July was Earth's hottest month on record, NOAA says

[webfact]

Feeling the heat: Earth in July was hottest month on record
SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — Earth just keeps getting hotter. July was the planet's warmest month on record, smashing old marks, U.S. weather officials said.

And it's almost a dead certain lock that this year will beat last year as the warmest year on record, they said.

July's average temperature was 61.86 degrees Fahrenheit (16.6 Celsius), beating the previous global mark set in 1998 and 2010 by about one-seventh of a degree, according to figures released Thursday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That's a large margin for weather records, with previous monthly heat records broken by a 20th of a degree or less.

"It just reaffirms what we already know: that the Earth is warming," said NOAA climate scientist Jake Crouch. "The warming is accelerating and we're really seeing it this year."

NOAA records go back to 1880. Separate calculations by NASA and the Japanese weather agency also found July 2015 to be a record.

The first seven months of 2015 were the hottest January-to-July span on record, according to NOAA. The seven-month average temperature of 58.43 degrees (14.7 Celsius) is 1.53 degrees warmer than the 20th-century average and a sixth of a degree warmer than the old record set in 2010.

Given that the temperatures have already been so high already — especially the oceans, which are slow to cool — NOAA climate scientist Jessica Blunden said she is "99 percent certain" that 2015 will be the hottest on record for the globe. The oceans would have to cool dramatically to prevent it, and they are trending warmer, not cooler, she said.

Crouch, Blunden and other scientists outside of the government said these temperatures are caused by a combination of man-made climate change and a strong, near-record El Nino. An El Nino is a warming of the equatorial Pacific Ocean that alters weather worldwide for about a year.

The oceans drove the globe to record levels. Not only were the world's oceans the warmest they've been in July, but they were 1.35 degrees warmer than the 20th-century average.

The heat hit hard in much of Europe and the Middle East. It was the hottest July on record in Austria, where records go back to 1767. Parts of France had temperatures that were on average 7 degrees above normal and temperatures broke 100 in the Netherlands, which is a rarity. And an Iranian city had a heat index (the "feels like" temperature) of 165 degrees (74 Celsius), which was still not quite record.

Nine of the 10 hottest months on record have happened since 2005, according to NOAA. Twenty-two of the 25 hottest months on record have occurred after the year 2000. The other three were in 1998 and 1997.

This shows that despite what climate change doubters say, there is no pause in warming since 1998, Blunden said.

It doesn't matter if a month or a year is No. 1 or No. 2 or No. 5 hottest on record, said University of Georgia climate scientist Marshall Shepherd.

"The records are getting attention but I worry the public will grow weary of reports of new records each month," Shepherd said in an email. "I am more concerned about how the Earth is starting to respond to the changes and the implications for my children."
___

Online: NOAA on July records: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/summary-info/global/201507


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-08-21

[craigt3365]

I can say this August has been the hottest I've experienced here in years. Too hot!!! We need rain!

[Seastallion]

This despite Antipodean record cold weather. Both NZ and Australia had a particularly cold winter, with record colds in some places. Consider how that affects the global average, and you have a picture of a bleak future.

Well done Big Oil, Big Coal, and all the politicians in your pockets.

[RickBradford]

Consider how that affects the global average, and you have a picture of a bleak future.

Not if you have any common sense.

Some parts of the planet were warmer than usual this year, some parts were colder than usual; the average will come out at about the same as in 2010.

There's nothing to worry about in there, but the belief neurotics will continue to run around wailing that the world is doomed, just as they have for the past 20 years. No wonder nobody's listening any more.

[aonangkrabi]

Consider how that affects the global average, and you have a picture of a bleak future.

Not if you have any common sense.

Some parts of the planet were warmer than usual this year, some parts were colder than usual; the average will come out at about the same as in 2010.

There's nothing to worry about in there, but the belief neurotics will continue to run around wailing that the world is doomed, just as they have for the past 20 years. No wonder nobody's listening any more.

Sorry Rick but you must be an extremely ignorant man. You keep denying the global warming trend which is obvious from observations and of which the physics are well understood for over a century.

