Climate change: July set to be world's warmest month on record

[bignok]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Because you refuse to retract your false statement. A simple apology will suffice and I'll pretend it never happened.

Socialists never apologise. I learnt that years ago. 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

I have provided evidence to the most important point. That any change is being dwarfed by our ability to handle it. Hence climate related deaths falling so dramatically.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-activists-disasters-fire-storms-deaths-change-cop26-glasgow-global-warming-11635973538

 

 

Of course, facts like these do nothing to push through your socialist agenda. 

Whatever "activisists" may allegedly say, and what could be more vague than the term "activists", I only care about what scientists and other researchers say. What you have offered here is just a typical "straw man"

argument.

And it's clear you have no salient counterargument to my  explicit rebuttal that pointed out why the reduction in deaths is irrelevant to the issue of climate change..

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, bignok said:

Not everyone. All the socialists just copy each other. No independent thought. Tigers? Yeah cc they say. No mention of poaching sums up their thinking. No actual research into fires. Just sheep.

It's because they share the same end game.

 

Big state control. High taxation (redistribution of wealth) under the guise of green taxes. Diminishing rights for citizens. 

 

Climate alarmism is a wonderful tool for all 3. It's no coinicidence that members of the doomsday cult are always left wing.

[JonnyF]

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

And it's clear you have no salient counterargument to my  explicit rebuttal that pointed out why the reduction in deaths is irrelevant to the issue of climate change..

I'd agree on that. 

 

It has nothing to do with reduction of deaths. The aim of the climate alarmists is the relentless push of the socialist agenda.

[JonnyF]

18 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Really? Can you provide any objective evidence to support your claim that everyone has seen through the charade? 

At least you're acknowledging it's a charade now.

 

One step at a time.

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I'd agree on that. 

 

It has nothing to do with reduction of deaths. The aim of the climate alarmists is the relentless push of the socialist agenda.

Nice try. It has nothing to do with the reduction of deaths from natural disasters. Reduction of deaths is a different matter.

And once again you make a conspiracy allegation. You've got nothing.

[Lucky Bones]

33 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Someone else who confuses weather with climate.

By the numbers: Australia’s climate has warmed by an average of 1.47 degrees Celsius (2.6 degrees Fahrenheit) since national records began in 1910, per the report.

• Sea surface temperatures have increased by an average of almost 1.89°F since 1900, which has led to an increase in the frequency of extreme heat events over land and sea, according to the report.

https://www.axios.com/2022/11/24/australia-climate-report-extreme-weather

 

I stuck my head out the window this morning.

It was damn cold when it wasn't supposed to be cold.

Fact. Not science.????????

[placeholder]

Just now, Lucky Bones said:

I stuck my head out the window this morning.

It was damn cold when it wasn't supposed to be cold.

Fact. Not science.????????

Did the weather report say it wasn't going to be cold? Even if it did, how is that relevant to the issue of climate? Your comment once again calls into question your understanding of the difference between weather and climate.

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Lucky Bones said:

I stuck my head out the window this morning.

It was damn cold when it wasn't supposed to be cold.

Fact. Not science.????????

Follow the their science.

 

Oh, and hand over the cash. Otherwise we're all going to burst into flames ????. 

[placeholder]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Follow the their science.

 

Oh, and hand over the cash. Otherwise we're all going to burst into flames ????. 

More confirmation that you don't seem to grasp the difference between weather and climate.

[Lucky Bones]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Did the weather report say it wasn't going to be cold? Even if it did, how is that relevant to the issue of climate? Your comment once again calls into question your understanding of the difference between weather and climate.

I dare say your scientific comments may have a place in history in the year 2525. (Z & E).????????

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Lucky Bones said:

I dare say your scientific comments may have a place in history in the year 2525. (Z & E).????????

In other words, you've got no rational rebuttal to offer. You've got nothing.

[Longwood50]

 

This notion that you can look at the past 100 to 200 years and somehow use it as "normal" is just ridiculous.  The earth has warmed and cooled for millions of years.  

There is a perfrect correlation between the per capita spending on cheese and died being hung in their own bedsheets.  

This idea that somehow that correlations human made carbon emission with climate change is just as spurious.  It is a correlation, not a proven correlation. 




What is the mid Holocene warm period?

 

 

Mid-Holocene Warm Period – About 6,000 Years Ago

Paleoclimatologists have long suspected that the "middle Holocene," a period roughly from 7,000 to 5,000 years ago, was warmer than the present day.Nov 12, 2564 BE

 

[heybruce]

45 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

 

This notion that you can look at the past 100 to 200 years and somehow use it as "normal" is just ridiculous.  The earth has warmed and cooled for millions of years.  

