Antarctic base records hottest temperature ever

[rooster59]

Antarctic base records hottest temperature ever

 

People walk along Orne Harbour, Antarctica, February 6, 2020. Picture taken February 6, 2020. Reuters/Ueslei Marcelino

 

GENEVA/BUENOS AIRES (Reuters) - A research base in the Antarctic has recorded the hottest temperature ever for the continent amid rising concern about global warming that has caused an increase in the melting of ice sheets around the south pole.

 

The Esperanza base on the northern tip of the Antarctic peninsula recorded a temperature of 18.3 degrees Celsius (64.94 degrees Fahrenheit), the highest on record, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said on Friday.

 

"(This) is not a figure you would normally associate with Antarctica even in the summertime. This beat the former record of 17.5 degrees C, which was set back in 2015," WMO spokeswoman Clare Nullis told reporters in Geneva.

 

"The Antarctic peninsula ... is among the fastest warming regions of the planet. We hear a lot about the Arctic, but this particular part of the Antarctic peninsula is warming very quickly."

 

The temperature was recorded at the Argentine base on Thursday.

 

Scientists believe global warming has caused so much melting at the south pole that the giant ice sheet is now on course to disintegrate. This would see an eventual global sea level rise of at least three meters (10 feet) over centuries.

 

A WMO committee will verify whether the temperature logged by Argentina's national meteorological service is a new record for the Antarctic continent. The record in the wider Antarctic region is 19.8 degrees C in January 1982.

 

"The amount of ice lost annually from the Antarctic ice sheet increased at least six-fold between 1979 and 2017," Nullis added, citing images showing cracks in glaciers in Antarctica.

 

"The melting from these glaciers, you know, means we are in big trouble when it comes to sea level rise."

 

(Reporting by Marina Depetris in Geneva and Adam Jourdan in Buenos Aires; Editing by Janet Lawrence)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-02-08

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Tug]

Wow that is warm

[bristolboy]

And then there's this:

Huge Cavity in Antarctic Glacier Signals Rapid Decay

Researchers expected to find some gaps between ice and bedrock at Thwaites' bottom where ocean water could flow in and melt the glacier from below. The size and explosive growth rate of the newfound hole, however, surprised them. It's big enough to have contained 14 billion tons of ice, and most of that ice melted over the last three years.

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=7322

[Crazy Alex]

Hottest temperature ever recorded. OK. How long have we been recording temperatures? About 200 years? How much of Earth's timeline is 200 years? 0.000004%.

 

Ergo, "hottest temperature ever recorded" isn't very impressive at all.

 

This is a good time to present some more rational information to rebut the hysteria climate change pimps are trying to sell:

 

 

As you can see, there have been at least three spikes in global temperatures in the last 350,000 years alone that went higher than the current spike, which has gone on for thousands of years. As you can also see, the last temperature spike, about 120,000 years ago, had a faster rise. Earth's temperatures went down all by themselves: no corporate welfare, no accumulation of power to government, no Elon Musk, no windmills, no human intervention whatsoever.

 

All in all, this latest "news" is just another yawn fest.

[nausea]

Manmade or natural, who cares, hopefully I'll be dead before this hits, pity you guys with kids, they're gonna feel the full force.

[khwaibah]

Spent 16 months straight months at McMurdo Station Antartica 1990 to 1992. Thanksgiving day of 1990 & 1991 temp topped out at 40F. While there I saw it down to -80f. 

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Hottest temperature ever recorded. OK. How long have we been recording temperatures? About 200 years? How much of Earth's timeline is 200 years? 0.000004%.

 

Ergo, "hottest temperature ever recorded" isn't very impressive at all.

 

This is a good time to present some more rational information to rebut the hysteria climate change pimps are trying to sell:

 

 

As you can see, there have been at least three spikes in global temperatures in the last 350,000 years alone that went higher than the current spike, which has gone on for thousands of years. As you can also see, the last temperature spike, about 120,000 years ago, had a faster rise. Earth's temperatures went down all by themselves: no corporate welfare, no accumulation of power to government, no Elon Musk, no windmills, no human intervention whatsoever.

 

All in all, this latest "news" is just another yawn fest.

Typical of denialists, you fail to include a link to your image. Well, here's a link.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming

From NASA. You could read it and educate yourself.

 

What you don't note is that the graph you are using stops around the year 2000. It's 20 years on now. And the NASA page was done in 2010. There's been quite a bit of warming since then too. Including  most of the hottest years on record 

Furthermore that graph comes from a paper that ties those changes in temperature to changes in the earth's orientation to the sun. 

