A third of the world now faces deadly heatwaves as result of climate change

  • Thread starter Thread starter lynnvinc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hopefully this chart based on NASA data from 1880 through 2016 will put to rest the idea that GW has somehow stopped. Even most skeptics agree it is happening, and in fact it looks like it’s accelerating (hopefully not):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe....svg/450px-Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg.png

Note 1998 was quite warm – a super-el-nino year – but not nearly as hot as 2016.
NASA was created in 1958.

How did they go back in time to 1880?

On the other hand, we DO KNOW that there were cold snaps … time periods when, for example, the Thames River in London froze over.

historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/The-Thames-Frost-Fairs/

These were, as far as we know, purely natural occurrences.
 
NASA was created in 1958.

How did they go back in time to 1880?
They used historical records
On the other hand, we DO KNOW that there were cold snaps … time periods when, for example, the Thames River in London froze over.
These were, as far as we know, purely natural occurrences.
You continue to confuse weather with climate. Weather changes over the short term climate trends takes decades. Look at the image again, notice that from 1880 to about 1965 we see a normal variation in temperature (natural occurrences) but since 1965 temperature has been steadily increasing and climate models predict it will continue to increase.
 
Guess what!

Ozone is invisible.

The DU was not used until well after Dobson died.

The first time that South Polar ozone was measured was during the IGY … International Geophysical Year … and it showed a definite seasonal reduction followed by a seasonal increase.

We also already know from Gordon Dobson’s 1963 and 1968 publications that the “Ozone Hole” is natural. First measured in 1956, not 1975 or 1985, seasonal fluctuations of the “Ozone Hole” have always been there.

In 1963, Gordon Dobson (1889 - 1976) wrote “Observing the Atmosphere”. He covered temperature, ozone {1} (including global anomalies), solar activity, ionosphere, aurora, Van Allen belts, and magnetic field {5}. It ws partly an effort to describe what had been learned during the celebrated IGY (International Geophysical Year) … July 1957 thru December 1958 … for which Dobson built 100 ozone measuring instruments (the first ones).

In March 1968, “Applied Optics” published Dr. Dobson’s full-length article on the work done by his group at Oxford since 1922 to measure atmospheric ozone {2}.

Since then a number of books and papers have been published about atmospheric ozone. But they are scattershot rather than methodical … collections of anecdotes … stories. They present no data that can be readily compared to previous data in any consistent way. Although the new guys pay homage to Dobson by giving his name to the unit of measure, they NEVER refer to Dobson’s 40+ years of work, or to his writings, or to his data.

For example, Dr. Dobson published the following graphic in both his 1963 and 1968 editions:

And in 1968, he published the following:

[0.25 cm = 250 Dobsons = 1/8" thickness of ozone spread thru 30 km of altitude!]

The new guys fuss over 6% “depletion”! A 6% variation of an average cannot be measured with ANY certainty thru 30 km of upper atmosphere!

Dobson’s May to April graphs {2} of the first measurements of Antarctic ozone correlate with the Arctic cycle (adjusted by six months).

[Seasonality in the southern hemisphere is out of phase with ours.] Halley Bay is at 76 degrees S. latitude; Spitzbergen at 80 degrees N. latitude. Dobson also discovered ozone anomalies in Canada and northern India.

Instead of updating the early data, his successors homogenize data {3} and use one-time readings which tell us very little. They use selective data {4}, make retroactive adjustments, and devise theoretical models to create imaginary trends which they then pit against Dobson’s documented observations and experiments (“The Hole in the Ozone Scare”, Maduro & Schauerhammer, 1992). In 1982 Dobson’s instruments were replaced and , voila!, the scary “hole” suddenly appeared.

Gribbin (1998) uses some undefined composite {3}, which shows little fluctuation over the years, in an effort to demonstrate long term stability of the ozone layer until the surprise “discovery” of ozone depletion. By contrast, Dobson data show minor fluctuation at the equator but DRAMATIC seasonal (and daily) variation at both poles {1}, {2} … around 40% even in the 1950’s (in the pre-Freon era) … with a 60% difference between polar and equatorial readings! One could even say that the year-round normal polar ozone level is around 250, but INCREASES to 400+ with spring warming!! NO HOLES!!!

An apocalyptic graph {4}, with a misleading vertical axis, does not help us understand what is really happening, especially in light of the conflict with Dobson’s work.

Other elements ignored by all of the disaster mongers include: Mt. Erebus, the surface caldera volcano 18 miles upwind of McMurdo; 1958 French polar vortex data; long-term solar cycles; 1988 Japanese data; bacterial and ocean floor interactions with CFCs; and gross oversimplifications in the computer models. (Maduro). Scientists are required to answer and satisfy ALL criticisms of their theories. But instead, the current crop is trying to bury and intimidate its critics.
Where are you copying and pasting this info from?

