Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#6,328
#6,328
mrorange211 said:
After reading the study and not media click bait, this actually helps confirm GW is happening, not disprove it.
Click to expand...

snow in the winter? AGW
hot in the summer? AGW
no major hurricanes? AGW
multiple major hurricanes? AGW
earthquakes? AGW
refugee crises? AGW
volcanic eruptions? AGW

After a while, even well-meaning and reasonable proponents of the human contribution to climate change get lost in the blathering of the zealots and their mania.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#6,330
#6,330
BartW said:
That’s just sick. Nobody wants a repeat of Haiyan from 2 years ago or Sandy 3 years ago. Nobody wanted Patricia to bring Texas its second 1000-year flood this year (despite the drought). South Carolina’s record tidal flooding last week was described as “totally worse than the 1000-year flood” they had earlier this year. More recently still, another rare and unusually powerful cyclone has spun up in the Arabian Sea and could bring eight years worth of rain to war-torn Yemen (which has never experienced a hurricane). And let’s not forget we’ve already had our share of death and destruction from this year’s record fire season. Hottest year on record must be a coincidence...

1gjdAX7.gif
Click to expand...

Yes. Yes "they" do. "They" do because it justifies their "research".
 
#6,331
#6,331
Global warming..climate change..shiz is real yall! Just look at my pool temp at 9am this morning!!
edit- its at 86 right now! Pool Party at my house!
 

Attachments

  • temp.jpg
    temp.jpg
    17.4 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:
#6,333
#6,333
MG1968 said:
snow in the winter? AGW
hot in the summer? AGW
no major hurricanes? AGW
multiple major hurricanes? AGW
earthquakes? AGW
refugee crises? AGW
volcanic eruptions? AGW

After a while, even well-meaning and reasonable proponents of the human contribution to climate change get lost in the blathering of the zealots and their mania.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but it works both ways. You have members of your side that paint it just as bad as the crazy members of my side. In all seriousness, read the report and findings. They clearly show that these results are 100% indicative of global warming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,334
#6,334
mrorange211 said:
After reading the study and not media click bait, this actually helps confirm GW is happening, not disprove it.
Click to expand...

Is it this statement in the paper that makes you reach your conclusion......

The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

or is it just all the "if" statements and Zwally's biased view?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,336
#6,336
BigOrangeTrain said:
I wonder what kind of crap he is going to come up with to try and invalidate NASA now?
Click to expand...

Some mid-level manager at a tobacco or oil company has a son that works for NASA and once hosted a party that included NASA higher ups. The ensuing evening of drinking and joking will be enough to convince Bart that NASA is firmly in the hands of the "denialists".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,338
#6,338
MG1968 said:
Some mid-level manager at a tobacco or oil company has a son that works for NASA and once hosted a party that included NASA higher ups. The ensuing evening of drinking and joking will be enough to convince Bart that NASA is firmly in the hands of the "denialists".
Click to expand...

Awesome post :good!:. :eek:lol:
 
#6,340
#6,340
BartW said:
Impossible! NASA is one big climate cabal, haven't you heard?

I figured the usual crowd would be all over this one. I’m disappointed.
Click to expand...
That didn’t take long :) Now that we’re all caught up, I guess I’ll address the frenzy.

First, I think it’s hilarious how y’all pick and choose what news from NASA is a fact, and which is obviously part of the conspiracy. For example, this quote
BigOrangeTrain said:
I wonder what kind of crap he is going to come up with to try and invalidate NASA now?
Click to expand...
was in response to a post in which SandVol attempts to discredit the lead author of this study. Wtf? You’re the ones that have been trying to discredit NASA all along. It’s the same **** with NOAA. Make up your mind, are they conspirators or not?


Anyway, on to the study. There have been several estimates of glacier mass balance for Antarctica over the years and they generally report values close to zero, with error bars on either side of zero, indicating we cannot yet nail down whether the total mass of ice is increasing or decreasing (but either way it’s small). As stated in the articles, West Antarctica and the Arctic peninsula appear to be losing mass while interior East Antarctica is gaining mass.

This isn’t exactly a seminal paper on the topic (nor is it the first to get such a result). Last year, a NASA study using the GRACE satellites found that Antarctica is losing 134 billion tons of ice each. GRACE uses changes in the gravitational field to measure changes in mass. This new study, on the other hand, used altimeters to measure changes in elevation (or volume) which are assumed to be representative of changes in mass. Another caveat to consider is that the new study only includes data through 2008.

And while the new study does still show an increase in the overall melt rate, I wouldn’t go so far as mrorange to say it necessarily supports AGW. Between 1991 and 2002 the study used data from a radar altimeter, and between 2003 and 2008 it uses a laser altimeter. The apparent change in melt rate is small and could reflect the change in instrumentation. That’s not to say the melt rate isn’t increasing, though. There is independent evidence that the melting has accelerated since 2008 (see the ‘Antarctica is Melting’ thread). Just this week another NASA study basically showed, again, that the West Antarctic ice sheet is doomed.

All that said, according to the last IPCC report Antarctica is currently contributing less than 10% of the observed sea level rise. The biggest contributors are the thermal expansion of water and rapid melting of Greenland’s ice sheet. So this study raises questions about where that 10% is really coming from, but it doesn’t question the existence of sea level rise or other aspects of climate change.

The successor to that laser altimeter is set to launch in 2018. Better data would be nice, right? I wonder if this news will make the climate deniers in congress rethink eliminating NASA’s earth science division…
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#6,341
#6,341
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#6,344
#6,344
BigOrangeTrain said:
The NASA portion is the most important part and you want to cherrypick around it. Not surprised.
Click to expand...