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Typical of denialists, you fail to include a link to your image. Well, here's a link.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming

From NASA. You could read it and educate yourself.

 

What you don't note is that the graph you are using stops around the year 2000. It's 20 years on now. And the NASA page was done in 2010. There's been quite a bit of warming since then too. Including  most of the hottest years on record 

Furthermore that graph comes from a paper that ties those changes in temperature to changes in the earth's orientation to the sun. 

It's interesting and revealing that the comment in the linked article, right below that graph, states:
"But the paleoclimate record also reveals that the current climatic warming is occurring much more rapidly than past warming events", yet the graph shows the opposite, with a number of lines from cooling to warming, in the past, that are more vertical than the final vertical line representing the current warming.

 

After engaging in many discussions with 'climate change alarmists', it's beginning to become clear to me that there is no purpose served in convincing them of the uncertainty about mankind's contribution to the current warming and the uncertainty as to whether or not such warming will have a net bad effect or a net good effect, over all, for our continuing prosperity.

 

Uncertainty is not tolerable, politically and economically. Progress requires a degree of certainty or confidence that one is right. You don't buy shares in a company if you are not confident they will rise in value. A company doesn't spend billions of dollars on a project if it is not confident the project will be successful and eventually produce a profit.

 

The political message that we can control the climate by reducing our CO2 emissions, provides a degree of hope for the future and helps to avoid a widespread panic that could result if the true degree of scientific uncertainty on the issue were to become the main political focus.
The benefits of the transition to renewable energy sources are not only an atmosphere with cleaner air, free of the harmful pollutants that affect human health, but the creation of greater sources and reserves of energy in general. The energy from the sun is effectively limitless, and energy supplies are the fundamental building block for all human prosperity.

 

However, the negative aspect of focusing on the reduction of CO2 emissions as a solution to a changing climate, is the fewer resources that will be directed towards protecting citizens from the natural extreme weather events that we know have occurred in the past, before the industrial revolution, and which are likely to recur in the future, regardless of CO2 levels.

 

Of particular concern to me as an Australia, is the history of Australian droughts. Proxy records from Ice Core drilling in the Antarctic have revealed a 1,000 year history of droughts in Australia. According to these proxy records, the worst droughts occurred during the previous warm period, known as the Medieval Warm Period. One such drought was 39 years in duration. That could happen again, regardless of CO2 emissions.

 

Combined with an eastern Australian rainfall proxy from Law Dome, the first millennial‐length Australian megadrought (>5 year duration) reconstruction is presented. Eight megadroughts are identified including one 39 year drought (A.D. 1174–1212), which occurred during an unprecedented century of aridity (A.D. 1102–1212).

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2014GL062447
 

[natway09]

Thank you ,,, some of the contributions on here make interesting reading.

To me, a far greater threat to mankind looms & yes maybe linked. I have a great concern

about sustainable, long term potable water, as without mankind is doomed

[RickBradford]

8 hours ago, nausea said:

Manmade or natural, who cares, hopefully I'll be dead before this hits, pity you guys with kids, they're gonna feel the full force.

They sure are.

 

Ludicrously high electricity prices, frequent power blackouts and unreliable energy supply, higher taxes, higher plane ticket prices, higher prices for food and all other goods because of more expensive energy, more intrusive regulation, plus the worst of all - incessant moral hectoring from the successors to Greta Thunberg's brand of petulant woke ranting.

 

The Green movement has become the Greed movement, with barely a ripple to mark the changeover.

Edited February 8, 2020 by RickBradford

[IAMHERE]

Tell me about global warming when the wine industry in Britain is back to the level the Romans had when they were there.

[Eric Loh]

8 hours ago, rooster59 said:

. This would see an eventual global sea level rise of at least three meters (10 feet) over centuries.

Still time for Thailand government to move Bangkok to Issan. 

[Grumpy John]

In my lifetime living in Australia I have seen a number of droughts and the outcome is  always the  same,  it rains and everything is good Again.....till the next drought! Back in 1937, or there about,  a plan was mooted to build a couple of dams in North Qld that would store ample water to see us through the  worst drought.   Of course nothing was done because the politicians of yesteryear were as inept or corrupt as the useless fools of today. 

[jany123]

1 hour ago, IAMHERE said:

Tell me about global warming when the wine industry in Britain is back to the level the Romans had when they were there.

Relevance?