Of course there were A FEW cooler than average areas, but the overwhelming majority was (much) warmer than average.

Please try to understand the picture of global warming in this article http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/article.html

[RickBradford]

Sorry Rick but you must be an extremely ignorant man. You keep denying the global warming trend which is obvious from observations and of which the physics are well understood for over a century.

*SIGH*

Show me one post where I have "denied" the global warming trend. I have repeated on many occasions that looking at a thermometer shows that the world has warmed since 1850, though some periods have shown cooling (1940-1975) and others have shown warming. There has been little or no warming for 15 or so years up to the present day.

What I disagree with is that a global temperature for a single month which may be fractions of a degree warmer than anything we have seen before, betokens a "bleak future".

Not that common sense will stop the outpourings of glee at this 'discovery'. Like some religious fanatics seeing a painting of the Virgin Mary cry tears of blood, or a potato in the shape of Jesus, the Warmists are exulting in what they see as signs from their 'god'.

There's extreme ignorance here, but it's not mine.

[canuckamuck]

Temperatures are still basically a flat line since 1998. Not that a warmer year means anything other than the temperatures have gone up. They always go up or down, the trend of the last 12,000 years has been up. Think of it as a blessing, We sure as hell don't want to see the temps go the other way.

[craigt3365]

Sorry Rick but you must be an extremely ignorant man. You keep denying the global warming trend which is obvious from observations and of which the physics are well understood for over a century.

*SIGH*

Show me one post where I have "denied" the global warming trend. I have repeated on many occasions that looking at a thermometer shows that the world has warmed since 1850, though some periods have shown cooling (1940-1975) and others have shown warming. There has been little or no warming for 15 or so years up to the present day.

What I disagree with is that a global temperature for a single month which may be fractions of a degree warmer than anything we have seen before, betokens a "bleak future".

Not that common sense will stop the outpourings of glee at this 'discovery'. Like some religious fanatics seeing a painting of the Virgin Mary cry tears of blood, or a potato in the shape of Jesus, the Warmists are exulting in what they see as signs from their 'god'.

There's extreme ignorance here, but it's not mine.

I'd hardly say NOAA scientists are ignorant. The data comes from their analysis. Which I'd guess, is better than anybody's here. The OP says this YEAR looks to be the hottest ever, breaking previous (recent) records.

"It just reaffirms what we already know: that the Earth is warming," said NOAA climate scientist Jake Crouch. "The warming is accelerating and we're really seeing it this year."

Plus, they say the recent past has shown an increase in average temps:

Nine of the 10 hottest months on record have happened since 2005, according to NOAA. Twenty-two of the 25 hottest months on record have occurred after the year 2000. The other three were in 1998 and 1997.

This shows that despite what climate change doubters say, there is no pause in warming since 1998, Blunden said.

But as they say, it's partly due to man, partly due to the El Nino. Either case, it's hot! At least here right now...

[Seastallion]

Sorry Rick but you must be an extremely ignorant man. You keep denying the global warming trend which is obvious from observations and of which the physics are well understood for over a century.

*SIGH*

Show me one post where I have "denied" the global warming trend. I have repeated on many occasions that looking at a thermometer shows that the world has warmed since 1850, though some periods have shown cooling (1940-1975) and others have shown warming. There has been little or no warming for 15 or so years up to the present day.

What I disagree with is that a global temperature for a single month which may be fractions of a degree warmer than anything we have seen before, betokens a "bleak future".

Not that common sense will stop the outpourings of glee at this 'discovery'. Like some religious fanatics seeing a painting of the Virgin Mary cry tears of blood, or a potato in the shape of Jesus, the Warmists are exulting in what they see as signs from their 'god'.

There's extreme ignorance here, but it's not mine.

Argue with the scientists in the OP. I don't think you've read it or comprehended it. It doesn't cite a single month alone ("The first seven months of 2015 were the hottest January-to-July span on record, according to NOAA. The seven-month average temperature of 58.43 degrees (14.7 Celsius) is 1.53 degrees warmer than the 20th-century average and a sixth of a degree warmer than the old record set in 2010.").

