Google Earth: how much has global warming raised temperatures near you?

[canman]

Antarctic sea ice hit 35-year record high Saturday - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/23/antarctic-sea-ice-hit-35-year-record-high-saturday/

Antarctic sea ice has grown to a record large extent for a second straight year, baffling scientists seeking to understand why this ice is expanding rather than shrinking in a warming world.

Ohh those poor baffled scientists.

Here's an idea; maybe the world is not warming? Just sayin

[wilcopops]

Antarctic sea ice hit 35-year record high Saturday - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/23/antarctic-sea-ice-hit-35-year-record-high-saturday/

Antarctic sea ice has grown to a record large extent for a second straight year, baffling scientists seeking to understand why this ice is expanding rather than shrinking in a warming world.

Ohh those poor baffled scientists.

Here's an idea; maybe the world is not warming? Just sayin

Ad with most of these reports, rather than cherry pick the media that supports your own bias, why not try reading the report and then peer reviews....not easy, but you will see that the area covered by ice less important than the production of ice at the centre of Antarctic...it is the depth of this ice that is of concern...not just coverage.

[3NUMBAS]

gingers are set to die out

http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/06/not-the-gingers-global-warming-zealots-now-claim-redheads-will-soon-disappear/

NOT THE GINGERS! Global Warming Zealots Now Claim Redheads Will Soon Disappear

[chuckd]

Polar bears and red heads...both on the endangered species list.

[RickBradford]

Polar bears and red heads...both on the endangered species list.

Polar bears aren't on the 'endangered' list; they're on the 'vulnerable' list, which is less serious.

And why any species (or sub-species) would be endangered by global warming when there isn't any global warming is a conundrum that only an alarmist mind can figure out.

Ten years ago, the US government, in the shape of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) decided to end criticism once and for all that badly-sited temperature stations were exaggerating global warming statistics, as skeptics had long claimed, and set up a carefully chosen pristine 144-station network called the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN).

USCRN has just released its first decade of results; the US has cooled 0.4C in the last 10 years, which is more than half of the claimed global warming of the 20th century.

There are reasonable caveats; 10 years is not really long enough to draw definite conclusions from, and of course, the US is not the whole world.

With this impeccable temperature record set up, the alarmists' worst fears have come to pass. Thanks to the USCRN, the data are what the data are.

Expect global warming alarmists, now and for the foreseeable future, to howl in desperation claiming the USCRN temperature data are irrelevant.

Of course, to global warming alarmists, all real-world data are irrelevant....

[chuckd]

This out today from Forbes:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Government Data Show U.S. in Decade-Long Cooling

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s most accurate, up-to-date temperature data confirm the United States has been cooling for at least the past decade. The NOAA temperature data are driving a stake through the heart of alarmists claiming accelerating global warming.

Responding to widespread criticism that its temperature station readings were corrupted by poor siting issues and suspect adjustments, NOAA established a network of 114 pristinely sited temperature stations spread out fairly uniformly throughout the United States. Because the network, known as the U.S.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2014/06/25/government-data-show-u-s-in-decade-long-cooling/

Edited July 9, 2014 by Scott
Edited for fair use

[canuckamuck]

Yeah but i saw an ice shelf fall off on TV! Doesn't that mean were all gonna be BBQ?

[canman]

The frequency of 90 degree days in the US has been plummeting for 80 years, and 2014 has had the lowest frequency of 90 degree days through July 23 on record.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/07/26/coolest-summer-on-record-in-the-us/

[RickBradford]

Yes, but that's just data, and True Believers would rather gargle battery acid than accept data which doesn't serve their apocalyptic fantasies.

Throw in some guff about 'climate justice', 'deniers' and 'evil capitalists', and you might get their attention.

[arjunadawn]

Opinions do not have to be supported. Facts should be.

There is a common phrase bandied about....especially on forums such as these......"you're entitled to your own opinion "

This is of course patently nonsense. If it isn't based on some rational thought then it isn't even an opinion.

What is entitlement or opinion is never questioned so the "opinion" itself is nonsense.

In the context of a thread like this one would expect some level of back up if one is trying to make a scientific point, but many seem to think that asking for a reference is a form of argument...which is a particularly facile idea.

This is brilliant, and well written. Thanks!