 

english wine of the day was supposedly a nasty swill, liberally sweetened with honey to make it drinkable, when water was a dangerous alternative.... and the production rate was very low

 

Never the less, England continued to produce wines, right up until the king removed tariffs on wines in the 1800’s, making it commercially unviable to compete with French wines

 

that said, current wine production in England, with vastly improved farming techniques, produces a reasonable wine which is both drinkable and produced in greater quantities than 2000 years ago

 

so, I’m thinking it’s time you accepted global warming, or at least talking about it sensibly... in line with your comment attached

[jany123]

10 hours ago, rooster59 said:

This would see an eventual global sea level rise of at least three meters (10 feet) over centuries.

Stupid blurry comment.... how am I supposed to use that to calculate when my property will have beach front appeal?

[GreasyFingers]

12 hours ago, rooster59 said:

"The amount of ice lost annually from the Antarctic ice sheet increased at least six-fold between 1979 and 2017," Nullis added, citing images showing cracks in glaciers in Antarctica.

 

"The melting from these glaciers, you know, means we are in big trouble when it comes to sea level rise."

So why have the oceans not risen already, particularly when the Arctic ice is also down 40% at times.

[Crazy Alex]

12 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Typical of denialists, you fail to include a link to your image. Well, here's a link.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming

From NASA. You could read it and educate yourself.

 

What you don't note is that the graph you are using stops around the year 2000. It's 20 years on now. And the NASA page was done in 2010. There's been quite a bit of warming since then too. Including  most of the hottest years on record 

Furthermore that graph comes from a paper that ties those changes in temperature to changes in the earth's orientation to the sun. 

1) Specifically, what am I denying? Oh and of course, name-calling means you know you're debating from a losing position. While I already knew that, thanks for tipping your hand.

2) Do you have a more current chart? If so, feel free to post it.

3) I've already gone over the "hottest years on record" nonsense. Hottest temps among .000004% of Earth's timeline remains unimpressive to rational people.

4) Specifically, how does the chart being related to another change how we should look at the chart I posted?

Edited February 8, 2020 by Crazy Alex

[Scott]

Troll post removed.

 

[Dumbastheycome]

15 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Hottest temperature ever recorded. OK. How long have we been recording temperatures? About 200 years? How much of Earth's timeline is 200 years? 0.000004%.

 

Ergo, "hottest temperature ever recorded" isn't very impressive at all.

 

This is a good time to present some more rational information to rebut the hysteria climate change pimps are trying to sell:

 

 

As you can see, there have been at least three spikes in global temperatures in the last 350,000 years alone that went higher than the current spike, which has gone on for thousands of years. As you can also see, the last temperature spike, about 120,000 years ago, had a faster rise. Earth's temperatures went down all by themselves: no corporate welfare, no accumulation of power to government, no Elon Musk, no windmills, no human intervention whatsoever.

 

All in all, this latest "news" is just another yawn fest.

You ignore the  fact we  are not   fargin  amphibious  by  nature !

[thaicurious]

On 2/7/2020 at 6:47 PM, Crazy Alex said:

Hottest temperature ever recorded. OK. How long have we been recording temperatures? About 200 years? How much of Earth's timeline is 200 years? 0.000004%.

 

Ergo, "hottest temperature ever recorded" isn't very impressive at all.

 

This is a good time to present some more rational information...

https://skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm

...Greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes. This time around humans are the cause, mainly by our CO2 emissions...

 

Climate Myth...

Climate's changed before
Climate is always changing.

 

...So yes, the climate has changed before humans, and in most cases scientists know why. In all cases we see the same association between CO2 levels and global temperatures. And past examples of rapid carbon emissions (just like today) were generally highly destructive to life on Earth....

 

 

 

Edited February 9, 2020 by thaicurious

[saengd]

On 2/8/2020 at 6:47 AM, Crazy Alex said:

Hottest temperature ever recorded. OK. How long have we been recording temperatures? About 200 years? How much of Earth's timeline is 200 years? 0.000004%.

 

Ergo, "hottest temperature ever recorded" isn't very impressive at all.

 

This is a good time to present some more rational information to rebut the hysteria climate change pimps are trying to sell:

 

 

As you can see, there have been at least three spikes in global temperatures in the last 350,000 years alone that went higher than the current spike, which has gone on for thousands of years. As you can also see, the last temperature spike, about 120,000 years ago, had a faster rise. Earth's temperatures went down all by themselves: no corporate welfare, no accumulation of power to government, no Elon Musk, no windmills, no human intervention whatsoever.

 

All in all, this latest "news" is just another yawn fest.