You are also ignoring that the OP talks about global average. That some places were colder than ever recorded makes the statistic even more stark.

You ignore the trend over a long period.

Sigh.

Lets for a moment ignore all the arguments for and against. Lets just agree that arguments for and against exist.

In the absence of absolute proof (say) either way,,,,,why would you err on the side of Big Money, instead of erring on the side of caution?

[RickBradford]

I'd hardly say NOAA scientists are ignorant.

I didn't say they were.

That said, they have considerable previous when it comes to making up data - 'satellitegate' was a particularly egregious instance.

They've probably got it about right here -- even the RSS satellite data has been showing unusual warmth -- and they may even be right when they predict this year will break the record set in 1998.

Either way, it's hardly cause for concern, though the hard-core alarmists will try to persuade everyone that this measurement is caused by wicked humans angering Gaia and assorted earth gods, so we must make sacrifices to appease them.

[aonangkrabi]

Temperatures are still basically a flat line since 1998. Not that a warmer year means anything other than the temperatures have gone up. They always go up or down, the trend of the last 12,000 years has been up. Think of it as a blessing, We sure as hell don't want to see the temps go the other way.

My knowledge of physics has told me since my years as a student that rising CO2 levels will cause a significant global temperature rise.

There has been a glimmer of hope in my heart, not my brain, that the effect was minor and was overshadowed by variations in the solar output.

This hope is no more because the continuing temperature rise after 1998 despite a decreasing solar output.

The trend of the last 7000 years is a downward temperature trend.

A rising temperature means a rising sea level. If that is a blessing, tell that to the people in Miami. Of course lower temperatures would be a disaster too.

Humankind has been blessed with a fairly constant sea level the last 7000 years, let's keep it that way. And stop all CO2 emissions right now. As it is, even in that unlikely event, the earth will still need a few centuries before CO2 level is down to pre-industrial levels.

By the way, my house is now powered by solar panels and I can assure you that Thailand is a perfect place for harvesting solar energy.

[craigt3365]

I climbed Kili a few years ago. The snows are gone and the glaciers melting at an incredible pace. We can debate all we like, but it's a reality there and dramatically changing the lives of those who depend on the runoff.

I'm not up for a debate on what's causing this, just know the earth is getting warmer and glaciers are melting. Climbed a few in Patagonia a few years ago. How much they've receded is shocking. It'd blow your mind.

[Catoni]

I wonder how many people panic when they see the words "...hottest on record." And then fail to read the rest of the article.

"NOAA records go back to 1880."...it says. We just came out of the Little Ice Age circa 1850... a time of short growing seasons, early frosts.. late Springs, failed harvests and famine in Europe and the colonies in North America.

Washington lost a lot of men at Valley Forge.. and it was't due to British troops. It was due to disease, starvation, malnutrition, and exposure killed nearly 2,500 American soldiers by the end of February 1778. All due to the harsh freezing winter during the Little Ice Age.

I'm not sure what they would expect the climate to do when coming out of the Little Ice Age. Get colder ? The I.P.C.C. says we warmed 0.85 degree C between 1880 - 2012.

Do people realize just how short a time 135 years is in Geological/Paleclimatological history on this planet. We are still in an Ice Age that began about 2.6 million years ago. The Pleistocene Glaciation....also known as the Quaternary Glaciation.... present ice age. NOT a Glacial Period like 30,000 years ago... that began to end about 20,000 years ago. Many people confuse Glacial Periods with Ice Ages. As long as we still have ice caps, glaciers and ice fields.. .we are still in an Ice Age that has been going on for 2.6 million years now.

If you study the history of the Earth... you can begin to think in terms of hundreds of thousands... millions.... and hundreds of millions of years....

We are presently in an Interglacial Period, between Glacial Periods, during the present Quaternary Ice Age.

The warmest in the past 135 years is nothing. We are well within the normal range of variability for this planet. As a matter of fact...looking at the past 600 million years... we are on the cold side.

What most people don't realize... and eco-socialist political agitators take advantage of, is the fact that most people don't study these things and know the information for themselves..