There is a perfrect correlation between the per capita spending on cheese and died being hung in their own bedsheets.  

This idea that somehow that correlations human made carbon emission with climate change is just as spurious.  It is a correlation, not a proven correlation. 




What is the mid Holocene warm period?

 

 

Mid-Holocene Warm Period – About 6,000 Years Ago

Paleoclimatologists have long suspected that the "middle Holocene," a period roughly from 7,000 to 5,000 years ago, was warmer than the present day.Nov 12, 2564 BE

 

Once again, rate of change matters.  Putting high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere in an unnaturally short period of time has resulted in a dangerous rate of change.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

It's because they share the same end game.

 

Big state control. High taxation (redistribution of wealth) under the guise of green taxes. Diminishing rights for citizens. 

 

Climate alarmism is a wonderful tool for all 3. It's no coinicidence that members of the doomsday cult are always left wing.

Now we're into the conspiracy theory stuff.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Lucky Bones said:

Heard from a mate in mid north South Australia that Mon & Tues mornings, 7 & 8 August 2023 hit 0.00C early morning.

Close to new record lows, but hey, that was August.

July must have been a sauna? Righto.????????

Did no one ever tell you that July and August are winter months in Australia?

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Well it's certainly having a catastrophic effect on humanity.????

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fclimate-activists-disasters-fire-storms-deaths-change-cop26-glasgow-global-warming-11635973538&psig=AOvVaw147WomOkGkRQHWKsazKSic&ust=1691718453404000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CBMQjhxqFwoTCPCz5r380IADFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE

 

 

 

Casualties are reduced by better weather forecasting and transportation.  However structures can't be evacuated, which is why climate related disasters have gone up 30-fold in cost in the last 40 years in the US.  https://www.climate.gov/media/13979

[Lucky Bones]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Did no one ever tell you that July and August are winter months in Australia?

Obviously not.

I shall immediately broadcast to the good living citizens that you have advised that winter is now happening and temperatures are down from the norm. Global warming will happen next year (maybe?)

????Cheers for the tip.????

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

 

This notion that you can look at the past 100 to 200 years and somehow use it as "normal" is just ridiculous.  The earth has warmed and cooled for millions of years.  

There is a perfrect correlation between the per capita spending on cheese and died being hung in their own bedsheets.  

This idea that somehow that correlations human made carbon emission with climate change is just as spurious.  It is a correlation, not a proven correlation. 




What is the mid Holocene warm period?

 

 

Mid-Holocene Warm Period – About 6,000 Years Ago

Paleoclimatologists have long suspected that the "middle Holocene," a period roughly from 7,000 to 5,000 years ago, was warmer than the present day.Nov 12, 2564 BE

 

First off, thanks for the lack of links. That always inspires confidence.

Here's some evidence with a link provided as well.

Global Temperature Reconstruction Over Last 24,000 Years Show Today’s Warming “Unprecedented”

 

The study, published Wednesday (November 10, 2021) in Nature, has three main findings: 

• It verifies that the main drivers of climate change since the last ice age are rising greenhouse gas concentrations and the retreat of the ice sheets.
• It suggests a general warming trend over the last 10,000 years, settling a decade-long debate the paleoclimatology community about whether this period trended warmer or cooler.
• The magnitude and rate warming over the last 150 years far surpasses the magnitude and rate of changes over the last 24,000 years.
• 

https://scitechdaily.com/global-temperature-reconstruction-over-last-24000-years-show-todays-warming-unprecedented/

 

As for that graph. It doesn't indicate what year it ends at. It clearly doesn't show the sharp rise of the past 40 years..

The idea that the mid holocene was warmer has been laid to rest.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0530-7

https://www.rutgers.edu/news/important-climate-change-mystery-solved-scientists

 

And I've saved the worst for last:

"There is a perfrect correlation between the per capita spending on cheese and died being hung in their own bedsheets. 

This idea that somehow that correlations human made carbon emission with climate change is just as spurious.  It is a correlation, not a proven correlation. "

 

If you can come up with a scientifically based mechanism for how bedsheets can affect climate, then you've made a great point. Do I really need to explain to you what the mechanism for how carbon emissions and other other emissions affect the climate? Are you truly unaware of the science about the issue dating all the way back to the 19th century? If so, I would be glad to acquaint you with a bit of the history.

Edited August 10, 2023 by placeholder

[heybruce]

8 minutes ago, Lucky Bones said:

Obviously not.