Do you even understand any of the science?

Ozone is invisible to what, or whom, exactly? And how does its alleged invisibility impact a hole or not?

Btw , in the world of peer reviewed scientific research, its poor form to continue rehashing work, or quoting work over 10yo. 5yo is premium

You might want to start spewing forth current research, esp the conclusions… if you cant access the full article, ask someone who can. Like myself.
 
We have arctic temperature data going back to 1958.

Kahl analyzed the data and said that global warming is bogus.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/93JD00818/full

Abstract

Arctic temperature trends in four tropospheric layers during the period 1958–1986 are examined through analysis of a comprehensive archive of Arctic upper air meteorological data. The goals of the study are to describe the trends in Arctic tropospheric temperatures and to provide verification data for model simulations of Arctic and global climate. This analysis extends the work of previous researchers by examining rawinsonde time series from a much denser distribution of stations than was previously available and by resolving the vertical distribution of tropospheric temperatures as well. Absolute trends of 3°C/30yr or larger were found, with both cooling and warming tendencies observed in all layers. The majority of the trends, however, are not statistically significant. Considerable regional and seasonal variability is observed. Trends at many stations in Eurasia and Greenland are highly sensitive to large positive anomalies during the period 1958–1963, which may be artifacts of the data. On the basis of our analysis, we conclude that greenhouse-induced warming is not detectable in the Arctic troposphere for the 1958–1986 period.
We, whose we?

Whats the conclusion in this alleged article you havent named, authored or dated?
 
We, whose we?

Whats the conclusion in this alleged article you havent named, authored or dated?
It’s in the link to AGU publications. Only the abstract. You have to pay to get the whole article. But there is author info and dates. It is a little dated, being published in 1993. But it scholarly paper.
 
It’s in the link to AGU publications. Only the abstract. You have to pay to get the whole article. But there is author info and dates. It is a little dated, being published in 1993. But it scholarly paper.
I really do have sources that completely discredit you.
But you have to pay to see it.
 
Way to demagogically attribute something to me that I didn’t remotely say.
Before you can implement a final solution to climate deniers, you first have to dehumanize them. Equating them with Holocaust deniers is a very good way to begin the dehumanization process. We’re already past the point were climate change alarmists are trying to criminalize dissent. Now, it’s only a negotiation over appropriate penalties.

scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2015/09/19/letter-to-president-obama-investigate-deniers-under-rico/
 
In the late 70s/early 80s, we were being taught (scared with) ‘the Coming Ice Age.’

I’d like an explanation of how ‘the coming ice age’ suddenly became ‘global warming.’ And when enough people have pointed out some very cold years recently, it’s been changed to ‘climate change’ and we’ve been told that somehow very cold years are evidence of warming. :confused:

Call me stupid, but cold seems to me to be evidence of cold, not evidence of warmth.

For the record, I’m sitting here on the brink of July in a state that I *know *was very hot from late May onward, back when I was in high school, having turned on the *heater *the last day or two.

Also for the record, there is a long history of ‘climate change,’ including warming and cooling periods in the medieval centuries. There are entire books written on it.

For yet another record, I’ll believe that people like Al Gore actually *believe *what they’re telling us about ‘global warming’ or ‘climate change’ or whatever the term is in a given week, when they themselves LIVE as if it’s true. Right now, such people are typically living in huge homes that consume massive amounts of energy, flying in private charter planes, and generally producing the largest carbon footprints of all.

Sorry, if they *believed *what they’re saying, they’d be living a life that reduces their own energy consumption.
 
In the late 70s/early 80s, we were being taught (scared with) ‘the Coming Ice Age.’
Hey look! That myth again.

There was no scientific consensus that there was a coming ice age and even in that period there were more studies and models showing that the earth was warming than cooling.
 
Hey look! That myth again.

There was no scientific consensus that there was a coming ice age and even in that period there were more studies and models showing that the earth was warming than cooling.
Wow, really, Wesrock? A myth? I hope you’re not suggesting I’m propagating a ‘myth’ THAT ‘the coming ice age’ was being taught in the 70s/80s. If so, you are calling me a liar. I was there, and I clearly remember the constant push on ‘the coming ice age.’

Your comments about consensus and studies and models are irrelevant. The FACT remains that they constantly change the Current Scare.

And if there were (supposedly) studies claiming the opposite even at the time, it raises the questions of why we were being told something contrary to these (supposed) studies and why, if that’s the case, we should believe anything we’re being told now.

Additionally, there is not a consensus now about global warming.