[arjunadawn]

I suppose I'd give global warming theory the benefit of the doubt except when I hear such militancy, such narrow minded statements about settled science, I pause. When I look collectively at the bodies of peoples asserting global warming, note that they all tend toward the politically active as well, and that they tend to the left, I then consider the other policies and settled science such minds have offered humanity. It's here, in the background of global warming reprimands, that I find cui bono. Global warming, true or not, is a stalking horse for a political solution, a political agenda. Cities have been reclaimed by the seas for millennia. Kingdoms have turned to deserts. Egypt, once lush and fertile, was turned into lunar like dust. These cycles are earth's seasons. Whether man contributes or not currently a thinking man cannot discount the repugnant truth that under the guise of global warming a bait & switch is being put in place to fundamentally alter all human activities- polity, economic, sovereignty, habitation, energy, foodstuffs, surveillance, and even faith. There is a political solution that is being pushed irrespective of the populations consent. This is why global warming remains dubious.

Edited July 29, 2014 by arjunadawn

[boomerangutang]

"Sixteen-foot waves are buffeting an area of the Arctic Ocean that until recently was permanently covered in sea ice—another sign of a warming climate, scientists say."

"Because wave action breaks up sea ice, allowing more sunlight to warm the ocean, it can trigger a cycle that leads to even less ice, more wind, and higher waves."

source

[chuckd]

"Sixteen-foot waves are buffeting an area of the Arctic Ocean that until recently was permanently covered in sea ice—another sign of a warming climate, scientists say."

"Because wave action breaks up sea ice, allowing more sunlight to warm the ocean, it can trigger a cycle that leads to even less ice, more wind, and higher waves."

source

...and this is breaking news?

From your link:

"The 16-foot (five-meter) waves the scientists' instrument picked up occurred during a storm with strong winds on September 18, 2012."

[boomerangutang]

"Sixteen-foot waves are buffeting an area of the Arctic Ocean that until recently was permanently covered in sea ice—another sign of a warming climate, scientists say."

"Because wave action breaks up sea ice, allowing more sunlight to warm the ocean, it can trigger a cycle that leads to even less ice, more wind, and higher waves."

source

...and this is breaking news?

From your link:

"The 16-foot (five-meter) waves the scientists' instrument picked up occurred during a storm with strong winds on September 18, 2012."

You introduced the term: 'breaking news.' Yet deniers are fond of switching time scales to try to make a point, sometimes going back hundreds of thousands of years. The article above is taken from some data which is less than 2 years old. However, that quoted sentence above may not be the entire data sequence. In other words, there could have been data recorded prior, and other data recorded after that date. That data may have been the highest waves recorded at that location.

one line from the preceding excerpt: " an area of the Arctic Ocean that until recently was permanently covered in sea ice" I'm sure deniers can easily refute that, though not necessarily with scientific data.

Edited July 31, 2014 by boomerangutang

[boomerangutang]

Deniers will hate this article:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/08/120828-arctic-sea-ice-global-warming-record-environment-science/

"Researchers at the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center said the rate of Arctic sea ice decline is now the highest that has ever been observed for the month of August. In August of this year, the sea ice disappeared at an average rate of about 35,400 square miles (91,700 square kilometers) per day—or about twice as fast as normal, NSIDC scientists say. Moreover, the area of Arctic sea ice around the North Pole had shrunk to 1.58 million square miles (4.1 million square kilometers)—the smallest measurement since 1979, when satellite observations began."

Boomerangutang's spin: The article was published in Nat'l Geo 23 months ago, so deniers will say it's 'dated' and therefore insignificant. And what about the cold spell experienced in east and middle US (not in the west) this year? It's predicted in source article. Less Arctic sea ice cover can play havoc with weather patterns, so even some colder than average temps can be expected. However, the overall trend, for the coming decades, is increased warming. An ice-free Arctic in an upcoming summer? How far in the future? Some climate scientists say 30 years, others say sooner. Does it matter? You tell me.

[RickBradford]

However, the overall trend, for the coming decades, is increased warming. An ice-free Arctic in an upcoming summer? How far in the future?

That question has already been exhaustively answered

The New York Times: “…the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two”.

Of course, they said that in 1969, but hey, it's a good story.

Now that's just the NYT, which wouldn't recognise a scientific fact if it jumped up and bit them on the nose, so what do the scientists say?

“At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions.” - Dr. Jay Zwally - NASA.

"According to these models, there will be no sea ice left in the summer in the Arctic Ocean somewhere between 2010 and 2015. And it’s probably going to happen even faster than that." - Professor Louis Fortier - Université Laval, Director ArcticNet.

