"Global Warming", Ha Ha, tell me another good joke!

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Phage

2012 was one of the 10 warmest years on record globally (from the NOAA web site)

Warm temperature trends continue near Earth’s surface: Four major independent datasets show 2012 was among the 10 warmest years on record, ranking either 8th or 9th, depending upon the dataset used. The United States and Argentina had their warmest year on record.

www.noaanews.noaa.gov...

Yes, I know. And it was the warmest in the US. Like I said here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



Tell me, are you still claiming that 1936 was the warmest year (in the US or globally)? It wasn't. 2012 was the warmest year in the US. 2015 was the warmest year globally.

a reply to: Greven
I am finding evidence of at least 114 models so far.... Interesting, on a percentage basis, 97 out of 100 were wrong.

The IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report asserted "...very high confidence that models reproduce the general features of the global-scale annual mean surface temperature increase over the historical period." However, the report also observed that the rate of warming over the period 1998-2012 was lower than that predicted by 111 out of 114 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project climate models.

a reply to: D8Tee

Interesting, on a percentage basis, 97 out of 100 were wrong.

No. They weren't.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Phage
Did the satellite data sets and sea surface data sets all have to be revised in order to get back on track?
How much is the warming trend now?
Is it something we should fear?

a reply to: D8Tee
Satellite air temperature data has always been problematic because of the way it is derived, they don't lower thermometers into the atmosphere. It doesn't jibe with in situ measurements (surface, balloons) well. Also, they are not all that useful for lower tropospheric data. They also only go back to 1979. But they are not incorporated with from directly observed instrumentation in global temperature models anyway, they are considered separately.

The adjustments to historical sea surface temperatures correlate well between instrument sets. Will they be further refined? Maybe.

The adjustments didn't change the overall trend much (from 0.65º to 0.68º per century, since 1880) but it did pretty much do away with that "pause."

Is it something we should fear?

It depends on where you live, I suppose. If you are in a coastal region, you should be concerned. And if you care about anyone but yourself.

a reply to: Phage

It depends on where you live, I suppose. If you are in a coastal region, you should be concerned. And if you care about anyone but yourself.

Any idea what the hypothetical time frame is for any real change ? The ocean hasn't risen a great deal in the last 30 years or so from what i can tell living on the coast...

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

The ocean hasn't risen a great deal in the last 30 years or so from what i can tell living on the coast...

It depends upon where you live. Some places are seeing a more rapid change than others but the overall trend is up. I've been living on a bay (right on a bay, my property line on one side is a seawall) continuously for the past twenty years. The same bay I grew up on, so I've been here for more than 60 years.

In the past 3 or 4 years I have seen a dramatic change. Low tides are higher and high tides are higher than I have ever seen. A portion of my yard (behind my seawall) has disappeared because the seawall is inundated far more frequently than it ever was before. The grass in a higher section of my yard has died from seawater exposure. While it would occasionally happen, it would grow back. It hasn't grown back in three years now.

This is not coastal erosion. This is higher water. There is a sea level station on my bay. The recorded sea levels are consistently higher than the predicted levels. I pay attention to this because I am a boater. Now, there has been a "dome" of warm water which has been persisting in my part of the ocean and this is the primary cause of what I've observed but it is a spike in the trend. Just as the last El Nino (and previous El Ninos) show as spikes in the warming trend.


tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov...

a reply to: Phage

for that...

While i have observed some really high tides, the coastline here is much the same, there is a guy in his 90s i chat at the beach most days and when i queried him on the high tides that to me seemed unusually high, he told me he had seen tides much higher 40 years ago and according to him not there has been no real encroachment over the last 70 years to his knowledge....

So if some places are showing spikes in warming and higher recorded sea levels it is possible it is cyclical, and as an example the waters levels where you are may drop in the next decade or so ?

a reply to: Phage

Can you build the wall higher? Looks like you will have to contend with about 3 mm a year, would that be right?