As far as some activist scientists.... the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Tell everyone there is a problem... you will get lots of grant money, money for all your studies... and exposure in the media for your book sales...... say there is no problem, or solve the problem.... see your funds dry up.

That's my take on it..... .

[RickBradford]

In the absence of absolute proof (say) either way,,,,,why would you err on the side of Big Money, instead of erring on the side of caution?

Because caution isn't free.

In fact, adopting the poster above's solution (stop all CO2 emissions now) would be the most catastrophically futile, damaging, and expensive policy in the history of mankind, even if you could do it.

Humanity has finally, in the past 150 years, managed to drag itself to a reasonably comfortable standard of living through using cheap energy (that is, fossil fuels). Without cheap energy we revert to living in yurts powered by tallow candles, as the extreme Green movement would like. Plus, a large sub-section of humanity would die of starvation or disease in very short order.

The 'precautionary principle', which is what you are arguing for, is only valid if you consider the risks, benefits and the costs of a policy. That hasn't happened in the climate debate. It has been assumed (quite arbitrarily) that the 'risk' is so overwhelming that any 'cost' is worth bearing.

Acting without considering both the benefits and the risks, in the case of global warming, means that societies will incur staggering economic losses in possibly futile attempts to protect against environmental damage whose existence can only be speculated about. The stakes are enormous. To act without knowing the facts would be extremely irresponsible.

Edited August 21, 2015 by RickBradford

[Catoni]

I climbed Kili a few years ago. The snows are gone and the glaciers melting at an incredible pace. We can debate all we like, but it's a reality there and dramatically changing the lives of those who depend on the runoff.

I'm not up for a debate on what's causing this, just know the earth is getting warmer and glaciers are melting. Climbed a few in Patagonia a few years ago. How much they've receded is shocking. It'd blow your mind.

Nothing to do with Global Warming.... everything to do with de-forestation for great distances round the mountain. The snows of Kilimanjaro started retreating long before World War I. When the Earth was cooling for a while approx. 1941 - 1970.. the snows of Kilimanjaro continued to retreat....

And it's not disappearing due to melting.... but due to sublimation. This may have been going on for centuries...

It's likely that over time... Kilimanjaro's snow and ice has come and gone many times. Climate changes on the planet. Sometimes fast... sometimes slow... sometimes a little .... sometimes a lot..

But de-forestation for great distances around the mountain means much lower humidity...... the much greater humidity from the former forests is now gone... resulting in much less precipitation on the mountain..

With no more moisture laden air dropping precipitation in the form of snow..... the ice cap slowly evaporates...

[Seastallion]

In the absence of absolute proof (say) either way,,,,,why would you err on the side of Big Money, instead of erring on the side of caution?

Because caution isn't free.

In fact, adopting the poster above's solution (stop all CO2 emissions now) would be the most catastrophically futile, damaging, and expensive policy in the history of mankind, even if you could do it.

Humanity has finally, in the past 150 years, managed to drag itself to a reasonably comfortable standard of living through using cheap energy (that is, fossil fuels). Without cheap energy we revert to living in yurts powered by tallow candles, as the extreme Green movement would like. Plus, 90% of humanity would die of starvation or disease in very short order.

The 'precautionary principle', which is what you are arguing for, is only valid if you consider the risks, benefits and the costs of a policy. That hasn't happened in the climate debate. It has been assumed (quite arbitrarily) that the 'risk' is so overwhelming that any 'cost' is worth bearing.

Acting without considering both the benefits and the risks, in the case of global warming, means that societies will incur staggering economic losses in possibly futile attempts to protect against environmental damage whose existence can only be speculated about. The stakes are enormous. To act without knowing the facts would be extremely irresponsible.

OK, so you've made it clear that money is your motivator, rather than your grandchildren, and mine.

Enough said with regard to any of your arguments, since they are made with a thought to money, now, not the future of everyone else after you're dead.

[Catoni]

This despite Antipodean record cold weather. Both NZ and Australia had a particularly cold winter, with record colds in some places. Consider how that affects the global average, and you have a picture of a bleak future.