“…..It is quite likely that the North Pole will be exposed this summer [2008]– it’s not happened before,” - Professor Peter Wadhams - Cambridge University

“Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007. So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative." - Professor Wieslaw Maslowski

“If Norway’s average temperature this year [2008] equals that in 2007, the ice cap in the Arctic will all melt away, which is highly possible judging from current conditions,” - Dr. Olav Orheim - Norwegian International Polar Year Secretariat

"For the record—I do not think that any sea ice will survive this summer [2013]. An event unprecedented in human history is today, this very moment, transpiring in the Arctic Ocean." Paul Beckwith - PhD student paleoclimatology and climatology, scientific advisor to the Sierra Club.

Like all the alarmists, they are absolutely certain, and consistently wrong. This isn't science, it's Agit-Prop 101.

[boomerangutang]

The warming trend is there, despite some individual's not getting their predicted dates precise.

National Geographic is having to re-draw their world maps often, because the annual averages of sea ice in the Arctic is steadily receding. Whether it's 4 years or 24 years or whatever (until a sea ice-free Arctic), the pattern of receding ice is evident. Deniers can try to angrily twist the issue every which way (other than realistically), but the trend is there. Sorry if it's not what some of you want to hear/see.

[RickBradford]

The warming trend is there, despite some individual's not getting their predicted dates precise

The other, straightforward explanation, is that these people have no idea what they're talking about and worse, don't care.

These are not just 'some individuals', they are spokesmen for major government scientific organisations and NGOs and without fail they claim that "it's worse than we thought" and equally infallibly, they're wrong.

But they never miss the chance for a bit of unsupported alarmism, as their sorry history of failed claims demonstrates.

[3NUMBAS]

first-of-its-kind study finds that global sea levels could rise 20 percent higher by 2100 than previously estimated because of melting ice in Antarctica.

“A 20 percent higher sea level makes a bad situation worse,” said Robert Bindschadler, a glaciologist and coauthor of the study, which was published in the journal Earth Systems Dynamics.

“Right now nine of the 10 largest cities—Mexico City being the only exception—are coastal cities,” said Bindschadler, an emeritus researcher at NASA Goddard Space Center who collaborated with Anders Levermann at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. “Nearly half of the world’s population, almost 3 billion people, live at or near the coast. We are placing ourselves in harm’s way.”

Bindschadler’s estimates are higher than those released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in an April report.

His study doesn’t incorporate data from two studies published in May that found the West Antarctic ice sheet is headed to an irreversible meltdown and collapse due to global warming driven by greenhouse gas emissions.

Bindschadler’s team found that Antarctica’s ice melt will contribute seven to 28 centimeters in additional sea level rise by the end of the century. That would boost the IPCC assessment of total global sea level rise to as much as 111 centimeters, said Bindschadler.

http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/08/20/melting-antarctic-ice-will-raise-sea-levels-more-thought

[RickBradford]

^^

Tick off the usual tired agit-prop methods from the Green/Left playbook

Completely new study - check

Weasel words (could, would, as much as) - check

Worse than we thought - check

Imminent danger (we are placing ourselves in harm's way) - check

Irreversible tipping point - check

Capitalist bashing (global warming driven by greenhouse gas emissions) - check

Scaremongering - check

Phew! Everything's all right at Green Central Bureau.

Especially when you look at the abstract of the study (see link helpfully provided above) and count the number of times key words appear. How about "data"? Answer: 0. How about "model"? 12.

This is classic Green/Left science in action.

1) Decide in advance what you want the answer to be.

2) Build computer models based on other computer models and exclude anything resembling data.

3) Achieve desired result.

4) Run off to the media announcing incipient apocalypse.

[wilcopops]

Rick Bradford - ThaiVisa's answer to the Spanish Inquisition

[chuckd]

Without the physical pain, except for warmists.

[canuckamuck]

Really, I would think he is more of a Martin Luther

[canman]

Rick Bradford - ThaiVisa's answer to the Spanish Inquisition

One more for the list Rick

Ad Hominem attacks rather than counter points with science. Check!

Edited August 26, 2014 by canman

[wilcopops]

Rick Bradford - ThaiVisa's answer to the Spanish Inquisition

One more for the list Rick

Ad Hominem attacks rather than counter points with science. Check!

Check your history and see the point.

[canman]

Rick Bradford - ThaiVisa's answer to the Spanish Inquisition

One more for the list Rick

Ad Hominem attacks rather than counter points with science. Check!

Check your history and see the point.

OK, just checked and my history tells me that the point at which the global ice extent was at its most recent greatest was about about 21,000 years ago; since then the ice and glaciers have been retreating, the earth has been warming and the seas have been rising.

Edited August 26, 2014 by canman

[canman]

inevitable resultant scary headlines.

What, Like this?