And I repeat the other things I said:
  1. I’m living in a state that now routinely has many cool days. I currently have my heater on. This was unheard of when I lived here in high school.
  2. There is a long history of ‘climate change.’ Look into some reading on the weather of the 14th century and the centuries surrounding it.
  3. If Al Gore et al believe what they are saying, they’d be living accordingly. Their own behavior says they themselves don’t believe what they’re saying.
Let me add to that: we routinely have these scares. The coming population explosion–anyone else remember being taught that in the 70s? We’re all supposed to be living crowded shoulder to shoulder since the last fifteen or twenty years. These scares are constantly floated, used to scare people into political agendas, and the date of the mass destruction passes…and they just change the goalpost.

Forgive me for being skeptical. But do not accuse me of being a liar or pushing ‘myths.’
 
Many years ago when I lived in California I was pregnant and it was the middle of October, the heat for several weeks was very hot and my baby was born when the temperature was 115 degrees.

Of course there is climate change, it has been changing from hot to cold and from cold to hot probably since God created the earth.

It seems that mostly liberals love to push some type of agenda without facts and it seems that as the years go by, more and more people have been brain washed to believe whatever elitists and the media say.

Bernadette
 
In the late 70s/early 80s, we were being taught (scared with) ‘the Coming Ice Age.’
No, we weren’t. There was one small group of scientists who said that, and one Time Magazine cover story that publicized it. That is all.
Also for the record, there is a long history of ‘climate change,’ including warming and cooling periods in the medieval centuries. There are entire books written on it.
But the rate of warming was never as fast as it has been over the past 60 years.
 
Before you can implement a final solution to climate deniers, you first have to dehumanize them. Equating them with Holocaust deniers is a very good way to begin the dehumanization process. We’re already past the point were climate change alarmists are trying to criminalize dissent. Now, it’s only a negotiation over appropriate penalties.

scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2015/09/19/letter-to-president-obama-investigate-deniers-under-rico/
Ad Hominem (Circumstantial)

argumentum ad hominem

(also known as: appeal to motive, appeal to personal interest, argument from motives, conflict of interest, faulty motives, naïve cynicism, questioning motives, vested interest)

Description: Suggesting that the person who is making the argument is biased or predisposed to take a particular stance, and therefore, the argument is necessarily invalid.
 
Wow, really, Wesrock? A myth? I hope you’re not suggesting I’m propagating a ‘myth’ THAT ‘the coming ice age’ was being taught in the 70s/80s. If so, you are calling me a liar. I was there, and I clearly remember the constant push on ‘the coming ice age.’

Your comments about consensus and studies and models are irrelevant. The FACT remains that they constantly change the Current Scare.

And if there were (supposedly) studies claiming the opposite even at the time, it raises the questions of why we were being told something contrary to these (supposed) studies and why, if that’s the case, we should believe anything we’re being told now.

Additionally, there is not a consensus now about global warming.

And I repeat the other things I said:
  1. I’m living in a state that now routinely has many cool days. I currently have my heater on. This was unheard of when I lived here in high school.
  2. There is a long history of ‘climate change.’ Look into some reading on the weather of the 14th century and the centuries surrounding it.
  3. If Al Gore et al believe what they are saying, they’d be living accordingly. Their own behavior says they themselves don’t believe what they’re saying.
Let me add to that: we routinely have these scares. The coming population explosion–anyone else remember being taught that in the 70s? We’re all supposed to be living crowded shoulder to shoulder since the last fifteen or twenty years. These scares are constantly floated, used to scare people into political agendas, and the date of the mass destruction passes…and they just change the goalpost.

Forgive me for being skeptical. But do not accuse me of being a liar or pushing ‘myths.’
I also remember the return-of-the-Ice-Age scare years ago. You are not alone. I also remember the era when some scientists believed the universe was contracting and others expanding, while still others said neither. Likewise, I recall the carbohydrate craze in the 1970’s, and then the all-protein diets without carbohydrates, and today the Paleo diet. Science keeps changing, and so it is hard for us to believe anything the scientists tell us. Still, I am a believer until the current theory is proven wrong.
 
I also remember the return-of-the-Ice-Age scare years ago. You are not alone. I also remember the era when some scientists believed the universe was contracting and others expanding, while still others said neither. Likewise, I recall the carbohydrate craze in the 1970’s, and then the all-protein diets without carbohydrates, and today the Paleo diet. Science keeps changing, and so it is hard for us to believe anything the scientists tell us. Still, I am a believer until the current theory is proven wrong.
I think pop-science runs with these things and makes it seem like science. The ice age thing was only proposed by a couple of scientists, the rest claiming GW was upon us, but I guess and ice age sounded scarier than GW, so the media ran with the ice age.

Also around that time was the nuclear scare and the idea of a nuclear winter. An ice age would have taken 100s if not 1000s of years to manifest, but a nuclear winter could happen within a year or so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top