If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   2012 has been the warmest year on record. This is not a repeat from 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, or 2002, and certainly does not reflect any sort of measurable trend. Besides, it's snowing somewhere   (content.usatoday.com) divider line 326
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

5263 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 May 2012 at 11:05 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



326 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-09 12:21:29 PM

fickenchucker: Who cars one way or the other? I live in an area with plenty of water and food.

The seas could rise 300 feet and I don't give a carp.


I hope you also live in a place with lots of tanks then.
 
2012-05-09 12:21:34 PM
Quick, chop down more trees so we can fire up the chart factory.
 
2012-05-09 12:21:38 PM

LSinLV: records go back to 1895.

so approximately 120 years of statistical data on a planet that is approximately 4 billion years old....so...you base your "trend" of data on a statistical model that represents less than 0.00000000001 % of all possible data.

yeah.....I believe that "Global Warming" is here.

/facepalm


Are you an ice core denier?
 
2012-05-09 12:22:35 PM

ManRay: What is the big deal?

Warmer temps = More places food can be grown.

Global warming feeds the masses!


Because temperature is the sole limiting factor in agriculture! Which is why areas with poor soil and precipitation regimes are totally amazing places to grow food with the addition of a little heat, amirite?
 
2012-05-09 12:22:49 PM
Whether the weather be fine
Whether the weather be not
Whether the weather be cold
Whether the weather be hot
We'll weather the weather
Whatever the whether
Whether we like it or not
 
2012-05-09 12:22:55 PM

Demonrats: I hate winter with a greater passion than anyone can imagine. Every year my fingers get blisters on them that begin to weep from late November until April. This has been the first tolerable year in quite some time due to the very warm winter. I would just like to say, "I LOVE YOU GLOBAL WARMING!!"


Ever thought of relocating so you're not such a miserable douche almost half of your waking hours?
 
2012-05-09 12:23:00 PM
 
2012-05-09 12:23:09 PM

jehovahs witness protection: The planet is overpopulated anyway.
knocking off around 6.5 billion humans would be a great improvement.


Fark it! I'm an upper middle class white guy. Nothings going to happen to me!
 
2012-05-09 12:23:21 PM

LSinLV: but trying to base something on such a small data set is statistically wrong, and not accurate in any way.


You're not understanding that those other billions of years aren't important to what is happening over the past 100. The climate forcings that act on long time scales and billions of years ago are different from the forcings which act on short time scales and are happening now. For example, why should we include temperature data from when the Earth's atmosphere lacked oxygen or had other significant chemical difference than the modern atmosphere? The Earth of the distant past had a cooler sun, a different continental configuration, a different ecosystem, a different atmosphere, etc, etc.
 
2012-05-09 12:23:43 PM

gtfan92: Wait, did you just take the argument that the rest of the world cares about climate change? LOL


They acknowledge it and support or don't actively block further research into it.... That doesn't mean they have the political will or economic might to fight it, but they understand it and allow it to be a factor informing policy.

No d'uh.
 
2012-05-09 12:23:57 PM
I suppose we had a huge increase in carbon dioxide back in March that brought 80 degree days to the upper midwest, or maybe it just was the shift on the jet stream like they reported. That being said, it's real and irreversible and no amount of government taking more of our money is going to change it.

To slightly alter Jimmy Carter's quote: wear a t-shirt.
 
2012-05-09 12:24:25 PM

Magnanimous_J: jehovahs witness protection


half a billion is too many.

0.5-1million. Two sites, opposite sides of the planet. Call em "city" and "second city"
if you like.
 
2012-05-09 12:25:19 PM

fickenchucker: Who cars one way or the other? I live in an area with plenty of water and food.

The seas could rise 300 feet and I don't give a carp.


www.roflcat.com
 
2012-05-09 12:26:30 PM

fickenchucker: Who cars one way or the other? I live in an area with plenty of water and food.

The seas could rise 300 feet and I don't give a carp.


