It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The trend continues in August; The World is Warming as NASA says hottest on record

page: 5
26
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing ok just point me too the hot spots this summer. I could buy what you are selling if it was hot somewhere.




posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Really?

I mean REALLY?

First, you say this in your OP:




August was hottest on record, according to NASA

Of course, NASA says not to read too much into it because we can't base everything off a single month and that we need to use long-term data, but I believe with all these records being broken, it's getting obvious that a trend continues.


A month's worth of data about: weather. And that time period of course is not long enough to represent climate.

And even your source says: Not to read too much into it.

But THEN you turn around and star getting after people for posting about how mild or cool there summer has been (a period GREATER than a single month)?????

Talk about the pot calling the kettle......

I'll add to it:

This summer has been not that bad for us, and I'm not talking about a town....nor just a county....nor just several counties, but across two states: SC and GA.

Some years we see highs getting to and over 100 F. Some years, we don't. This year and last year, we didn't.

Several years ago, we did see it get that hot. And you know what? The years before that, it didn't get that hot.

We've had very mild winters......except for last year. It was hard. Sub freezing temps, snow, and a huge ice storm.

But that's not all that different, as 10 years ago, that winter was almost the same! (Ice storm included).

Cycles. Since 1989 when I moved here, I've watched as the seasons pass, and you know what? We have some cycles!

We go through some very hot summers, and then some mild summers, and then back to hot summers, and now back to some more mild summers.

Same with winter. We've had some brutal winters.....then some mild winters....then back to brutal again!

Does that mean the climate isn't changing? No, of course not. The climate of Earth does change. It always have, and always will.

Does a month's worth of global temps prove/disprove it? Absolutely NOT.

And you've been here on ATS many times posting these threads (me thinks your signature explains why), and you get after ANYONE that talks about how mild their summer was or how hard their winter was.

Yet you have the AUDACITY to use a single month's worth of global temperature data as proof of anything????

Are you really concerned with Climate Change? Or are you more concerned with your book sales?

Honest question here.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Cynic

To add. In my 60 years of planting and harvesting food, I have NEVER lost my garden. I got some produce but not enough to can. That put me in a panic this year because I can and preserve a lot of food for the winter. This year, I will have to rely on the stores. But next year, I am enclosing the entire garden and adding climate control system myself.
edit on 16-9-2014 by MOMof3 because: spelling



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: amazing ok just point me too the hot spots this summer. I could buy what you are selling if it was hot somewhere.



I'm in Vegas. It's way over 100 degrees right now. That's freak'n hot!

LOL --I'm not saying that proves Global Warming! I'm just saying that you asked me to tell you where it was hot somewhere! I did and it is!
edit on 16-9-2014 by amazing because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-9-2014 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   
A wee lesson.

There was once a time not so long ago that the Earth's Ozone Layer was thining and even had holes over the poles. People were crying and wailing as they knew that the Ozone Layer protected life on the surface of the planet from harmful solar radiation.

Scientists toiled and discovered that CFC (Cloro-Floro-Carbons) that were ubiqutis in our aerosole products contributed mightly to the destruction of the protective ozone. After years of acrimonious debate (CFCs are the case, it's too late, we can't change anything, etc., etc.) laws were passed to phase out the chemical culpret

Happily we have a healing Ozone Layer today because people on all sides agreed to find better alternatives.

But then that was before Avoidance and Obstruction 101 was a college requirement.



In 1987, the Montreal Protocol saw the world unite, and pledge to reduce Ozone-depleting substances found in a range of everyday products, such as deodorants and refrigerators. That now means that the ozone layer is expected to recover to 1980 levels by the middle of this century.



www.independent.co.uk...
edit on 16-9-2014 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)



edit on 16-9-2014 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

I don't see how this topic refers to local geographic trends since the title infers otherwise. As to enclosing your garden, good idea. You can start earlier and perhaps get a second harvest. Peace.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DAZ21
a reply to: Rezlooper

It's just another gimmick to increase our energy bills or add another tax to the growing list.

Hey you know what would be a great idea? If we paid off these scientists to create the greatest farce of the century to milk the population dry.

At least if I put myself in the shoes of the powers that be, that's probably what I would do. It's all about money, I mean why would they really care it's not like it's killing people? and if it is, don't they want to depopulate the world anyway?


