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.

 

Climate change: 2015 'shattered' global temperature record by wide margin

page: 5
17
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

They are broken because the modern collection of data is been used as comparison, nobody cares to analyzed the age of the planet and how many clima change earth had, including the last ice age that humans survived.

I find very disturbing the way the weather channel along with the government pushing into the population that information and comparisons in modern times, taking into consideration that most human life span is just a fraction compare to earth life, humans are the younger species in earth and we think we know everything about earth.




posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage



Roy Spencer does his own adjustments of data.


Why are you continually on about Roy Spencer, its John Christy that realeases the UAH satellite temperature dataset.



John Christy....

In a 2007 editorial in the Wall Street Journal, he wrote: "I'm sure the majority (but not all) of my IPCC colleagues cringe when I say this, but I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see

In 2014, Christy and his UAH colleague Richard McNider wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal in which they criticized climate models as making inaccurate predictions. He also dismissed the scientific consensus on global warming by arguing that there was a consensus about putrefaction causing scurvy, which was later acknowledged to be wrong.

link



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

nobody cares to analyzed the age of the planet and how many clima change earth had
Actually you are wrong. A great deal of research goes into it. The thing is, there is no way to determine exact numbers on temperatures before they were recorded.
www.ncdc.noaa.gov...



humans are the younger species in earth and we think we know everything about earth.
Hardly.
But that doesn't mean we don't know anything.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: glend




Why are you continually on about Roy Spencer, its John Christy that realeases the UAH satellite temperature dataset.

False. Once again.

Every month, John Christy and I update global temperature datasets that represent the piecing together of the temperature data from a total of fourteen instruments flying on different satellites over the years.
www.drroyspencer.com...

They are both at Huntsville.

edit on 1/23/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Phage I am not here to change your mind on what you believe in man made global warming, heck I read enough to know how earth has developed in the billions of years is been around, way before we humans have any impact on the environment, 75 million years ago, the artic was nothing but forest, and now we are finding that 45 thousand years ago it was inhabited, and livable, what that tells you.

Is an agenda that has trillions of dollars attached to it, scientist knows that earth is going to have a major change, but not different from the changes that earth had in the past, species comes and species die, is not humans the ones that are becoming an inconvenience to earth, is earth clima what's is becoming an inconvenience to the economic balance of the status quo today, so those that are going to lose the most if the clima starts to change are the ones that wants to be payback with global warming agendas from the rest of the citizens in this planet.

Earth will do what earth has done for billions of years with us humans or not.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Not false at all. That web page might have been correct when it was published but that does not mean that it is correct today.



The dataset is published by John Christy et al. and formerly jointly with Roy Spencer.
link




They are both at Huntsville.


And that is important why?



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043




Earth will do what earth has done for billions of years with us humans or not.

Sure. But I don't really care about what happened on Earth a billion years ago, outside of intellectual curiosity. Or what will happen in a billion years.

But to think that billions of human beings, dumping billions of tons of stuff into the air and water, have no effect is to put your head in the sand. Really deep.

So let's just keep doing it because...I don't why.
edit on 1/23/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

I am still baffled why you are convinced this is all an agenda to somehow hustle money out if us peons.(the oil/energy companies have been doing a good job of that for over a century now)

By claiming its an agenda worth billions you are making an emotional plea without using science and observations to back up your claim.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: glend


Not false at all. That web page might have been correct when it was published but that does not mean that it is correct today.
Hehe. So you take an unsourced wiki statement over the website which actually provides the data? Here's another wiki entry:

Since 1989 Christy, along with Roy Spencer, has maintained an atmospheric temperature record derived from satellite microwave sounding unit measurements, commonly called the "UAH" record (see also satellite temperature record).

en.wikipedia.org...


And that is important why?
Because they created the model together. Not NASA, Spencer and Christy.
www.drroyspencer.com...

edit on 1/23/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Because in the research I have done and posted the information in other threads, Oil and energy companies had invested the most money toward the global warming agenda, not to deflect from it, Interestingly they will be making a lot more money keeping the agenda going.