I hope you have a lot of guns and a lot of friends because people who don't have what you have will be along to take it from your dumb ass and give it someone with a shred of humanity.
 
2012-05-09 12:26:33 PM

dognose4: The real global temperature as measured by Satellite.


The UAH satellite data look like this when you don't fit an unphysical third order polynomial "trend" to them:

i.imgur.com

dognose4: Oh, and how about all that melting ice?


How about it? Are you denying that there is a longterm decline in any of the following:

NH sea ice?
Global sea ice?
Glacial mass balance?
 
2012-05-09 12:27:12 PM
So we're not going to see anymore snow within the next ten years...

Wait, they said that ten years ago, and last winter we got buried in 'just weather not climate'

They also said that by 2010 we would have hundreds of thousands of climate change refuges.

Where are they?
 
2012-05-09 12:28:27 PM

Magnanimous_J: Fark it! I'm an upper middle class white guy. Nothings going to happen to me!


middle class, check.
White, check
live in the USA, check

Worst case scenerio, there are literally millions(if not billions) of people who will die of starvation and disease before I'm even seriously inconvenienced.
 
2012-05-09 12:29:45 PM

meat0918: [media.kentucky.com image 620x413]


Joel Pett is an idiot.

Of course doing healthier things for the planet (and people) would have good long ranging benefits. But the cost to do these things all at once as though they had a higher priority then putting the roof over, food into, and moderately improving the quality of people's lives, is really stupid. Put shoes on everyone first before wanting to buy suits.

To perform all the "right" things we could/would/should do, would break not only our bank, but also our piggy banks. And I would rather work towards the moderate diet, then a crash course of hunger to lose weight.

Contrary to what people like our ex-VP that supposedly created and built the interwebs all with his own little hands would have you believe, the sky is NOT falling. We will survive, and as long as we work on doing the rights for both us and the earth in a logical and planned manner, I have little doubt that we both shall survive, and the quality of live for the both of us will improve.

Hopefully logic will eventually prevail.
 
2012-05-09 12:30:43 PM

SlothB77: Whoops, subby, but you forgot when NASA admitted their models were wrong


The article is confusing hottest year in the US with the hottest year globally. And the mistake which put the hottest year in the US as 1998 instead of 1934 had no effect on the global data because the US is only a fraction of the total surface area of the globe.
 
2012-05-09 12:31:35 PM
Quick, someone nuke Israel and fix it with a nice nuclear winter!
 
2012-05-09 12:32:05 PM
Is the Sun going supernova?
 
2012-05-09 12:32:34 PM

Corporate Self: fickenchucker: Who cares one way or the other? I live in an area with plenty of water and food.

The seas could rise 300 feet and I don't give a carp.

[www.roflcat.com image 555x458]



We can't have things until the issue has emotion taken out of it and a better grand plan is put in place. Nothing will happen until developing countries are on board. America could revert to teepees and horses, but without China and India, we're all screwed. Driving a Prius, which actually is very bad for mother earth given the batteries and total carbon footprint it takes to make one, won't do squat. And it wastes a lot of money in it's diversionary lifetime.

Therefore I don't care.
 
2012-05-09 12:32:59 PM

Jon Snow: LSinLV: because statistics.

That's not an answer. You're assuming that the total length of the Earth's history has some bearing on whether or not climate is changing now.

Timescales of relevance are absolutely a fundamental issue that people like you don't seem to understand. If I am trying to detect the effect of diurnal change on a metric, I don't look at a thousand annually-averaged data points just because there are more of them than hourly measurements. It completely misses the phenomenon I'm interested in.

no one is arguing that there is a trend currently, and that it is getting hotter.

Yes, plenty of people are. You can see it in this very thread.

but trying to base something on such a small data set is statistically wrong, and not accurate in any way.

You have literally no basis for making this claim. It might "feel right" to you, but there is no statistical basis for your claim. ~20-30 years of annual, globally-averaged temperature data is enough to meaningfully evaluate temperature trends. We can demonstrate this with historical or synthetic data where the answers are already known ahead of time and show that this is the case.

it's like trying to say that the the US is primarily a Jewish nation, based upon a poll taken in Miami Beach on saturday near a Synagouge.

