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.

 

Global Temperatures Skyrocketing (Again)

page: 3
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 11:58 PM
link   
a reply to: gort51


Yes, Australia has had a Hotter October this year....What a surprise, we are in the Effect of a El Nino....its what happens.
Did you read the first sentence in the OP?
But you think El Nino dramatically affects the Indian Ocean? How does that work?


When there are cool years, the averages lowers, when the temp returns to warm, it is above the "Average", even if its close to "normal".
Except that there are more and more all time high temperature records being set and fewer all time low temperature records.

So, to be clear, you deny that the world is getting warmer? Let alone that human activity is the primary cause.


edit on 11/19/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 12:00 AM
link   
a reply to: machineintelligence



Anthropomorphic global warming theory centers around the idea that there are too many humans and we are collectively guilty of bringing down the biosphere.

Anthropomorphic means "human like". I think you mean anthropogenic, unless you think global warming looks like humans. Which really doesn't make any sense.

But the theory has little to do with the number of people. It's about how we produce energy...by burning fossil fuels.

edit on 11/19/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1




It seems that they dont have enough real coverage in the real world and so they duplicate some of the data to cover the places they dont have coverage .

Like I said. The AGW deniers get it backwards. Claiming that the models are constructed to "duplicate" the data. That is not the way the models work.


edit on 11/19/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 12:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: machineintelligence



Anthropomorphic global warming theory centers around the idea that there are too many humans and we are collectively guilty of bringing down the biosphere.

Anthropomorphic means "human like". I think you mean anthropogenic, unless you think global warming looks like humans. Which really doesn't make any sense.

But the theory has little to do with the number of people. It's about how we produce energy...by burning fossil fuels.


Global warming looks like humans...hahaha...so funny



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

anthropogenic is the correct word thanks. Hey if the energy companies would just release all the free energy devices they bought up to save their carbon fuel investments everything would be peachy but here we are.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: machineintelligence
Define "free energy."
Photovoltaic is free. Once you buy the system.


edit on 11/19/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
Big energy companies has a history of buying alternative energy technologies then those technologies are forgotten.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 12:17 AM
link   
a reply to: machineintelligence
Your answer is non-responsive.
Again. Please define "free energy."



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 12:34 AM
link   
a reply to: machineintelligence

You didn't address any of the science I asked you to, just responded with more conspiracy theory jumble. But since you like conspiracy theories (who doesn't!) then try this:

If the theory of man made climate change, which (I already left a link in the OP) first emerged as legitimate science in the 19th century, is just a globalist plot to get your freedoms - why did a consortium of fossil fuel interests conspire in the early 1990s to "Reposition global warming as theory (not fact)"?



And why are the exact same shills who were paid in the 80s and 90s to question the science on smoking now championing the global warming "skeptic" movement? Did they suddenly have a change of heart and become good guys?

Read this thread on The Heartland Institute
Or this one on Steven Milloy and JunkScience.com

Why is every scientist or talking head connected to this movement being secretly funded by these same shady interests?

Example #1
Example #2

Those are just a taste, so go ahead and put all those pieces together and then come here and talk about conspiracy theories.

You call me an alarmist. If anything I like to consider myself an alarm-clockist: trying to wake you up to the REAL underlying agenda here; the one to keep you all mindless consumers of finite resources and a Ponzi pyramid scheme economy that the plutocrats already control. They don't need some insane plot hatched over a hundred years ago by scientists to get what they want. They already have you wrapped around their greasy fingers while everyone licks the runoff and congratulates themselves on the phony freedoms this gives them.

You just don't realize it because they fill your heads with these absurd counter-conspiracies designed to keep you blindly terrified of what the left hand is doing while the right is already thumbing through your wallet.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 05:33 AM
link   
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Would this be the same Peter Wadhams, wattsupwiththat.com...

"Dr. Peter Wadhams had famously claimed that Arctic Sea Ice would be completely gone this year, even Gavin said it was ridiculous:" ,,,,,wattsupwiththat.com...

"Over the past few years the Arctic expert, Professor Peter Wadhams, has strongly predicted an ‘ice-free’ Arctic no later than 2016. Late this year he changed it to 2020 without apparently giving an explanation."..wattsupwiththat.com...< br />
"SUBJECT: Arctic meltdown: a catastrophic threat to our survival

AMEG calls for rapid refreezing of the Arctic to halt runaway melting

WHO: John Nissen, Chair AMEG, supported by Professor Peter Wadhams, Cambridge University, co-founder of AMEG and world-renowned expert on Arctic sea ice, with Paul Beckwith, AMEG blogger." wattsupwiththat.com... Our conclusions are:

• The meltdown is accelerating and could become unstoppable as early as Sept 2015
• Immediate action must be taken to refreeze the Arctic to halt runaway melting
• Greenhouse gas emissions reduction, however drastic, cannot solve this problem
• Calculations show that powerful interventions are needed to cool the Arctic
• Any delay escalates the risk of failure
• Arctic meltdown is a catastrophic threat for civilisation.

AMEG therefore calls for the immediate setting up of a task force, specifically mandated to ensure that the Arctic is cooled as quickly and safely as possible. "


That sounds like really bad news but in the same piece we get this news ....."However, new research led by Princeton University researchers and published in The ISME Journal in August suggests that, thanks to methane-hungry bacteria, the majority of Arctic soil might actually be able to absorb methane from the atmosphere rather than release it. Furthermore, that ability seems to become greater as temperatures rise.