I shall immediately broadcast to the good living citizens that you have advised that winter is now happening and temperatures are down from the norm. Global warming will happen next year (maybe?)

????Cheers for the tip.????

Not a very coherent post.  Should I explain to you that there is a difference between local weather and global climate, or are you unclear on some other issue?

[Longwood50]

23 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Once again, rate of change matters.  Putting high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere in an unnaturally short period of time has resulted in a dangerous rate of change.

As said, using the past 200 years as some sort of benchmark is like taking one day out of a century and saying "that day is normal" 

Also, while CO2 can be correlated to temperature rise, so can the number of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches eaten in one day can be correlated to temperature rise.  

Correlation is not causation. 

[Lucky Bones]

17 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Casualties are reduced by better weather forecasting and transportation.  However structures can't be evacuated, which is why climate related disasters have gone up 30-fold in cost in the last 40 years in the US.  https://www.climate.gov/media/13979

I think your comment is somewhat quite valid. Forecasting and transportation can be poles apart.

 

But..... I reckon that climate related disasters have gone...etc..is wrong.

I can recall 55 years ago that Bangladesh was flooded out, but that was AAP on a two paragrah page 7 article On my local paper.

Sadly, we all wanted to read the footy back page.

Transportation is pretty much still never gunna happen. People are too proud to just walk away.????????

[Yellowtail]

The Earth is warming, at least in part, and likely largely due to burning fossil fuels, and despite all the idiocy with alternating energy and social engineering, we are still emitting more CO2 than ever before, and with no significant reduction in site. 

 

 

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

As said, using the past 200 years as some sort of benchmark is like taking one day out of a century and saying "that day is normal" 

Also, while CO2 can be correlated to temperature rise, so can the number of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches eaten in one day can be correlated to temperature rise.  

Correlation is not causation. 

As far as past temperatures go, you seriously need to acquaint yourself with that branch of science called paleoclimatology.

And I've already called you on your nonsense about correlation.

[Lucky Bones]

13 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Not a very coherent post.  Should I explain to you that there is a difference between local weather and global climate, or are you unclear on some other issue?

No. Don't "explain"anything to me.

I think you need to visit a psychologist or a meterologist.

 

I am also probably unclear about why some people don't enjoy the Swedish band  - Viagra Boys. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

 

Head out the window tells me that it is later in the day. Insects and small furry animals will be awakening.????????

[heybruce]

13 minutes ago, Lucky Bones said:

No. Don't "explain"anything to me.

I think you need to visit a psychologist or a meterologist.

 

I am also probably unclear about why some people don't enjoy the Swedish band  - Viagra Boys. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

 

Head out the window tells me that it is later in the day. Insects and small furry animals will be awakening.????????

You are still posting weather reports on a topic about climate.   Are you sure you know the difference?

[heybruce]

29 minutes ago, Lucky Bones said:

I think your comment is somewhat quite valid. Forecasting and transportation can be poles apart.

 

But..... I reckon that climate related disasters have gone...etc..is wrong.

I can recall 55 years ago that Bangladesh was flooded out, but that was AAP on a two paragrah page 7 article On my local paper.

Sadly, we all wanted to read the footy back page.

Transportation is pretty much still never gunna happen. People are too proud to just walk away.????????

The chart showing dramatic increases of the cost of climate disasters is not based on someone's recollection of past newspaper stories, it is based on credible data.

[heybruce]

24 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

As said, using the past 200 years as some sort of benchmark is like taking one day out of a century and saying "that day is normal" 

Also, while CO2 can be correlated to temperature rise, so can the number of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches eaten in one day can be correlated to temperature rise.  

Correlation is not causation. 

The last 200 years is not a "benchmark", it is the time covering the beginning of the industrial revolution and large scale burning of fossil fuels.  It is the time of interest to us.

 

Would you argue that using the past year when a patient had cancer as a benchmark of his health ignores the many years without cancer, therefore we can't assume the patient is unhealthy?

 

CO2 has been scientifically determined to be a product of the burning of fossil fuels and to be a greenhouse gas.  There is a correlation between CO2 levels and global temperature because there is a causative effect.   There is no causative effect between sandwiches and global warming that I am aware of.

[Longwood50]

24 minutes ago, heybruce said:

CO2 has been scientifically determined to be a product of the burning of fossil fuels and to be a greenhouse gas.  There is a correlation between CO2 levels and global temperature because there is a causative effect.   There is no causative effect between sandwiches and global warming that I am aware of.

And where exactly do you get your evidence that it is causal?  