You might have a point if we were using an inappropriate data set to evaluate a metric of interest, but annual, globally-averaged temperature over multidecadal to centennial timescales is completely appropriate to look at changes to the climate from changes in radiative forcings.


If you took a data set of temperatures during the ice age, would you say the earth is cooling.

do you even understand that I agree with you, and that CURRENTLY the earth IS INDEED in a warming trend. but a short trend is all we have.

the number of variables, from the likes of mankind and our use of fossil fuels, to a current solar maximus, to variations in the current magnetosphere,etc ad nauseum.

we do NOT have enough data to properly extrapolate anything, unless we can definitely tie all of the variable down to specific causality.

NONE of us are RIGHT OR WRONG....we are all just GUESSING.
 
2012-05-09 12:33:30 PM
This place used to be a tropical forest surrounded by warm shallow seas.

YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN THAT.
 
2012-05-09 12:33:41 PM

SlothB77: Whoops, subby, but you forgot when NASA admitted their models were wrong


1. The temp data from TFA are from NOAA/NCDC, not NASA.

2. The error your link refers to was trivial and had no impact on the long term trends of either US temps or global temps:

i.imgur.com
i.imgur.com
 
2012-05-09 12:35:05 PM
I'm totally amused by all the "statistics" knowledge being thrown about in this thread.

Other than John Snow there isn't much to be had here.



Also...

dognose4: The real global temperature as measured by Satellite.
[www.drroyspencer.com image 640x369]

Oh, and how about all that melting ice?
[http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/ image 640x246]
We have more ice than average for the last 30 years.


I was going to make a comment about your graphs not having citations, but then I looked at the web addresses.

The first one cites Roy Spencer who has signed this declaration "We believe Earth and its ecosystems - created by God's intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence - are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth's climate system is no exception."

and the second cites the Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois which states on its website "Sea ice extent averaged over the Northern Hemisphere has decreased correspondingly over the past 50 years (shown right). The largest change has been observed in the summer months with decreases exceeding 30%. "

Hooray cherry picked data!
 
2012-05-09 12:35:59 PM
I still hate CFLs
 
2012-05-09 12:37:02 PM

LSinLV: NONE of us are RIGHT OR WRONG....we are all just GUESSING.


Clearly you are
 
2012-05-09 12:37:07 PM

LSinLV: records go back to 1895.

so approximately 120 years of statistical data on a planet that is approximately 4 billion years old....so...you base your "trend" of data on a statistical model that represents less than 0.00000000001 % of all possible data.

yeah.....I believe that "Global Warming" is here.

/facepalm


We've been observing modern biology in a scientific context for only about 200 years, therefore fossil records are meaningless and evolution is false, just like ice cores and other evidence of ancient climate are meaningless.

Seriously, if you can think of a better explanation for the contents of the ice cores and other ancient climatic evidence then, please, say so. Otherwise, you're ignoring evidence that speaks against your side.
 
2012-05-09 12:37:28 PM

Voiceofreason01: Magnanimous_J: Fark it! I'm an upper middle class white guy. Nothings going to happen to me!

middle class, check.
White, check
live in the USA, check

Worst case scenerio, there are literally millions(if not billions) of people who will die of starvation and disease before I'm even seriously inconvenienced.


Seriously. I don't mean to come off as cynical, but if no one else cares enough about this to do anything meaningful, why should I worry about it?

China can burn Styrofoam for power 24/7 for all I care. The South Americans can rip down the rain forests all day long. The Mexicans can turn their farm land into slag with all the chemicals and over farming. They'll be the first ones to die when things go pear shaped. Not me.

I'll be fishing for surf perch and snaring wild grouse with my AK slung over my back in the Pacific Northwest long after human civilization crashes down around us.
 
