up since then?

^^ Must've missed this question.

 

[bfdd]

rofl rofl rofl, local climate much? 48 out of what? 195 countries. Not really a big deal. Lets not forget that they assume we have always had the same climate, ROFL. More of the leaving shit out. Shira, do you even read the shit you post? I also find it funny you are ok with the NOAA pushing this shit because they have 4.7 billion in research funds only to turn around point and scream at any skeptic for taking money from big oil zomg. rofl shira, who do you think spends more money trying to push their agenda big oil or the gubment?

 

[jhbball]

The climate-change deniers are going to need to reach a new level of intellectual self-delusion to avoid seeing the truth in NOAA's latest report.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100728_stateoftheclimate.html

The climate-change denial crowd is actually pretty pathetic. Show them the results of the combined efforts of more than 300 climatologists from around the globe on 10 independent measures of warming, and they dismiss it as fake. But show them a blog by ONE non-climatologist making an unsubstantiated claim about ONE area of measurement, and they do a victory dance. It's kind of like they're losing a basketball game 97 to 0, and then they recover a turnover with 2 seconds on the clock and imagine they're winning.

Oh, here's a link to the actual report.

Oh, bye the bye: Notice that the deniers oft-repeated claim that the last decade was one of cooling is just out and out false. As the report makes clear, the ten years 2000 through 2009 were MUCH warmer than 1990 through 1999, which were in turn MUCH warmer than 1980 through 1989.

And in case you need more evidence that the anti-MMCC argument is bunk, see the companion thread I've just posted where the EPA categorically rejects that claim.

Only 48 countries? That's only like, 25% of the countries in the world. Weak argument!

 

[bfdd]

From the report:
"The report emphasizes that human society has developed for thousands of years under one climatic state, and now a new set of climatic conditions are taking shape."

Does not include the medieval warm period or the Little Ice Age. Making the statement false.

this is literally the only thing you need to read to discredit the entire article. i still laugh at shira for putting this forward when he obviously didn't read the whole thing.

 

[shira]

Let's all have a group hug as we contemplate all the times government has argued for itself to have less power and funding . . .

But you're making the claim that government funding of NOAA is large BECAUSE their research results have reinforced the theory of MMCC.

Why don't you explain to us how that works? Does NOAA tell Congress that they'll come up with ever more pro-MMCC research if NOAA's funding grows? Does Congress threaten NOAA by telling them that money will be withheld if research against MMCC is funded? I mean, please inform us how this pro-MMCC cabal has been in control of Congress for at least the past 20 years - even during the Bush Sr and Bush Jr years? Show us your evidence.