You have to ask yourself, who really makes the money by convincing you and so many others that it is a hoax? The oil and gas industry, that's who. Do governments really need to make up this massive hoax in order to get another tax on you. They can do as they please, trust me, they don't have to go through all of this. It's ridiculous, your logic.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

It's a dry heat though.

Then so is an oven.
I was in Vegas when it hit 135 but hey, deserts are like that. They also experience major flooding, hence the miles of sewers being laid.
That said, this is normal for the locale.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   
I want go hear from real ats members. I think that study is full of crap. In the middle Atlantic, its been one of the coolest Augusts I can ever remember.

Nothing like the 1990's. This summer there were many nights we didn't even turn on the AC. That's unheard of for DC in august.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cynic
a reply to: amazing

It's a dry heat though.

Then so is an oven.
I was in Vegas when it hit 135 but hey, deserts are like that. They also experience major flooding, hence the miles of sewers being laid.
That said, this is normal for the locale.


Way too hot for me! LOL



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Rezlooper
Are you for real Rez? These same people were yammering about an Ice Age in the 1970's Al did a number on his faithful sheep and after the IPCC was caught and exposed for fudging numbers to meet their theory he is decidedly absent from the discussion. 130 years of data does not trump untold eons of empirical data readily available. The climate is changing, no argument there but to think man is the sole factor is just plain stunned. It is a natural occurrence and simply adding more taxes to a necessary ecological item - yes, carbon - is the real Inconvenient Truth.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:45 PM
link   
I'm just going to leave this here...

nipccreport.org...



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
If I am not mistaken the sea temp's actually fluctuate the most .Could be something like volcanic activity .Could just be that big orange ball in the sky .One thing is for sure ,humans seem to have little effect on the climate system based on historical data . a reply to: WhiteAlice



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Chickensalad

originally posted by: Rezlooper
I love it out how deniers love to say..."Hey, I had to nearly turn up the heat, so you're climate change is full of BS," lol, as if they represent the entire world. The point is people, it's warming on a global scale, not in your neighborhood, or, maybe it is in your neighborhood. IDK, I'm just providing plenty of links to show that there is a trend and whether you choose to believe or not (keep your heads in the sand) then that is entirely up to you. How the folks like NASA, NOAA, weather channel, who are actually watching and keeping these records can make it up and lie when ever since the late 90's, average temps have consistently been higher than the 100 years before that, IDK. I think you should keep taking one guys word for it (at WUWT) over all these climate scientists and meteorologists, yeah, that's the best argument for your denial. lol.

Do we seriously need to direct you to the many links on the net discussing the manipulation of data from the last few decades?

Yes. They are lying.

Here, take your pick. Ill wait...
Data Manipulation


Are you serious? No, it is your source that is full of it. Steven Goddard is a psuedonym for some climate change skeptic named Tony Heller. He admitted using this fake name in his blog on June 27 of this year. All of these articles claiming that the data was manipulated was based on this one phony's supposed "research." So many people are so blind it really is a sad state for our future...for my children.

No matter what portrait he paints in regards to CO2, I'd like to know if he disputes that levels of methane are rising and whether the rise is a threat to climate change.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

I can pull up links and reports all damn day....but I get the feeling your going to attack my source everytime...

So how about you just prove me wrong...

edit on 16-9-2014 by Chickensalad because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cynic
a reply to: Rezlooper
Are you for real Rez? These same people were yammering about an Ice Age in the 1970's Al did a number on his faithful sheep and after the IPCC was caught and exposed for fudging numbers to meet their theory he is decidedly absent from the discussion. 130 years of data does not trump untold eons of empirical data readily available. The climate is changing, no argument there but to think man is the sole factor is just plain stunned. It is a natural occurrence and simply adding more taxes to a necessary ecological item - yes, carbon - is the real Inconvenient Truth.


You miss the point for me and most of us here, I think.

I don't listen to Al Gore. He's not part of the discussion for me. He is for you, for some reason. He's just one pundit out of the dozens for either side of the argument. Also, take away the "...yammering about an Ice age in the 1970's..." talk. That was 44 years ago, most of those people, and it was only a small handful-like maybe 12, scientists who posited that theory. Most of them are dead or out of the discussion.

Now, let's take science. Thousands of scientists are theorizing that, in addition to the natural cycles of climate change that we know our earth goes through, there is another cycle that man has initiated with his actions. That's real science and data that say that.