A little dense are you? In no way did I support or attack global warming. I attakced the NWO that RAS and Pacer talk about and there insistence on using questionable sources to defend their argument.
 
#6,345
#6,345
Hey SandVol...

Hottest October in Satellite Record: Global Temperature Trend Update
October 2015 registered the third largest deviation from seasonal norms in the 443 month satellite temperature record, making it the third “warmest” month in the Northern Hemisphere since December 1978. October 2015 trailed only April 1998 (+0.85 C) and February 1998 (0.69 C) as the “warmest” month in the Northern Hemisphere.

“We thought this El Niño had the potential to be a record setter for some of the quantities we track, and it isn’t disappointing,” Christy said. “Not only is this a strong El Niño, but the transient warming we see from it is superimposed on top of the slowly rising global base temperature."
Click to expand...

Could it be? Was Christy's prediction correct? I guess UAH must be the new NASA! Big Tobacco has infiltrated NASA and UAH is part of the New World Order :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,348
#6,348
BartW said:
Hey SandVol...

Hottest October in Satellite Record: Global Temperature Trend Update


Could it be? Was Christy's prediction correct? I guess UAH must be the new NASA! Big Tobacco has infiltrated NASA and UAH is part of the New World Order :p
Click to expand...

Bark, you really need to stop linking this lying a$$ pulled out of context crap. The month of October warming had very little to do with El Nino. This is what Christy and Spencer stated.... "As can be seen, there was a rather large jump in the global average anomaly, but instead of it being due to the tropics being warmer (as El Nino continues), it was due to a very warm (but not record warm) month in the Northern Hemisphere extra tropics.
 
#6,349
#6,349
BartW said:
That didn’t take long :) Now that we’re all caught up, I guess I’ll address the frenzy.

First, I think it’s hilarious how y’all pick and choose what news from NASA is a fact, and which is obviously part of the conspiracy. For example, this quote

was in response to a post in which SandVol attempts to discredit the lead author of this study. Wtf? You’re the ones that have been trying to discredit NASA all along. It’s the same **** with NOAA. Make up your mind, are they conspirators or not?


Anyway, on to the study. There have been several estimates of glacier mass balance for Antarctica over the years and they generally report values close to zero, with error bars on either side of zero, indicating we cannot yet nail down whether the total mass of ice is increasing or decreasing (but either way it’s small). As stated in the articles, West Antarctica and the Arctic peninsula appear to be losing mass while interior East Antarctica is gaining mass.

This isn’t exactly a seminal paper on the topic (nor is it the first to get such a result). Last year, a NASA study using the GRACE satellites found that Antarctica is losing 134 billion tons of ice each. GRACE uses changes in the gravitational field to measure changes in mass. This new study, on the other hand, used altimeters to measure changes in elevation (or volume) which are assumed to be representative of changes in mass. Another caveat to consider is that the new study only includes data through 2008.

And while the new study does still show an increase in the overall melt rate, I wouldn’t go so far as mrorange to say it necessarily supports AGW. Between 1991 and 2002 the study used data from a radar altimeter, and between 2003 and 2008 it uses a laser altimeter. The apparent change in melt rate is small and could reflect the change in instrumentation. That’s not to say the melt rate isn’t increasing, though. There is independent evidence that the melting has accelerated since 2008 (see the ‘Antarctica is Melting’ thread). Just this week another NASA study basically showed, again, that the West Antarctic ice sheet is doomed.

All that said, according to the last IPCC report Antarctica is currently contributing less than 10% of the observed sea level rise. The biggest contributors are the thermal expansion of water and rapid melting of Greenland’s ice sheet. So this study raises questions about where that 10% is really coming from, but it doesn’t question the existence of sea level rise or other aspects of climate change.

The successor to that laser altimeter is set to launch in 2018. Better data would be nice, right? I wonder if this news will make the climate deniers in congress rethink eliminating NASA’s earth science division…
Click to expand...

So, we're supposed to give a scientist credit for presenting facts who then turns around and poops on the facts by stating if this happens or that happens then these facts really aren't important because they don't fit our political agenda? BS.
 
#6,350
#6,350
This:
Sandvol said:
Bark, you really need to stop linking this lying a$$ pulled out of context crap. The month of October warming had very little to do with El Nino.
Click to expand...
does not follow from this:
Sandvol said:
This is what Christy and Spencer stated.... "As can be seen, there was a rather large jump in the global average anomaly, but instead of it being due to the tropics being warmer (as El Nino continues), it was due to a very warm (but not record warm) month in the Northern Hemisphere extra tropics.
Click to expand...
You must be confused about the context. My quote came straight out of the press release. So did this:

"Powered by an El Niño Pacific Ocean warming event, temperatures in October set records globally, in the Northern Hemisphere and the Tropics, while temperatures in the Southern Hemisphere pushed toward the upper end of the dataset, said Dr. John Christy, director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. October 2015 was the warmest October in the 36-year satellite temperature record, pushing past October 1998 during what was then called the El Niño of the Century."

Sandvol said:
So, we're supposed to give a scientist credit for presenting facts who then turns around and poops on the facts by stating if this happens or that happens then these facts really aren't important because they don't fit our political agenda? BS.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you’re getting at here. The lead author is taking some heat and he is standing by the study. It’s entirely possible that their result is correct, but that wouldn’t mean we’re entering a new ice age or anything. The paper will get its due attention from the scientific community and undue attention from the media :zeitung_lesen:

VolsNSkinsFan said:
Hey Bart do you know what happens during an El Niño year and directly afterward?
Click to expand...
Climate deniers get pizzy as they’re forced to reset their favorite argument?

“Global warming stopped in 2016!”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top