"As you can also see, the last temperature spike, about 120,000 years ago, had a faster rise. Earth's temperatures went down all by themselves: no corporate welfare, no accumulation of power to government, no Elon Musk, no windmills, no human intervention whatsoever".

 

The global population today is about 7.8 billion, 200,000 years ago it was how many would you guess, a few hundred creatures perhaps that vaguely resembled man today? Those things being true, what I wonder was the impact on those creatures was as a result of that prior temperature change that you imply was actually OK, versus what will it the impact be on today's vastly overcrowded population? Is the death of even 1% of 7.8 billion still a yawn fest for you, what about 10%, is that still too boring? What percentage of that 7.8 billion has to die before people like you change your attitude from the subject being boring, to one that makes you actually do something such as trying to prevent it from happening rather than spending all your time trying to convince everyone that the science is phony and that actually everything is OK?

[jcsmith]

On 2/8/2020 at 6:47 AM, Crazy Alex said:

As you can see, there have been at least three spikes in global temperatures in the last 350,000 years alone that went higher than the current spike, which has gone on for thousands of years. As you can also see, the last temperature spike, about 120,000 years ago, had a faster rise. Earth's temperatures went down all by themselves: no corporate welfare, no accumulation of power to government, no Elon Musk, no windmills, no human intervention whatsoever.

 

All in all, this latest "news" is just another yawn fest.

You can bury your head in the sand if you want Alex. But we are certainly contributing to the increase of CO2, that is undeniable.

 

Ice ages are certainly cyclic but what does that matter? We are accelerating the progress of something that will be catastrophic to ourselves. Of course the people contributing the most to this are going to try to put out information that minimizes the blame to themselves. But that doesn't mean you have to buy into it. Even if they had minimal effect on this and science is wrong here, it wouldn't matter because it's undeniable that the planet is warming. It's undeniable that it is going to cause major problems to our way of life in the future. I can't say it is undeniable that man is accelerating the process because people (you for instance) will argue against it. But all of the scientific evidence points to it. 
 

What is alarming is the rate at which it is accelerating. If you look at this graph its pretty hard to say that we are not contributing. 
 

[pkspeaker]

Antarctica actually recorded its coldest temp ever, 3 times in the last few years, 

 

I would like to see exactly where they took this temp to make sure they didn't fake it, high temps can be faked by taking them near human activity, low temps cannot .  i have seen on the skeptic blogs that actually alot of these record high temps turned out to be faked by placing a thermometer near a parking lot on a sunny day.. There was a record high taken in France this last summer, it turned out the thermometer was places 2 feet above a red bricked roof.

[pkspeaker]

1 hour ago, thaicurious said:

And past examples of rapid carbon emissions (just like today) were generally highly destructive to life on Earth....

Ahuh and what exactly was the past example ofrapid carbon emisions?  Hmm..lemme take a guess... could it be.. MASSIVE VOLCANIC EXPLOSION(s) ?  So when there is a VEI 7 volcano withthe explosive force of 20000 hiroshima bombs, itts actually the carbon dioxide that was highly destructive.

[thaicurious]

19 minutes ago, pkspeaker said:

I would like to see exactly where they took this temp to make sure they didn't fake it,

From the surface of an asphalt paved parking lot in the middle of congested downtown Esperanza, apparently.

 

Hope this satisfies your considered inquiry.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/08/climate/antarctica-record-temperature.html

 

"Esperanza, Argentina’s research station on the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula, reached 64.9 degrees Fahrenheit, or 18.2 degrees Celsius, breaking the previous record of 63.5 degrees set on March 24, 2015, according to Argentina’s National Meteorological Service. The station has been recording temperatures since 1961."

 

[pkspeaker]

On 2/8/2020 at 7:15 AM, bristolboy said:

There's been quite a bit of warming since then too. Including  most of the hottest years on record 

Hottest years on record are all fake, using the UStemp record every year in the 1930's was hotter than any recent year, by alot.. To make the US temp chart show a warming trend from the 1930's, the noaa, nasa.giss, etc. had to go back and adjust the 1930's data down.. most of the rest of the world has noreliable data but places do showed a similar trend down from the 30's to the 70's  that brings us to 1989:

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/26/us/us-data-since-1895-fail-to-show-warming-trend.html

 

'Melting ice' is also entirely fake, in both antarctica and greenland- there is more ice freezing than there is melting.  The 'melting ice' is actually the ice calving into the ocean, that is simply the glaciers flowing into the water, they always do that, other wise the ice would just pileup until its in space.