2012-05-09 12:38:08 PM

LSinLV:

we ...


earthobservatory.nasa.gov
i.ytimg.com
Nope nothing to see here
 
2012-05-09 12:38:19 PM
The worth of the global warming argument was eventually made obvious to me when I realized that everybody was arguing about what they want the royal You, and the world's conglomerate of evil corporations, to do to save their world, but absolutely nobody talks about their own personal responsibilities.

Here's a quick test for everybody. Do you:

have more than 1 child
regularly drive a car
fly more than once a year
shop at chain supermarkets
eat at chain restaurants
buy your clothes from chain retailers

If you answered yes to any of the above questions you need to stop talking about what other people need to do to fix global warming.
 
2012-05-09 12:38:54 PM

Gunther: Lucky LaRue: If Al Gore was right, then it's already too late to fix, anyway, so what's all the worry and fuss?

I love the way the anti-GW argument has progressed:

"It isn't happening!"

"OK it's happening, but it's a natural cycle!"

"OK it's happening and we're causing it, but it's completely harmless!"

"OK it's happening, we're causing it and it is harmful, but it's too late to stop!"

Well yeah, possibly, but the reason it might be too late to stop it is because YOU ASSHOLES HAVE BEEN STALLING US FOR DECADES.


But that's ok because we'll have to abandon Texas and Arizona first.
 
2012-05-09 12:39:02 PM

plasticuser: gtfan92: Wait, did you just take the argument that the rest of the world cares about climate change? LOL

They acknowledge it and support or don't actively block further research into it.... That doesn't mean they have the political will or economic might to fight it, but they understand it and allow it to be a factor informing policy.

No d'uh.


plasticuser: gtfan92: Wait, did you just take the argument that the rest of the world cares about climate change? LOL

They acknowledge it and support or don't blame the USA for it and actively block further research into it if it shows fossil fuels are the real culprit instead of the USA's sinful arrogance.... That doesn't mean they have the political will or economic might to fight it won't support the AGW movement's plans to tear the US economy down to a "sustainable" level, but they understand it would be very bad for their own economies and won't allow it to be a factor informing their own policy.

No d'uh.


FTFY.
 
2012-05-09 12:41:32 PM
We have a week of 70F and sunshine in the PNW. I'd forgotten what that bright yellow thing in the sky was.

/bring on the global warming!
 
2012-05-09 12:41:41 PM

Lord Dimwit: LSinLV: records go back to 1895.

so approximately 120 years of statistical data on a planet that is approximately 4 billion years old....so...you base your "trend" of data on a statistical model that represents less than 0.00000000001 % of all possible data.

yeah.....I believe that "Global Warming" is here.

/facepalm

We've been observing modern biology in a scientific context for only about 200 years, therefore fossil records are meaningless and evolution is false, just like ice cores and other evidence of ancient climate are meaningless.

Seriously, if you can think of a better explanation for the contents of the ice cores and other ancient climatic evidence then, please, say so. Otherwise, you're ignoring evidence that speaks against your side.


great.

tell me then, was the sun cooler billions of years ago?? maybe that is why we had ice ages??? maybe it was because the earth had a larger or more eliptical orbit,or we rode further off the plane of the ecliptic??? maybe our inclination off axis was much less than it is today, as the motel core was larger???

these are ALL current questions being researched that can affect our current and past global temps....none of this is yet been factualized.

I'll stop posting because too many here are afraid to admit we JUST DON'T know all of the variables.

It's OK to not know an answer to a question.
 
2012-05-09 12:41:56 PM
Wow, look at all the new trolls!
Aw, they're so cute when they're brand new.

/stomp them, Jon
 
2012-05-09 12:41:57 PM

Jon Snow: The continental US != the globe. The fact that the US is experiencing a warm year in and of itself is nothing remarkable.

However, as subby points out (though in an exaggerated manner), this isn't just an isolated year[1].

[i.imgur.com image 500x371]

The US is experiencing demonstrable long term warming, and that warming is consistent with the global trend of warming as well[2].