Well done Big Oil, Big Coal, and all the politicians in your pockets.

Last winter was a record cold in the eastern U.S. and Canada also... people there would have loved a bit more warming.. Heating bills were crazy...

I prefer the warmth ,,,, much nicer than freezing chilling bitter cold that lasts for months.. and snow and ice removal....

In Chiang Mai and the surrounding area for four months during the hottest part of the year...(and Songkran ) .... first two or three weeks was bad...sweating like crazy in the heat... drinking lots of Nestle water... and then I got used to it.

My sweating slowed down back to normal... and even when it got very hot... I could ignore it and enjoy myself.

One secret was staying away from airconditioning..... just using fans.. wearing a hat ..the proper fabrics for shirts etc...

Air-conditioning will ruin your body's ability to naturally acclimatize to the tropical heat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acclimatization

Edited August 21, 2015 by Catoni

[RickBradford]

OK, so you've made it clear that money is your motivator, rather than your grandchildren, and mine.

Enough said with regard to any of your arguments, since they are made with a thought to money, now, not the future of everyone else after you're dead.

It's always the same with the Green/Left, isn't it? Anyone who disagrees with you must not only be wrong, but evil as well.

I care just as much about the future of my children as anyone else, which is why I oppose futile, damaging, fantasy-land, feel-good Green policies.

I'm sick to death of these moralistic narcissists telling us how we should all run our lives, especially as none of them will ever have to bear the consequences of their folly.

[Seastallion]

I climbed Kili a few years ago. The snows are gone and the glaciers melting at an incredible pace. We can debate all we like, but it's a reality there and dramatically changing the lives of those who depend on the runoff.

I'm not up for a debate on what's causing this, just know the earth is getting warmer and glaciers are melting. Climbed a few in Patagonia a few years ago. How much they've receded is shocking. It'd blow your mind.

Nothing to do with Global Warming.... everything to do with de-forestation for great distances round the mountain. The snows of Kilimanjaro started retreating long before World War I. When the Earth was cooling for a while approx. 1941 - 1970.. the snows of Kilimanjaro continued to retreat....

And it's not disappearing due to melting.... but due to sublimation. This may have been going on for centuries...

It's likely that over time... Kilimanjaro's snow and ice has come and gone many times. Climate changes on the planet. Sometimes fast... sometimes slow... sometimes a little .... sometimes a lot..

But de-forestation for great distances around the mountain means much lower humidity...... the much greater humidity from the former forests is now gone... resulting in much less precipitation on the mountain..

With no more moisture laden air dropping precipitation in the form of snow..... the ice cap slowly evaporates...

Deforestation also means less carbon absorption, adding to the overall effect.

[craigt3365]

I climbed Kili a few years ago. The snows are gone and the glaciers melting at an incredible pace. We can debate all we like, but it's a reality there and dramatically changing the lives of those who depend on the runoff.

I'm not up for a debate on what's causing this, just know the earth is getting warmer and glaciers are melting. Climbed a few in Patagonia a few years ago. How much they've receded is shocking. It'd blow your mind.

Nothing to do with Global Warming.... everything to do with de-forestation for great distances round the mountain. The snows of Kilimanjaro started retreating long before World War I. When the Earth was cooling for a while approx. 1941 - 1970.. the snows of Kilimanjaro continued to retreat....

And it's not disappearing due to melting.... but due to sublimation. This may have been going on for centuries...

It's likely that over time... Kilimanjaro's snow and ice has come and gone many times. Climate changes on the planet. Sometimes fast... sometimes slow... sometimes a little .... sometimes a lot..

But de-forestation for great distances around the mountain means much lower humidity...... the much greater humidity from the former forests is now gone... resulting in much less precipitation on the mountain..

With no more moisture laden air dropping precipitation in the form of snow..... the ice cap slowly evaporates...

Deforestation is an absolute possibility. Combined with rising temps in an area that would be dramatically effected by this. But that doesn't explain Patagonia.

