Earth on track to warmest year on record, says NOAA


#1

With October global temperatures being the highest ever recorded for the month, Earth is on a track to see its warmest year in 2014, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Five of the past six months have been the warmest on record for their respective months, says NOAA, with July 2014 being the fourth warmest July ever recorded, which has pushed 2014 into position to break the record for warmest year. In fact, both November and December would have to be very cool, globally, in order for 2014 to not go down in the record books.

washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2014/11/20/earth-on-track-to-warmest-year-on-record-says-noaa/?Post+generic=%3Ftid%3Dsm_twitter_washingtonpost

:popcorn:

washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=http://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2014/11/ytd-global-temp-october-2014.png&w=484


#2

October was nice, November has been a bear.


#3

Remember this is global temps, including ocean temps and southern hemisphere temps.


#4

I’m sure the folks in Buffalo are gladdened to hear this.


#5

The New Consensus: 100 Percent Of Scientists Agree That Global Warming ‘Stopped’ Or ‘Slowed Down’

1:36 PM 11/19/2014

The Obama administration and environmental groups have long claimed 97 percent of scientists agree that human activity is causing the Earth to warm, but there’s a new consensus they may be less willing to acknowledge.
Using the same methodology as the vaunted “97 percent” paper by researcher John Cook, two climate scientists have made a bold discovery: virtually all climate scientists agree that global warming has “stopped” or “slowed down” in recent years.

dailycaller.com/2014/11/19/the-new-consensus-100-of-scientists-agree-that-global-warming-stopped-or-slowed-down/


#6

Sure…100% of Catholics agree on contraception, abortion, female priesthood, the Latin Mass. etc. The source and the claim of 100% should give any thinking person some pause.


#7

This is a good example of highlighting an irrelevancy. Let me give another example. Looking at the high temperatures in Olympia, Washington, in recent days, we see:

Nov. 11th: 53 deg.
Nov. 12th: 48 deg.
Nov. 13th: 45 deg.
Nov. 14th: 46 deg.
Nov. 15th: 47 deg.
Nov. 16th: 48 deg.
Nov. 17th: 50 deg.
Nov. 18th: 50 deg.

Clearly there has been a slow-down or hiatus or even a reversal of the predicted cooling trend that they call “winter”. 100% of meteorologist agree that this recent reversal has occurred in the last 8 days. Yet the alarmists still predict this so-called “winter” will come. When are people going to recognize this fraud for what it is - alarmist rhetoric sponsored by the makers of mittens and scarves?:smiley:


#8

The two authors Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberg are part of the 3% lot which goes against the consensus. Lots of funding and sponsoring from the oil & coal companies.

If you hear of something coming from the "What’s Up With That " corner, your alarm bells should go off straight away.

I feel sorry for the folks in Buffalo and other parts who are snowed under, but rest assured the globe is warming up and keeps getting warmer.


#9

I guess the 20 degree below average weather we’re having in my state and all across the N.West, N.E and midwest, actually most of the U.S aren’t being included in the “scientific” studies on Global warming. :shrug:


#10

there are many arguments on all sides of this debate, but one thing people often forget is that when NOAA says “ever recorded” remember that “ever” really only means the last 130 years or so (when NOAA began recording temps). have the last few months really been the warmest ever? do we know what the summer of 427 A.D. was like? or the winter of 12,836 B.C.? we all have an opinion on this issue, but nothing irks me more than people who claim the “science is settled.”


#11

If you read the article cited in the first posting you will see that the “North American cold pool” is indeed mentioned and included in the studies.


#12

And what is that supposed to mean? :confused:


#13

But are these adjusted temperatures or raw temperatures?

My bet is that they are ‘adjusted’ and that equals ‘total shenanigans’.


#14

Global warming is a bit of a misnomer. Higher temperatures on average mean there is more energy in Earth’s climate. This makes for stronger storms and weather patterns. In the case of the Midwest right now and most of last winter than means stronger storm systems forcing Arctic air further south. This is why we are seeing these colder temperatures in the Midwest.


#15

It is not as if we don’t know** anything** about global temperatures before 130 years ago. We have numerous proxies for direct temperature measurement, including ice core data that goes back thousands of years.


#16

Except that what happens with the seasons is cyclical and the *forcasted *global warming is supposed to be only a rise, and a rise connected with something else which *has *continued to rise, at that. Moreover, during the course of the rise in greenhouse gasses, we have already had a global cooling, and now a complete and long-lasting (almost 20 years) hiatus in global warming.

Why are people so surprised by GW skepticism under these conditions? Not to mention a lot of other skepticism-causing problems…


#17

Definition of adjusted data: “any data that does not agree with your ideology”.


#18

Does it bother you that global warming supporters were funded by, among others, Enron, BP, and GE? I mean, Enron and BP basically invented the idea of “cap and trade”, the creation of a market for CO2 credits. GE is the world’s largest windmill company and BP is the second largest solar panel company. Their business models will only work with massive subsidies or if oil and coal become much more expensive. Are you concerned that their sources of funding may have effected their “scientific objectivity”?


#19

Yes, we know a lot through climate proxies. We use ice cores, tree rings, sub-fossil pollen, boreholes, corals and sediments from lakes and oceans, to name the most important ones. The temperature has a direct effect on the oxygen 16/18 isotope ratio and other isotope ratios as well.


#20

sure, we know a lot, especially that earth’s climate has undergone cyclical changes since the beginning of time. I don’t deny that climate change exists. in fact I’m sure it does because the climate has always changed. what is most definitely not settled science is that the changes occuring now are significant or man-made. and again, I don’t deny that it’s man-made either…just that we don’t know, and it bugs me when people claim it’s fact. it simply is not fact.

but the point of my post is to not take these “hottest ever” statements too seriously. they don’t mean “of all time,” they simply mean since “we started keeping track.”


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.