[i.imgur.com image 640x416]

And obviously, we know what is causing that warming trend- increasing radiative forcing (largely through increasing GHGs) resulting in an energy imbalance, necessitating a warming to a higher equilibrium[3].

[i48.tinypic.com image 500x410]
[i47.tinypic.com image 500x412]
[i50.tinypic.com image 500x558]

[1] Image from NCDC/NOAA, year to date temp anomalies relative to a 1951-1980 baseline.
[2] Temp anomalies for US and globe with a LOWESS smooth.
[3] Huber, M., and R. Knutti (2011): Anthropogenic and natural warming inferred from changes in Earth's energy balance. Nature Geoscience, 5, 31-36, doi:10.1038/ngeo1327.


All you've told me is that we were coming out a long term cold snap that affected the Earth for several hundred years, the same one that drove the Vikings out of Greenland. Maybe. We could also be preparing to enter another global snap. The longer term trends suggest that the Earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling that have nothing whatsoever to with humans.
 
2012-05-09 12:42:06 PM

LSinLV: but trying to base something on such a small data set is statistically wrong, and not accurate in any way.


So, if I showed you a 30 year crime trend for the US, would you argue that it's meaningless because the earth is 4.5 billion years old? We have data covering the period where fossil fuel use ramped up dramatically, as well as much earlier than that.

The recently observed climate change is a response to the combustion of fossil fuels on a massive scale. It was predicted in 1896, and Arrhenius essentially got the mechanism and magnitude correct then-- his mistake was that he thought a doubling of carbon dioxide was a thought experiment, because he failed to foresee how quickly fossil fuels would expand.

Satellites can directly measure the recent change in absorption by the earth's atmosphere across all relevant wavelengths. Isotope data show that the excess greenhouse gases are from anthropogenic emissions, and the magnitude of their change lines up with known fossil fuel combustion rates. The climate response is exactly in line with that.

Finally, we have plenty of data on both global atmospheric concentrations and temperature trends going back much further than the direct instrumental record. One quick example of many:

www.ncdc.noaa.gov

From Loulergue, et al. "Orbital and millennial-scale features of atmospheric CH4 over the past 800,000 years." Nature, 453 (7193), 383-386, 15 May 2008. Note that present methane levels are ~1800 ppbv, over twice the level seen in nature for close to a million years. Carbon dioxide shows a similar trend.
 
2012-05-09 12:43:23 PM

Corporate Self: fickenchucker: Who cars one way or the other? I live in an area with plenty of water and food.

The seas could rise 300 feet and I don't give a carp.

I hope you have a lot of guns and a lot of friends because people who don't have what you have will be along to take it from your dumb ass and give it someone with a shred of humanity.


shiat! so you are saying that the OWS'ers will rule the wastelands?
 
2012-05-09 12:43:24 PM

LSinLV: NONE of us are RIGHT OR WRONG....we are all just GUESSING.


The official pants of the see-oh-two fetishists?
GUESS JEANS.

/Bwah-hahahaha.
 
2012-05-09 12:43:49 PM

thesloppy: Here's a quick test for everybody. Do you:

have more than 1 child
regularly drive a car
fly more than once a year
shop at chain supermarkets
eat at chain restaurants
buy your clothes from chain retailers

If you answered yes to any of the above questions you need to stop talking about what other people need to do to fix global warming.


Participation does not negate grievance.
 
2012-05-09 12:44:14 PM

madgonad: Land in Kansas that once grew wheat might become more like western Texas and only be fit for cattle.


That's a moisture issue, not a temperature issue. Besides, west Texas and western Kansas already have the same climate and already cannot grow wheat.
 
2012-05-09 12:45:31 PM

TheMysticS: Wow, look at all the new trolls!
Aw, they're so cute when they're brand new.

/stomp them, Jon


Ah yes.
Invoke Jon the Irrefutable!

/Go ahead, prove that this entire argument is just a pointless academic rhetorical exercise.
 
2012-05-09 12:47:12 PM

iheartscotch: Ok; either there is a measurable difference in the basic mean temperature or there isn't. We're either doomed or we aren't. Arguing with people on the internet isn't going to help anything.