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/09/patagonian-ice-field-has-lost-mass

A little-studied mass of ice in South America is undergoing some big changes: The Southern Patagonian Ice Field lost ice volume at a 50 percent faster rate between 2000-2012 than it did between 1975-2000, according to new analysis of digital elevation models performed by Cornell researchers.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/patagonian-glaciers-melting-in-a-hurry/

Warming air temperatures contributed to the thinning throughout the mountain range, Willis noted. And the warmer temperatures increased the chances that rain – as opposed to snow – would fall on and around the glaciers. That double threat increases the amount of water under the glaciers, decreasing friction and moving more ice to the oceans, he said.

There is some deforestation going on there, but around these mountains, it's pretty barren. And not many live down there. The weather is pretty brutal.

[Seastallion]

OK, so you've made it clear that money is your motivator, rather than your grandchildren, and mine.

Enough said with regard to any of your arguments, since they are made with a thought to money, now, not the future of everyone else after you're dead.

It's always the same with the Green/Left, isn't it? Anyone who disagrees with you must not only be wrong, but evil as well.

I care just as much about the future of my children as anyone else, which is why I oppose futile, damaging, fantasy-land, feel-good Green policies.

I'm sick to death of these moralistic narcissists telling us how we should all run our lives, especially as none of them will ever have to bear the consequences of their folly.

I get the impression that you worry about your grandkids bank balances, not their health.

Go burn a tyre or some polystyrene...just to feel good about yourself.

[Thaddeus]

Two important words in that article ''on record''

Scaremongers, please stop, last thing we need is any more pointless hot air.

[RickBradford]

OK, so you've made it clear that money is your motivator, rather than your grandchildren, and mine.

Enough said with regard to any of your arguments, since they are made with a thought to money, now, not the future of everyone else after you're dead.

It's always the same with the Green/Left, isn't it? Anyone who disagrees with you must not only be wrong, but evil as well.

I care just as much about the future of my children as anyone else, which is why I oppose futile, damaging, fantasy-land, feel-good Green policies.

I'm sick to death of these moralistic narcissists telling us how we should all run our lives, especially as none of them will ever have to bear the consequences of their folly.

I get the impression that you worry about your grandkids bank balances, not their health.

Go burn a tyre or some polystyrene...just to feel good about yourself.

Now you're being very silly.

[empireboy]

It seems the experts can seldom agree and this is just another case of it.

All the planets in our solar system, together with the sun are undergoing significant change as compared to recent modern historical records. (http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/the-weakest-solar-cycle-in-100-years/)

Not only is the sun on an orbit that impacts earth, but our entire solar system is also on an orbit within the Milky Way Galaxy that cannot be without impact on Earth.

There are many vested interests here... follow the money to get the best idea of what's happening!

[stevenl]

I have no doubt about manmade global warming, but I also think that a one month statistic is totally meaningless.

[swampdonkey]

They must of forgot to include Ireland, where records were set for lowest July temperatures ever recorded

[dabhand]

Interesting article concerning calculation of levels of carbon emissions produced by China.

http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/news/international-news/126378-china%5Cs-carbon-emissions-are-far-less-than-previous-estimates,-study-finds.html

Appears that the calculations, over the last ten years or more, failed to factor in the quality of coal used by China and had an impact of overstating the level of carbon emissions by a factor of around 40%.

Apparently fuel quality had not been previously included in the calculations!!

Not exactly a minor error.

[Catoni]

I climbed Kili a few years ago. The snows are gone and the glaciers melting at an incredible pace. We can debate all we like, but it's a reality there and dramatically changing the lives of those who depend on the runoff.

I'm not up for a debate on what's causing this, just know the earth is getting warmer and glaciers are melting. Climbed a few in Patagonia a few years ago. How much they've receded is shocking. It'd blow your mind.

You said "...hottest ever..." in a previous post.

"Ever" is a very, very, very long time..... are you sure you mean that ? ?

So often... I see people greatly exaggerate.... and wonder why they do that. The NOAA records only go back to 1880 for that report.... you can hardly call that "...hottest ever..."

But I see eco-socialist activists doing that all the time. Exaggerating as much as they figure they can get away with.

