Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Meanwhile in the rest of the world.

If we all agree that the world is indeed warming, that graph is yet another instance of a bad news beat up.

By using the mean temps (if that's what the base is?) between the years 1980 and 2010 the only possible results can be warmer overall. The interesting thing are the areas that are/were actually colder than this average and those exceedingly warmer. I'd think this indicates an external influence such as that related to atmospheric or oceanic circulation, as CO2 would be more or less homogeneous in the atmosphere and top layer of ocean. Why not compare with mean values from say the preceding 5 years instead? Surely this would be more meaningful and indicative as this graph just tells us what we already know?

[newhaul]

Quote from jacks quote I find interesting from post 1105
"The circulation changes result in more frequent episodes of atmospheric blocking patterns, which lead to increased cold surges and snow over large parts of the northern continents."
But the described pattern of more snow on the northern continents is what was happening during the last ice age wasn't it? Read somewhea report by a palaeoclimatologist that the Arctic had little sea ice which resulted in similar snow and cold events that were in the report you quoted .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

The NSIDC report is more current. Just a one day lag.



Currently just below the 2012-2013 record year.

The long range trend

Don't know what's up but whenever I attempt to access the nsidc web site all I get is a blue screen with pictures of an ice sheet in the background

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

If we all agree that the world is indeed warming, that graph is yet another instance of a bad news beat up.

By using the mean temps (if that's what the base is?) between the years 1980 and 2010 the only possible results can be warmer overall. The interesting thing are the areas that are/were actually colder than this average and those exceedingly warmer. I'd think this indicates an external influence such as that related to atmospheric or oceanic circulation, as CO2 would be more or less homogeneous in the atmosphere and top layer of ocean. Why not compare with mean values from say the preceding 5 years instead? Surely this would be more meaningful and indicative as this graph just tells us what we already know?

30 years is the WMO standard for climate means.

CO is very well mixed gas. It varies about 15 ppm temporally and spatially.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

I've not read 'The Population Bomb' but I trust the reviews are generally correct in that the authors somewhat overstated their case. To call it a 'Scam', in the normal meaning of the word is patently ridiculous...

Great post Jim, but it really is a waste when it comes to Third here. He'll just insult you, and keep repeating his ridiculous claims. Really not worth any effort.

... Reading on, I see I was right.


Why go fast, when you can go slow

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Don't know what's up but whenever I attempt to access the nsidc web site all I get is a blue screen with pictures of an ice sheet in the background

You are looking at the background image, not sure why.

Try

https://nsidc.org/

[StuM]

Originally Posted by jackdale

The polar vortex, not a new term, is a high pressure system.

Classic quote mining! Just goes to prove how morally degenerate you are. And where's your reference?


Oh and by the way:

"http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/winter/polar_vortex.shtml"

"The polar vortex is a large area of low pressure and cold air surrounding both of the Earth’s poles. "

Or maybe you're just aliterate

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by StuM

Classic quote mining! Just goes to prove how morally degenerate you are. And where's your reference?


Oh and by the way:

"http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/winter/polar_vortex.shtml"

"The polar vortex is a large area of low pressure and cold air surrounding both of the Earth’s poles. "

Or maybe you're just aliterate

Mea Culpa

I misspoke - you are correct. I confused it with an Polar / Arctic high, which is cold.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

You are looking at the background image, not sure why.

Try

https://nsidc.org/

No didn't work starts to load then goes to nothing but background .
No problem I was going from memory on a polar vortex being a low pressure and we all know my memory ain't what it should be.( damaged short term when I was 15 bike wreck)

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

No didn't work starts to load then goes to nothing but background .
No problem I was going from memory on a polar vortex being a low pressure and we all know my memory ain't what it should be.( damaged short term when I was 15 bike wreck)

Your memory is good. You are correct it is a low. I confused it with an polar/Arctic high is is cold as well.

Try clearing your cache - which I hate doing or go to:

https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/sea_ice.html

That should get you on to the site.

[StuM]

'misspoke"?

Is that another of those irregular verbs as in:
I misspeak, they make mistakes, you lie?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by StuM

'misspoke"?

Is that another of those irregular verbs as in:
I misspeak, they make mistakes, you lie?

Sure OK - I lied. And fessed up - twice.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

30 years is the WMO standard for climate means.

CO is very well mixed gas. It varies about 15 ppm temporally and spatially.

Then this serves no purpose as comparing weather to climate is comparing apples to oranges.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Then this serves no purpose as comparing weather to climate is comparing apples to oranges.

You can compare weather and climate. Usually you are showing how much weather can deviate from climate. Our local TV meteorologists (we have a couple who have the degrees) usually give the long term averages (climate) compared with the current conditions (weather).

The Köppen Climate Classification System is the one I studied in freshman geography.

The 30 year trends using any temperature data base show warming.

The use of 1997 / 1998 as a start point is cherry picking a date that gives inordinate emphasis to the largest El Nino event of the previous 50 years. The was a huge temperature spike in March 1997.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

You can compare weather and climate. Usually you are showing how much weather can deviate from climate. Our local TV meteorologists (we have a couple who have the degrees) usually give the long term averages (climate) compared with the current conditions (weather).

The Köppen Climate Classification System is the one I studied in freshman geography.

The 30 year trends using any temperature data base show warming.

The use of 1997 / 1998 as a start point is cherry picking a date that gives inordinate emphasis to the largest El Nino event of the previous 50 years. The was a huge temperature spike in March 1997.

M'kay. Was Sandy and Katrina weather or climate change? How 'bout this current el nino then?