Your simplistic association of climate change to C02 emmisions first off assumes the change to be abnormal.  The earths temperature has had wide swings for millions of years from ice ages to interglacial periods. 

Second, other factors "may" influence the earths temperture.  We know that volcanos spewing ash shade the earth shading the earth.  So is it conceivable that the amount of volcanic ash in the atmosphere is also low at this point causing the temperature of the earth to rise as more sun peneatrate it. 

You have this single notion that there is one cause for global warming and first off assume that the phenomena is something more than the normal cooling and heating of the earth over many years.  Secondly, you assume that C02 is the cause of it.  You point to the last 200 years and the fact of industrial revolution.   Well we also didn't have solar panels, rubber bands, safety pens, flush toilets, and ball point pens 200 years ago.  Using your logic, perhaps it is the introduction of those that is causing weather change. 

You dismiss the idea that a changing climate is normal and ignore the fact that the climate of the earth has changed for millions of years.  You dismiss any idea that other factors or a combination of factors might influence temperature changes.  

Volcanic eruptions spew tons of particulate into the atomosphere impacting climate.  So this simplistic view that only humans and carbon emisions are the primary causitive is just that naive. 

The following things are true.  The earths temperature is slightly warmer. What we don't know is whether that is abnormal, what if anything is causing that, and most importantly what could possibly to mitigate it. 

I suggest this move to electrify everything has substantial adverse enviornmental outcomes as well.  The mining of lithium is extremely impactful.  The construction of power plants to supply the required energy, string the millions of miles of electric lines is not without its negative impact. 

Also, there is this notion that the warming of the earth is destructive.  Perhaps, but it could also prove beneficial as areas once to cold to grow crops become now able to support crop growth.  The warmer temperature decreases the need to burn oil, coal, natural gas to heat homes from much colder temperatures. 

Do I know any of this to be true.  No.  And neither do you.  It is a mere supposition that the earths warming is unatutural, that is is bad, hydrocarbons are to blame, and that something can be done about it even if true. 




This also peaked in 2023. 

 

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/14/world/solar-maximum-activity-2024-scn/index.html

 

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html

[Bkk Brian]

5 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

And where exactly do you get your evidence that it is causal?  

Your simplistic association of climate change to C02 emmisions first off assumes the change to be abnormal.  The earths temperature has had wide swings for millions of years from ice ages to interglacial periods. 

Second, other factors "may" influence the earths temperture.  We know that volcanos spewing ash shade the earth shading the earth.  So is it conceivable that the amount of volcanic ash in the atmosphere is also low at this point causing the temperature of the earth to rise as more sun peneatrate it. 

You have this single notion that there is one cause for global warming and first off assume that the phenomena is something more than the normal cooling and heating of the earth over many years.  Secondly, you assume that C02 is the cause of it.  You point to the last 200 years and the fact of industrial revolution.   Well we also didn't have solar panels, rubber bands, safety pens, flush toilets, and ball point pens 200 years ago.  Using your logic, perhaps it is the introduction of those that is causing weather change. 

You dismiss the idea that a changing climate is normal and ignore the fact that the climate of the earth has changed for millions of years.  You dismiss any idea that other factors or a combination of factors might influence temperature changes.  

Volcanic eruptions spew tons of particulate into the atomosphere impacting climate.  So this simplistic view that only humans and carbon emisions are the primary causitive is just that naive. 

The following things are true.  The earths temperature is slightly warmer. What we don't know is whether that is abnormal, what if anything is causing that, and most importantly what could possibly to mitigate it. 

I suggest this move to electrify everything has substantial adverse enviornmental outcomes as well.  The mining of lithium is extremely impactful.  The construction of power plants to supply the required energy, string the millions of miles of electric lines is not without its negative impact. 

Also, there is this notion that the warming of the earth is destructive.  Perhaps, but it could also prove beneficial as areas once to cold to grow crops become now able to support crop growth.  The warmer temperature decreases the need to burn oil, coal, natural gas to heat homes from much colder temperatures. 

Do I know any of this to be true.  No.  And neither do you.  It is a mere supposition that the earths warming is unatutural, that is is bad, hydrocarbons are to blame, and that something can be done about it even if true. 




This also peaked in 2023. 

 

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/14/world/solar-maximum-activity-2024-scn/index.html

 

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html

Yet current CO2 levels are the highest in 2 million years. In addition the solar activity is not responsible for these recent changes.

 

Also from NASA

"the warming we’ve seen in recent decades is too rapid to be linked to changes in Earth’s orbit and too large to be caused by solar activity."

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/