The researchers found that Arctic soils containing low carbon content — which make up 87 percent of the soil in permafrost regions globally — not only remove methane from the atmosphere, but also become more efficient as temperatures increase. During a three-year period, a carbon-poor site on Axel Heiberg Island in Canada’s Arctic region consistently took up more methane as the ground temperature rose from 0 to 18 degrees Celsius (32 to 64.4 degrees Fahrenheit). The researchers project that should Arctic temperatures rise by 5 to 15 degrees Celsius over the next 100 years, the methane-absorbing capacity of “carbon-poor” soil could increase by five to 30 times.

The researchers found that this ability stems from an as-yet unknown species of bacteria in carbon-poor Arctic soil that consume methane in the atmosphere. ...there is more if you want to read . wattsupwiththat.com... So data alone can be mis-read or understood when other sinks are not considered . The sky is not falling .



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 05:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




Like I said. The AGW deniers get it backwards. Claiming that the models are constructed to "duplicate" the data. That is not the way the models work.
The models may be useful but because they diverge from reality in temp.projections they have little to no predictive value . CO2 has been rising at the predicted rate but the temps are not following . That tells me that they have something in the models or a lack of something in the models to produce the divergence .



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 06:21 AM
link   
a reply to: mc_squared

Part of the problem with a government stamp on anything is there are people who believe they have been lied to, deceived with numbers fudged for a political outcome so no matter what a government agency says, they are not going to believe it. It really is a sad state of affairs.

Did you guys (Gals) know that China burns almost as much coal as the rest of the world combined ? 66% of their energy comes from coal. It is so bad that about 29% of all air pollution on the USA west coast San Fransisco bay area is actually from China. The only reason I bring this up is the western nations could shut down just about everything and unless China gets on the GWA it will all be for naught except to leave most western societies unemployed, broke and unindustrialized.

Quite a pickle we have on our hands and IMO no amount of carbon tax scheme is going to fix the problem unless everyone agrees to play.




posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 06:27 AM
link   
a reply to: mc_squared

Earth will be fine..... humans will not, or.... the human bodies will not.

But this is all fine, it's just like it's supposed to be. This was going to be the outcome no matter how we look at it. The only thing we could never tell was when it is going to happen.

What makes us different from all the previous extinctions is that we think we are more than we are.

The time the human body has existed in a somewhat thinking way on Earth is only 0.0000025% of the total amount of time that Earth has existed.
Let's make that a more tangible comparison:

A cafe just opened... 30 days go by, and a customer appears, spends 3 seconds in the cafe then complains about the place, while stating how important he is to the cafe.


Tell me again, why are we important?

Earth will be fine, all is well. The human bodies are not.
edit on 19/11/15 by flice because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 06:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: 727Sky

Did you guys (Gals) know that China burns almost as much coal as the rest of the world combined ? 66% of their energy comes from coal. It is so bad that about 29% of all air pollution on the USA west coast San Fransisco bay area is actually from China. The only reason I bring this up is the western nations could shut down just about everything and unless China gets on the GWA it will all be for naught except to leave most western societies unemployed, broke and unindustrialized.


The vast majority of that energy is for their factories that manufacture goods that we buy. It's western consumerism that is driving this.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 06:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: flice

Earth will be fine, all is well. The human bodies are not.

Whoa that's a new one. mc-squared you need to add this to the list of excuses in your OP! Good grief condemning all humans to extintion because some of us are ignorant....you must be hoot at parties.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: mc_squared

So when we have a cooler than average month, will that signal a pause in warming? Will we be able to post threads claiming that warming has been slowed? Or would you come out and claim that ONE month doesn't mean anything in the big picture?

I can't wait for La Nina. We will all be saved!

(and before you get your panties in a wad, I believe it's warming, I am just not intelligent enough to know how much is man's fault and how much is a normal cycle.)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Well yes it does work like that. You see we have a trend of year after year of it being in the top ten all time hottest years, with many breaking all time heat records.
2014 Officially Hottest Year on Record
NOAA: 2013 Was Tied For The Fourth-Hottest Year On Record
NOAA: 2012 Hottest & 2nd-Most Extreme Year On Record
2011 Was Ninth Warmest Year in Decades, NASA Finds
NOAA: 2010 Tied For Warmest Year on Record
2009: Second Warmest Year on Record; End of Warmest Decade
NOAA: 2008 Global Temperature Ties as Eighth Warmest on Record
2007 Was Tied as Earth's Second-Warmest Year
2006 Was Earth's Fifth Warmest Year
2005 was the warmest year on record

So you are going to have to produce QUITE a bit longer of a period of time than just a month of cooling to establish a trend of cooling. Going by averages alone, you don't have a chance. I just stopped at 2005. I could keep googling earlier and earlier years.

2015 Likely to Be Hottest Year Ever Recorded

You may want to start collecting data in 2016 though.
edit on 19-11-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well then, I am glad to know that we are looking at weeks and months instead of long term data now. We will have a better chance of cooling. (since winter is coming to the northern hemisphere)

I'll be watching when La Nina hits. Who knows, maybe the warming will slow down a bit.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Yawn.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
I just don't believe it, there is snow already in Scotland, UK., most of my veg struggled to grow, both polar ices are growing, the 'consensus' has dropped to 42%, NOAA cannot make up its mind just what the weather is doing, or not doing, or might be doing. For those who want to know, I get daily updates into my inbox, and 'Google is my friend'.




top topics



 
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join