Yes it sounds crazy but heck in America if you have money you just have to make the most of it. That is why I don't trust those behind the global warming scaremongering add that to earth clima changes records base in the billions of years that earth is been around and it doesn't take a genius to know what is heading our way and what is been going on with information today, we as humans can survive an ice age with primitive tools and way of life, but heck in modern times everybody can not get their head out of their butts to figure out how to survive in a warming trend.


edit on 23-1-2016 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Damnations you got me on that one.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 07:50 PM
link   
In 2009 the world was alerted by the Moscow based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) that the Hadley Centre for Climate Change had cherry picked Russian climate data to show the globe warming (Link), By examining the worlds GHCN-v2 thermometer locations we can see cherry picking at its finest.




posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: glend

In 2009 the world was alerted by the Moscow based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) that the Hadley Centre for Climate Change had cherry picked Russian climate data to show the globe warming (Link), By examining the worlds GHCN-v2 thermometer locations we can see cherry picking at its finest.
We can? Can you explain where you see cherry picking?


GHCN-Monthly contains mean temperature data for 7,280 stations and maximum/minimum temperature data for 4,966 stations. All have at least 10 years of data.

www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

Is this "cherry picking?"
www.ncdc.noaa.gov...


Oh, about Russia:
www.techtimes.com...
I guess they should listen to their IEA instead. Or not.

edit on 1/23/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 05:10 AM
link   

That's just irradiance. It's only a small change, but it is there.

That may be true, but my issue was when you said to TOCF that there was "no surprise" and implied that the decrease in radiative forcing was expected because CO2 is subject to diminishing returns.


There's also global dimming to consider

Maybe so, but surely you also need to consider global brightening. There are a number of studies that claim to show a significant increase in global radiative forcing at the surface because of decreased cloud cover.


recall that scientists measured an increase of 0.2 W/m^2 from CO2 over a decade of outdoor measurement[/url]. We're beyond the talking point that CO2 doesn't cause forcing. That's long dead.

I think everyone agrees that CO2 has some effect. But if those measurements of back-radiation from 22 ppmv are correct then the IPCC's logarithmic equation would overestimate CO2's forcing by a factor 1.55.
edit on 24-1-2016 by Nathan-D because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The southern hemisphere is always cooler than the northern hemisphere because it has less land mass

that has nothing to do with the global nature of the MWP. The southern hemisphere is cooler today than the northern hemisphere. Does that mean that current global warming is NOT global in nature and merely a regional artifact.

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Jan, 25 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks
Because temperatures in both the northern and southern hemisphere are rising, it does indeed indicate that it is a global phenomenon.

Because the global average sea surface temperatures are higher than they have been in the past 10,000 years, it does indeed indicate that the current warming is global and quite different from anything that has occurred during that period.

Because OHC is increasing faster than it has in the past 10,000 years, it does indeed indicate that there is something quite different going on.


Have you read the paper yet? www.abovetopsecret.com...


edit on 1/25/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Thank you for the paper - I will read and digest. Right now I am busy painting my living room.

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk




Oh come on!!!
The earth has been here for billions of years, how many times was it MUCH warmer than it is now?
To say that its shattered global temperatures is just ridiculous


i second that. We are jus ta blip on the radar compared to the life span of the earth. The earth will always be fine. Its the people that are screwed. Besides there is lots of threads on here showing the "Raw data" being manipulated.

Global warming = Global tax increase - that is all



posted on Feb, 1 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328



The earth has been here for billions of years, how many times was it MUCH warmer than it is now?


When it was hotter was mostly when the continents were all centered around the equator and there were no ice caps. You can't compare climate then to now.

We had two weeks of 100 degrees here in Washington state last summer which was unheard of, and our January is about ten degrees above normal, so I can see climate change happening.


So "hot" was somehow "not hot" then, but it is now, because of the arrangement of the continents?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: lSkrewloosel
a reply to: VoidHawk




Oh come on!!!
The earth has been here for billions of years, how many times was it MUCH warmer than it is now?
To say that its shattered global temperatures is just ridiculous
i second that. We are jus ta blip on the radar compared to the life span of the earth. The earth will always be fine. Its the people that are screwed. Besides there is lots of threads on here showing the "Raw data" being manipulated.

Global warming = Global tax increase - that is all

So what. Are you so dead set against taxes that you would rather have the same air quality as China?
I have never understood why so many feel it is important to continue to pollute unabated. I don't know if a carbon tax will make any difference but there is no question that we cannot continue to burn oil and coal at the ever increasing rate in which we do.
edit on 2/2/2016 by Devino because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
17
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join