You say taxes, but there are far more taxes for the government to get if we keep on our fossil fuel path. A carbon tax doesn't offset the taxes our governments get on fuel, oil, combustion engine cars and so on.

You need to take away your fascination with science fictional accounts of ice ages from the 1970s and Al Gore and look at the science.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Rezlooper
I love it out how deniers love to say..."Hey, I had to nearly turn up the heat, so you're climate change is full of BS," lol, as if they represent the entire world. The point is people, it's warming on a global scale, not in your neighborhood, or, maybe it is in your neighborhood. IDK, I'm just providing plenty of links to show that there is a trend and whether you choose to believe or not (keep your heads in the sand) then that is entirely up to you. How the folks like NASA, NOAA, weather channel, who are actually watching and keeping these records can make it up and lie when ever since the late 90's, average temps have consistently been higher than the 100 years before that, IDK. I think you should keep taking one guys word for it (at WUWT) over all these climate scientists and meteorologists, yeah, that's the best argument for your denial. lol.


But, Rez, you didn't say climate change. You said Global Warming. There is a reason why the terms were switched. It used to be Global Warming back after the Super El Nino of 1998 when both the AMO and PDO were in their warm phase because a LOT of heat WAS jacked into the global system, but in case you haven't noticed, things have mellowed out a lot since then.

So, we had a warm August in some place? But why aren't you also talking about how July was one of the coldest ever, too?

The thing is that climate changes. That's what it does. Study the history of the world both before we ever got here and after. Things have been both colder and warmer than they are now. The ludicrous thing to me is that politicians are busy telling us that if we just give them all our money and let them control our lives, they can suddenly control the climate as if it's just like our in-home HVAC system.

I'm sorry, but NOPE. That's just plain silly. I'm all for sensible conservation and not being big pollutors, but I draw the line when I'm told that merely by breathing, I'm destroying the world and all that's in it and all I have to do is pay an endless tithe to the high priests of the church of gaia in order to atone for the sin of living.


Hey Ketsuko, I use the term global warming because that's what it is. AGW can change the term to climate change if they like because it sounds better, but the truth is, our world is warming and there's plenty of data to show it. You refer to past changes that have occurred over thousands and even millions of years. What we are talking about here is happening within a few decades.

The jump start in this recent warming was brought on by the methane gas pluming into our atmosphere from many different sources, both man made and natural, all over the planet. Methane is 25 times more effective at trapping the sun's heat than carbon, but most skeptics and AGW want to keep the argument focused on carbon and that's where it hurts the cause.

Methane began a sudden increase in atmospheric levels in 2007 and not long after, many strange phenomenon began to emerge around the world, which included the strange sky noises and loud booms in 2011. Smaller earthquakes started rising in 2009. Volcanoes have been increasing over the past two years. Mass animal die-offs started increasing in 2011 and skyrocketed over 2012 and 2013. Disease outbreaks started increasing in 2012. Sinkholes started sinking all over the place in 2012. Land cracks started appearing around the same time. Mysterious explosions of homes, factories, recycling centers, RV's, trucks and boats started rapidly increasing over the past three years as well. And what about the fireballs? Also increasing. I've got links to all of these events in my threads over the past two years.

There are many strange phenomenon in addition to extreme weather events that are increasing in frequency and intensity, and something is causing it. It's the addition of methane gas to the atmosphere. It acts like a blanket over the planet, trapping in the sun's heat. Levels of methane have been lingering over the 2,000 ppb level for the past year now. It's been said that the livable level for us humans is 1250 ppb. These measured levels are only what we know about. If you go up to the mesosphere (where meteors burn up), we don't even know how much methane is up there because we have no way of measuring it in that layer. Planes and balloons don't go that high and the space shuttle (that was) and satellites are much higher.

I'm sorry for not posting links right now to all of these statements, but I have many times posted them in my threads on methane and hydrogen sulfide gases.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mirdaerys
I'm just going to leave this here...

nipccreport.org...


Let's take a quick looking at the funding of the sponsering organizations, shall we?

