Clicking, I get to this headline: "This July 4 was hot. Earth’s hottest day on record, in fact." So... on record. When did the record of the temperature all over the Earth get started?
The article begins: "Tuesday was the hottest day on Earth since at least 1979, with the global average temperature reaching 62.92 degrees Fahrenheit (17.18 degrees Celsius), according to data from the U.S. National Centers for Environmental Prediction. As a result, some scientists believe July 4 may have been one of the hottest days on Earth in around 125,000 years.... Tuesday’s global average temperature was calculated by a model that uses data from weather stations, ships, ocean buoys and satellites, Paulo Ceppi, a climate scientist at London’s Grantham Institute, explained.... This modeling system has been used to estimate daily average temperatures starting in 1979."
Boldface mine.
पोस्ट्स
१२९ टिप्पण्या:
Which makes perfect sense, given that most younger people today think History started in the 80s. So this must seem really a far stretch back to them.
For us in Florida, it's hot this time of year- every year. But interestingly, I grew up in Michigan. And the summers there that I recall, as a kid, were also very hot. Not South Florida hot, but hot nonetheless. But then, it was in the 50's and 60's and that was well before recorded time.
"Tuesday’s global average temperature was calculated by a model" (emphasis added)
Meanwhile, in the world of actual measurements, the climate-porn is revealed for what it is.
Are they actually using the same instruments and data sets from 1979 or are they using newer instruments and measurements and running them through a model (on top of a model on top of a model on top of a model) to compare today's data to 1979's?
Bullshit.
There aren't any records of the global temperature going back 125,000 years.
It was cool and rainy here. I guess the global warming hysteria missed the front range.
"Paulo Ceppi, a climate scientist at London’s Grantham Institute" also known as "Paul in Charge Of Making Stuff Up."
“As a result, some scientists believe July 4 may have been one of the hottest days on Earth in around 125,000 years.”
Ahhh.. the ubiquitous “some scientists”
And the numbers from 1979 on are just estimates?
Tag: More Climate BS
What obvious garbage. Please, please: go read Judith Curry's new book. Or Steven Koonin's not-so-new book. Or Michael Shellenberger's similarly not-so-new book. Or something by Roger Pielke Jr.
This tabloid hysteria is prima facie evidence of mind-rot. Don't go there.
My local leftist pals say that there is no border crisis - and if there is a border crisis - it's due to "climate change"
really - they said that.
I'm sensing a theme in today's posts. First we have cocooning and cello and TV watching in wealthy enclaves on the East Coast, where all is not well. But then we leave our house, only to suffer predation and other dangers Mother Nature has in store. ASMR, take me away
Yes, but what I want to know is: Did the sky fall?
Yes, but what I want to know is: Did the sky fall?
“Put the needle on the record”
‘Pump up the volume’ - 1987 song by MARRS.
It was so hot
How hot was it?
It was so hot, Hunter forgot his party favors at the White House.
Hottest Day Ever !! says the Supreme Maximum Leader of the 'U.S. National Centers for Environmental Prediction'. We're Official! We're the U.S. National Centers! Trust the Science! Climate scientists have a consensus, which is highly scientific!
Wait - there's more than one center? Do they overlay, geometrically? Is it an axis of rotation, with centers stacked vertically? How official is it? It's 'according to data' says the Supreme Maximum Leader, and then, in the fine print at the bottom, 'calculated by a model '. Oh. You mean, like the models that have been warning us for the past 40 years that we are only 5, wait 10, wait 12 years from a certain doom. Oh.
There's that "Some [insert 'expert' group here] believe that....." again.
No one knows what the temperature of the earth was 500 years ago, let alone 125k years ago.
The stupidity of supposedly educated people continues to boggle the mind.
Typical. We have reliable records going back to 1979--the dawn to weather satellites. Despite that inconvenient limitation, temperature charts commonly go back to 1850 (where they claim to know to within 1/10th of a degree the average temperature of the earth at a time when 99% of the earth wasn't within 100 miles of a thermometer). Now they're goin back 125,000 years? Why not a million? Why not 4 billion? Maybe it's the hottest day since the earth cooled and land formed?
It might be. Who knows, really?
Total Bullshit. 125,000 years. The only people that might believe this are PhDs, College Educated White Women and anyone who thinks Greta Thunberg has a brain.
The Biden administration is now "open" to the psychotic suggestion from Bill Gates that we can send some shit into outer space and block the sun to "protect" the Earth and cool it. That's some Tower of Babel bullshit right there. Dr. Evil type of stuff.
Just imagine the power to block the sun in the hands of Democrats, PhDs, Bill Gates, and Globalists. If you thought COVID was bad...
The Global Warming scam is nothing but a massive power grab. Carbon Taxes. Inflation. Rationing. Food shortages. Travel restriction. Get rid of gas stoves. Can't make a coal fired pizza in NYC.