/ arguing on the Internet is like running in the special olympics; even if you win, you're still retarded


that's a great zinger...I'm gonna have to steal it
 
2012-05-09 12:47:12 PM
Subby needs to go back to troll school. And Primary school for reading. Not a repeat. Local. La Nina. ENSO. Weather. Hello?
 
2012-05-09 12:47:18 PM
"Well, it'll only kill the people we all want dead anyway, and I'm not selling the farking Yukon."
 
2012-05-09 12:48:45 PM

LSinLV: If you took a data set of temperatures during the ice age, would you say the earth is cooling.


If you looked at temperatures at the peak of the LGM, you wouldn't see cooling, you would see that temps were cooler than now. If you looked at temps transitioning from the Eemian to the LGM, you would see temps were cooling. If you looked at temps from the LGM to the early Holocene, you would see temps increasing (with notable reversals along the way due to DO events and the like).

But you wouldn't just look at temps. You would look at what the cause of the temp changes would be.

How does that in any way contradict anything I said?

do you even understand that I agree with you, and that CURRENTLY the earth IS INDEED in a warming trend.

So you said already. Why do I care? If you acknowledge one point but completely miss another, I'm not really worried about the part you're not getting wrong- I am worried about the part you are getting wrong.

but a short trend is all we have.

There is a difference between "short" and "insufficient". If you believe that the instrumental record is insufficiently long to make meaningful statements about the climate and, in combination with other observational and theoretical data, make meaningful statements about the drivers of climate, you're simply wrong.

the number of variables, from the likes of mankind and our use of fossil fuels, to a current solar maximus, to variations in the current magnetosphere,etc ad nauseum.

A relatively small number of variables drive a very large portion of climatic changes on multidecadal timescales. Saying "there's a lot of variables" isn't a legitimate rebuttal.

There are a lot of variables that determine human health. If I suddenly deprive you of oxygen, most of those other variables grow less and less important with time.

we do NOT have enough data to properly extrapolate anything

What do you mean "exptrapolate"? Are you under the mistaken impression that people are just extending present trends into the future?

That is demonstrably not what we're doing. We use state of the art models built on fundamental physical principles that demonstrate skill in reproducing the main features of the present global climate and changes in the instrumental record. We force them with estimates of changes in boundary conditions like solar irradiance, long-lived greenhouse gases, etc. and then look at the change in climatological metrics over time.

unless we can definitely tie all of the variable down to specific causality.

You're just speaking gibberish. A small number of variables control most climatic changes. It's not necessary to have an infallible grasp of the entire universe in order to talk meaningfully about climatic changes.

NONE of us are RIGHT OR WRONG

Some of us are assuredly more wrong than others. The ones using logical fallacies like argument from ignorance, for example.

we are all just GUESSING.

The fact that you think we're "just guessing" demonstrates your ignorance of the subject matter at hand, and should serve as a useful warning to anyone who makes the mistake of trying to engage with you seriously like I have.

What a waste of time.
 
2012-05-09 12:49:03 PM

hdhale: The longer term trends suggest that the Earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling that have nothing whatsoever to with humans.


Except we know what causes these cycles, and they aren't causing the present one. You can't just look at a planet-sized object changing temperatures by several Kelvins and yell "cycles".

Plus, and I think everyone thought this was obvious, the existence of natural cycles does not somehow rule out anthropogenic influence.
 
2012-05-09 12:49:16 PM

Joe Blowme: Corporate Self: fickenchucker: Who cars one way or the other? I live in an area with plenty of water and food.

The seas could rise 300 feet and I don't give a carp.

I hope you have a lot of guns and a lot of friends because people who don't have what you have will be along to take it from your dumb ass and give it someone with a shred of humanity.

shiat! so you are saying that the OWS'ers will rule the wastelands?


Well them or these guys:

Connoisseurs Blind Banjo Player Monthly
 
Displayed 50 of 326 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report