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Gobal Change -

from wikipedia:




The Center does not discuss their funding, "we believe that ideas about the way the world of nature operates should stand or fall on their own merits, irrespective of the source of support for the person or organization that produces them."[3]

According to IRS records, the ExxonMobil Foundation provided a grant of $15,000 to the center in 2000.[4] ExxonMobil stated it funded, "organizations which research significant policy issues and promote informed discussion on issues of direct relevance to the company. [...] These organizations do not speak on our behalf, nor do we control their views and messages."[5]


With references at the bottom... then goes on to name the other sponsoring orgaization (in the very same wiki-article)

Science and Environmental Policy Project.

Any organization that claims to "Disseminate Factual Reports" that will not disclose their funding can not be regarded any anything other then paid for propoganda outlets.

Ahh - here we go (do remember that both organizations and in fact a single front).

www.motherjones.com...




The Idso clan is the von Trapp family of climate change denial. In 1980, paterfamilias Sherwood Idso, a self-described "bio-climatologist," published a paper in Science concluding that doubling the world's carbon dioxide concentration wouldn't change the planet's temperature all that much. In years that followed, Idso and his colleagues at Arizona State University's Office of Climatology received more than $1 million in research funding from oil, coal, and utility interests. In 1990, he coauthored a paper funded by a coal mining company, titled "Greenhouse Cooling."

In 1998, Idso's son Craig founded the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change and began publishing CO2 Science, an online digest of climate change skepticism.

He subsequently earned his PhD in geography from ASU under the tutelage of climate skeptic Robert Balling, then the director of its climatology program. In the early 2000s, Idso was director of environmental science at Peabody Energy, the world's largest privately owned coal company. After Peabody laid him off, he began aggressively fundraising for the center, whose budget increased from just north of $30,000 in 2004 to more than $1 million last year.

Since 2006, the center has mounted a spirited defense of carbon dioxide using everything from ancient tree-ring data to elementary-school science experiments. "[S]cience tells us that putting more CO2 in the air would actually be good for the planet," its website says. "Therefore, in invoking the precautionary principle one last time, our advice to policy makers who may be tempted to embrace Kyoto-type programs is simply this: Don't mess with success!"


OHHHH - super impartial ......



But the center's 2008 tax filing shows that it entered 2009 with $445,000 in cash on hand. Last year, it paid Sherwood Idso $50,000, Craig Idso $79,000, and Craig Idso's wife, M. Anne Idso, $52,000. The center also made a $58,000 "scientific research" grant to a group called CO2 Science. Tax records reveal that CO2 Science's $75,000 budget that year mostly went toward paying Craig Idso a $45,000 salary, bringing his and his wife's total take from the family business to $182,000.



Actually for the Dirty Dozen of Chliate Change Denial - for reference folks see from 2009 - wonder what's changed????

www.motherjones.com...

Now back to - Ahh - the center for the study of carbon dioxide, yadda, yadda, yadda....

Oh - involved with ALEX too - how delightful....

from www.sourcewatch.org...

with another reference to - bingo - the Science and Environmnetal Policy Project....



In August 2011, Center founder and Chairman Craig Idso spoke on "Benefit Analysis of CO2"[3] (previously known as "Warming Up to Climate Change: The Many Benefits of Increased Atmospheric CO2"[4]) at the Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force meeting at the 2011 American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) Annual Meeting.[5] He was accompanied by Robert Ferguson of the Science and Public Policy Institute and MEP Roger Helmer, a Member of the European Parliament for the East Midlands of Great Britain who represents the Conservative Party and has used his position on the European Parliament to fight increased regulation of member states through the European Union.[5]


Nope - try again.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Chickensalad

Because I don't have to - you do it yourself by not providing any support for your 'opinions'.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: DAZ21
a reply to: WhiteAlice

Ok let's just agree to disagree?

So the climate is changing? Why should we be concerned? It might be changing for the better...

Like you already stated, when climate was different, forests existed where deserts now exist or vice versa.

So the climate changes? The world adapts to the new climate, such is life.

In the end we will have to adapt either way man made or natural.


That's the problem. You see, the world can go through these changes, but these extreme changes that will occur, we, mankind, cannot survive. When such drastic climate changes occur, such as a forest where there once was a desert, man wasn't here and man won't be here after either. Sorry to be a doommonger, but it is what it is. Sure, life on this planet will survive, but we won't. We are already seeing the evidence as the ocean's die off, as they warm, and acidify. Pay attention to the mass fish die offs occurring all over the planet. It's alarming and if you read between the lines, it has quite a story to tell.




top topics



 
26
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join