I guess it makes for more sensational alarming reports .. Those Hollywood disaster movies like "Waterworld" (sea level rise), Gores political "An Inconvenient Truth", "The Day After Tomorrow", "Wall*E", etc. must really have effected a lot of people..

We just came out of the Little Ice Age circa 1850.....Are you aware of how horrible a time that was for the people that lived through it ? ? Shorter growing seasons, failed harvests, famine, people gathered indoors more because of the longer, more deadly winters.. spreading disease easier, higher death rates ...especially for the young and ill..

I would expect it to gradually warm for a couple hundred years or so following that.... . Back to levels like during the Medieval Warm Period or the Roman Warm Period or other even warmer periods in the past..

The I.P.C.C. says we warmed only 0.85 degree C between 1880 - 2012. Thank the Gods we have warmed... It's good for the planet. Cold kills many more than warmth..

You find very few people choosing to live in the cold Arctic and Antarctic regions compared to the rest of the world. People I know that can afford it, choose to retire in the hot tropics.... not to the shores of Ellesmere Island or some other Arctic island.

There is no fancy resort or retirement communities at Alert on Ellesmere.... or on the north shore of Alaska or on Baffin Island..

If you know anything about geological and paleo-climatological history on this planet..... you would not find the present warming alarming at all.

It's well within the normal range of variability for this planet. Climate changes... sometimes fast.. sometimes slow... sometimes a little.. sometimes a lot...

Really a very interesting planet.

[GanDoonToonPet]

I wish journalists wouldn't publish these 'anecdotes'. It detracts from the real science which is based on extrapolation from long term trends. This leads to people making silly statements like 'there's been no warming since 1998', an example of horrendous cherry-picking of the data.

[Catoni]

I climbed Kili a few years ago. The snows are gone and the glaciers melting at an incredible pace. We can debate all we like, but it's a reality there and dramatically changing the lives of those who depend on the runoff.

I'm not up for a debate on what's causing this, just know the earth is getting warmer and glaciers are melting. Climbed a few in Patagonia a few years ago. How much they've receded is shocking. It'd blow your mind.

Nothing to do with Global Warming.... everything to do with de-forestation for great distances round the mountain. The snows of Kilimanjaro started retreating long before World War I. When the Earth was cooling for a while approx. 1941 - 1970.. the snows of Kilimanjaro continued to retreat....

And it's not disappearing due to melting.... but due to sublimation. This may have been going on for centuries...

It's likely that over time... Kilimanjaro's snow and ice has come and gone many times. Climate changes on the planet. Sometimes fast... sometimes slow... sometimes a little .... sometimes a lot..

But de-forestation for great distances around the mountain means much lower humidity...... the much greater humidity from the former forests is now gone... resulting in much less precipitation on the mountain..

With no more moisture laden air dropping precipitation in the form of snow..... the ice cap slowly evaporates...

Deforestation also means less carbon absorption, adding to the overall effect.

I'm not to concerned about the level of CO2 in the air if that is what you are referring to. Life arose on Earth about 3.8 billion years ago. And when you look at the last 500 - 600 million years of life on this planet when life became much more complex, we are actually extremely low in atmospheric CO2 concentration right now.

For as long as we have had coral reefs, bivalves, fish and pant life and animals, we have usually had between 1000ppm - 7000ppm and possibly higher.

The greenhouse industry in my area purchase CO2 generators to boost their indoor CO2 levels to between 800 - 1300 ppm for their vegetables and flowers.

The return on investment is very much worth it as they produce amazing vegetables and flowers... ( I love the tomatoes).

We did have lower CO2 not long ago on this planet.... about 230ppm..... and that is getting to a scary low level compared to the past.

Just let me say this..... Plant photosynthesis stops below 150 ppm. You know what would happen ? ?

Do you know what that would mean for life on this world if we went into an uncontrollable reverse of CO2 in the atmosphere and it went lower than 150ppm ? ?

Any idea what would happen ? ? Let me say this... it would make a very interesting "End of the world disaster" Hollywood movie..

Edited August 21, 2015 by Catoni