[saengd]

7 minutes ago, pkspeaker said:

Hottest years on record are all fake, using the UStemp record every year in the 1930's was hotter than any recent year, by alot.. To make the US temp chart show a warming trend from the 1930's, the noaa, nasa.giss, etc. had to go back and adjust the 1930's data down.. most of the rest of the world has noreliable data but places do showed a similar trend down from the 30's to the 70's  that brings us to 1989:

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/26/us/us-data-since-1895-fail-to-show-warming-trend.html

 

'Melting ice' is also entirely fake, in both antarctica and greenland- there is more ice freezing than there is melting.  The 'melting ice' is actually the ice calving into the ocean, that is simply the glaciers flowing into the water, they always do that, other wise the ice would just pileup until its in space.

Whatever are we doing wasting our money and effort on all these over educated scientists trying to figure all this out when you're sat here and have all the answers, whatever were we thinking!

[thaicurious]

2 hours ago, thaicurious said:

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, pkspeaker said:

Ahuh and what exactly was the past example ofrapid carbon emisions?  Hmm..lemme take a guess... could it be.. MASSIVE VOLCANIC EXPLOSION(s) ?  So when there is a VEI 7 volcano withthe explosive force of 20000 hiroshima bombs, itts actually the carbon dioxide that was highly destructive.

Had only you put in the effort simply to play the youtube already provided.

 

Here, let me provide you with the transcript. Or, if only you'd bother to listen to a youtube, I could do a transcript and then read it to you on a youtube for you. Then you wouldn't have to do anything for yourself to learn anything. Better?

 

at 2:59 "...volcanos release a tiny fraction of greenhouse gases...and the greenhouse gases they do emit have a different chemical composition than the gases produced by the burning of fossil fuels."

 

So, again, the problem is human caused.

[pkspeaker]

What is the example of past rapid co2 emisions if its not volcano?  

What is the 'different chemical composition' and why is that bad... what is so bad about it because after 40 years of this global warming nonsense.. its obviously not too much warming.. if temps have risen so much in the last 30 years, then why isthere more snow now?

Edited February 9, 2020 by pkspeaker

[thaicurious]

3 hours ago, pkspeaker said:

What is the example of past rapid co2 emissions if its not volcano?  

What is the 'different chemical composition' and why is that bad... what is so bad about it because after 40 years of this global warming nonsense.. its obviously not too much warming.. if temps have risen so much in the last 30 years, then why is there more snow now?

Again I refer you back to the youtube posted where is explained not that "different chemical composition ... is that bad" (as either can be bad) but rather that the different composition indicates, like a fingerprint, human cause.

 

As to "rapid", you need to view this from a geographical view. From the beginning of the industrial revolution to now is just as rapid as a volcano explosion with regard to the age of the planet, though from your viewpoint one seems much more rapid than the other. 

 

The video describes your line of reasoning as saying that just because people die of natural causes anyway, then evidence of murder means nothing. Isn't that, coincidentally, what the Thai soldier/mass shooter just ranted, that people die anyway. The harm isn't that people die anyway, that's life; the harm is that he snuffed out the lives of innocent others.

 

It isn't that the globe might warm or cool in its own time anyway as it does; the harm is that we are responsible not just for heating it, but at a rate that evolution might not be able to contend with. That animals might be able to relocate or otherwise adapt with the changing environment, etc. So all the pending deaths and the hardships of humans and animals and environments as a consequence of our actions are our fault and thereby our responsibility to try and fix absolutely or best mitigate.

 

As to why there might be more or less snow at any individual segment of time has not to do with overall temp trend but with that cycles are made extreme by the overall warming trend. This has to do with the oscillation of the jet stream altered as a result of the warming. We know the overall warming trend by temperatures measured over time, not just by segments of time. We know the cause because the trends match the trend of carbon outputs since the industrial revolution. We know also the trends of the temps by the ice melting. We know the ice melting and the seas heating/expanding because we can measure both ice melt directly and because we can measure sea levels over time. If you've lived 20 or 40 years in a waterfront community, you don't even have to measure; you can see it at a glance every day. Seawalls no longer high enough. Docks built long ago now too low. Never mind islands disappearing. More snow every now and then doesn't stop that. But reducing carbon might.

Please review Denial 101 youtubes for your further information. they are easily found. Here is week 1 for your study.

 

 

ooops, that was just the intro. here, i think this is the week 1

 

Denial 101 is a project of https://skepticalscience.com/

 

Here's who they are:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeptical_Science

Skeptical Science (occasionally abbreviated SkS) is a climate science blog and information resource created in 2007 by Australian cognitive scientist John Cook.

Edited February 9, 2020 by thaicurious