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Transient tides can vary quite a bit, they are dependant on a number of factors (wind, atmospheric pressure, currents). It's when they are consistently high (over several years) that it attracts attention. Mine anyway.

So if some places are showing spikes in warming and higher recorded sea levels it is possible it is cyclical, and as an example the waters levels where you are may drop in the next decade or so ?

The trend (tide records) where I live goes back more than 100 years.

a reply to: D8Tee

I could build the wall higher. If I can get the required permits. But the cost would be pretty high. But my property slopes to the water so there is no immediate threat to my home. And, unlike many places, rising sea levels pose no threat to my fresh water supply.

I'm not concerned about myself. I was talking about my observations.

a reply to: Phage

Fair enough, hard to argue with records that go back that far...time will tell i suppose ..

a reply to: Phage

Why is it that some places along the West Coast are going up, and some are going down?

Neah Bay, WA
9443090
The mean sea level trend is -1.73 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.31 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1934 to 2015 which is equivalent to a change of -0.57 feet in 100 years.

Hammond, OR
9439011
The mean sea level trend is -1.22 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 1.81 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1983 to 2014 which is equivalent to a change of -0.40 feet in 100 years.

Toke Point, WA
9440910
The mean sea level trend is 0.4 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.98 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1973 to 2015 which is equivalent to a change of 0.13 feet in 100 years.

North Spit, CA
9418767
The mean sea level trend is 4.6 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 1.06 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1977 to 2015 which is equivalent to a change of 1.51 feet in 100 years.

tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov...

a reply to: D8Tee

Because, not only is sea level actually rising, in some places the land is subsiding and in some places the land is rising.

Here's a primer.
tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov...

a reply to: Phage
I'll read that link in the morning. I hope it does not tell me that sea levels are only measured relative to the land it is beside. We all know that land is going to rise or fall as it's geological driver dictates. What, a place like Long Beach that experienced a huge land subsidence issue in years past shows that the sea itself was actually rising?

www.longbeach.gov...

a reply to: searcherfortruth>>>> Yeah, its been really cold here in the USA the past week and apparently cold over in Europe as well. But its winter and its supposed to be cold. I remember nights when it got down to 10 or 15 below here in Pa for a week. I admit I don't buy into Global Warming. They tried to hard to get people to believe it and then got frustrated and tried to punish those that didn't. Fake News, Fake Science. That's what we've been getting now from our own government and MSM. I liked to go to a website "Cryosphere Today" to look at polar ice caps. Its been offline the last few days, maybe longer. I don't buy into what they say about the ice melt or temps. If there's somebody else to record data it always shows a discrepancy. Same with Hurricanes.

Here is something to think about... What do they keep saying is the cause of Global Warming? Carbon Dioxide emissions. So, if green things use Carbon Dioxide as a main source of energy, which allows them to thrive, which would in turn consume carbon dioxide and release oxygen, wouldn't this be good for the entire planet?

a reply to: searcherfortruth

Hi Searchfortruth,

The politically correct buzzword is or was man-made global warming.

Al [the buffoon] Gore, winner of the [devalued] noble peace prize, only blames US citizens.
Never mind that Communist China formally admitted they produce the most air pollution.

Even so, the points you so well articulated, are way ahead of anything else that should be construed as speculation.

IF, the earth's oxygen percentage is going to be reduced by man, then all fingers need to point straight to Brazil, and their out of control destruction of the Amazon Jungle.

So, is Al [the buffoon] Gore gonna "save us," and go to Brazil and brow-beat em to stop the destruction? hell No. He'll blame US citizens for any oxygen percentage reduction caused by Brazil.

Remember, the "esteemed" Al Gore predicted total melting of the arctic ice cap by 2012.

a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

One volcano going off does more then all man has done in 100 years or more.

Mt sT HELLEAN
The Iceland one a few years ago.

And a number more that I haven't track all cause more CO2 then all the cars in history

a reply to: Painterz

You mean the same 99% that can't tell us the correct temp more then a day out?

When they can predict the temp for a whole week correctly MAYBE I will think about their long term predictions.