IPCC Working Group II report: Scientists predict Australia will continue to get hotter

Maybe you scare easy Rick eh? Doesn't seem too scary to me... just telling it like it is.

And, on a sidebar to this main story, there's a brief summary titled 'The Rigorous Report Process' which I've copied below as it's worth quoting at length, to illustrate their methods, since you raise it as a point:-

The upcoming report includes 310 lead authors from 73 different nationalities.

Australian scientists are heavily involved as authors and reviewers of the Working Group reports.

Lesley Hughes, the lead author of the paper on Australasia, says Australia "punches above its weight".

"We are disproportionately a larger group than you might otherwise think based on our population in the IPCC authorship team," she said.

"We have a lot of scientists working on climate change issues and that is because we see Australia as being particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change."

The reports take up to five years to produce, undergoing a rigorous review process.

For example, 48,000 review comments were received on the upcoming report.

Professor Hughes says the process is not really a matter of achieving consensus, but rather is about evaluating the evidence.

The Australasia chapter alone has 1,000 references.

"They are certainly the largest reports ever produced on climate change and its associated risks but I think probably some of the most careful documents put together anywhere," she said.

"I rather naively thought that eight people and 25 pages to write, how long can it possibly take to write three-and-a-bit pages?

"The answer to that is about three years. There is much discussion about the weight of evidence so its a very long, detailed and careful process."

source

'Australian scientists are heavily involved as authors and reviewers of the Working Group reports.

Lesley Hughes, the lead author of the paper on Australasia, says Australia "punches above its weight".

"We are disproportionately a larger group than you might otherwise think based on our population in the IPCC authorship team," she said.'

HMMMMM

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has been caught red-handed manipulating temperature data to show "global warming" where none actually exists

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/08/25/Australian-Bureau-of-Meteorology-accused-of-Criminally-Adjusted-Global-Warming

[canuckamuck]

There is a real global warming crisis on the horizon...

Massive unemployment in the climate industry

[JDGRUEN]

^^

Tick off the usual tired agit-prop methods from the Green/Left playbook

Completely new study - check

Weasel words (could, would, as much as) - check

Worse than we thought - check

Imminent danger (we are placing ourselves in harm's way) - check

Irreversible tipping point - check

Capitalist bashing (global warming driven by greenhouse gas emissions) - check

Scaremongering - check

Phew! Everything's all right at Green Central Bureau.

Especially when you look at the abstract of the study (see link helpfully provided above) and count the number of times key words appear. How about "data"? Answer: 0. How about "model"? 12.

This is classic Green/Left science in action.

1) Decide in advance what you want the answer to be.

2) Build computer models based on other computer models and exclude anything resembling data.

3) Achieve desired result.

4) Run off to the media announcing incipient apocalypse.

Rick - one correction:

"2) Build computer models based on other computer models and exclude anything resembling data"...

Not quite in the most famous graphical analysis of Global Warming... the Hockey Stick which depicted a dramatic rise in global temperatures. This inverted hockey stick was a significant reason the hoax of man made global warming took off ... the cooked data was embedded in the code ... the referenced real data file was not being read by the program coding ... sneaky little 'scientists'.

[boomerangutang]

Let the scientific data tell the story. The Earth is getting warmer and it will get warmer still. Why is that anathema to deniers? Bradford and a few others seem religiously affronted by any such scientific data and projections. Some may not agree as to the extent of the warming, but all but a few deniers agree there is warming going on. But because it's so difficult for them to concede any warming trend, they attribute it to 'coming out of an ice age.' What happened tens of thousands of years ago is not material to what's happening now. Mankind has adapted to current conditions of sea levels and trying to eke out a living on arid landscapes. Even a moderate change in either of those two things (higher sea levels or harsher droughts, for example) spells major troubles for people who have adapted to current parameters. Some examples:

>>> Australia's large aquifer is being depleted faster than it can replenish, and a significant portion of the replenishment water is toxic and/or radioactive. Midwest US's aquifer, similar predicament but without the radioactivity.

>>> California's current drought (and major droughts in other places worldwide). Nearly all of CA's agriculture relies upon irrigation. GW affects snowpacks in the Sierra Nevada mnts (where I'm from) as well as rivers, lake levels and aquifers. A friend emailed me today. He was with his family at Lake Tahoe, one of the cleanest and deepest lakes in the world. It's level is at historic low. He didn't send specs, but could probably look it up.

Thus far, all the talk is how GW trend affects people. I'm at least as concerned about other fauna. If anything, our one species need a correction (to use Wall St. speak).