On second thought, if we let the megalomaniacs block the sun, it might eliminate the necessity for naked environmental bike parades in Madison, WI.
I'm torn...
Meanwhile the fact that California especially SoCal is having a record cool year so far gets absolutely zero press at all. And does not affect this new World Average Temp measured by sticking thermometers in as many heat islands as possible to skew results.
Here is the source ...
Climate Reanalyzer of the Climate Change Institute, University of Maine.
Daily 2-meter Air Temperature
This page provides time series and map visualizations of daily mean 2-meter air temperature from the NCEP Climate Forecast System (CFS) version 2 (April 2011 – present) and CFS Reanalysis (January 1979 – March 2011). CFS/CFSR is a numerical climate/weather modeling framework that ingests surface, radiosonde, and satellite observations to estimate the state of the atmosphere at hourly time resolution onward from 1 January 1979. The horizontal gridcell resolution is 0.5°x0.5° (~ 55km at 45°N). Temperature anomalies are in reference to 1979–2000 climatology for each specific day of the year.
Climate Reanalyzer
Aren't you glad you asked?
Liars. The liberal narrative never stops. And they keep doing it because it works. Trillions are on the line with the CAGW scam.
This modeling system has been used to estimate daily average temperatures starting in 1979.
If COVID taught us anything is these "modeling systems" are all massaged bullshit. Propaganda tools to push and agenda.
62.92 degrees? How are the Washington Post reporters going to survive such hot temperatures? Several decades ago, I moved from New York to California, where the climate is warmer. I survived.
a model that uses data from weather stations, ships, ocean buoys and satellites..
This modeling system has been used to estimate daily average temperatures starting in 1979."
And, This modeling system has been corrected SEVERAL times, to make sure it gives CORRECT data.
satellites used to show NO RISE in temp.. So they "corrected" the satellite data; now it's "correct"
ocean buoys used to show NO RISE in temp.. So they "corrected" the buoy days; now IT'S "correct"
This year is THE HOTTEST YEAR ON RECORD (as have been the last 15 years)..
Serious Question, for all of you oldsters? Does it seem warmer, TO YOU; than it was in
the 1970's?
the 1980's?
the 1990's?
the 2000's?
the 2010's?
IF the world is WARMING.. Shouldn't *WE* be noticing it BY NOW???
I have to wonder, whether these people read their own propaganda. Don't they know that it is already too late? The consensus among climate scientoids is that even if the human race vanished tomorrow, there is already so much CO2 in the atmosphere that the Earth is doomed to somewhere between two and four degrees of climate change (it's not called global warming any more, Althouse. Get with the program). Which is more than enough to flood DC. I picture the Washington Monument, rising serene and unaccompanied, from the midst of the Potomac Inland Sea. Surely, 'tis a consummation devoutly to be wished!
Tuesday’s global average temperature was calculated by a model
Meaning they have no clue.
The claim is made by a group/person that looked at ~20 models, gathering data over over a varying time spans.
This model, during this very specific date range, gave them the statistic they wanted....or they just made it up. When if you think about it...is a difference without distinction.
Which raises the question; shouldn't you memory-hole your "global warming" tag? Global Warming no longer exists, and never did. We have always been at war with Climate Change.
How well has the model's predictions for post-1979 temperatures correlated with the actual temperatures?
Maybe a cold compress would help?
Since comets are mostly ice, we could use one for a slight reduction. Just would have to lower it to the surface very slowly: https://what-if.xkcd.com/162/
you have the trust "the science"! We all know this is a complete load of crap. The models never work.
More climate asininity.
here's an article from Des Moines KCCI, that PROVES the world is warming!
High temperatures Tuesday will soar to near 100 degrees across Iowa and are expected to stay in the 90s the entire week.
I found this, by goggle searching: "when was the last time it was over 100 degrees in iowa?"
That was the TOP article.. And it was from Aug 27, 2013. It wasn't about the last time iowa got over 100 (because google SUX), it was about Des Moines reaching 100 so late in the year.
(the article Casually listed 1983 as the last time it had been over 100 on Aug 27.. They DIDN'T mention that year, temps were over 100 for the ENTIRE Iowa State Fair). They did also casually mention, that in 1939 temps were over 100 in Des Moines til the Middle of Sept
Seriously people? Does it seem Warmer? to YOU??
Click bait -- I'm passing.
I notice the local paper is front-paging more and more stories about deaths by guns, but the people who do the killing are never identified, just the guns. I'm guessing there's an agenda there.
“Some scientists believe”. Compelling argument.
It's not news that some scientists believe something the left would like to claim as fact, regardless of any actual evidence.
some scientists believe = settled science ..... for now. Or as CDC director Rachel Walensky told F. Chuck Todd in MTP: "The science has evolved". These experts are a joke.
https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/full-cdc-director-walensky-evolving-science-drove-change-to-mask-guidance-112047685930
So, hottest day in last 125,000 years…or since 1979. Just a rounding error.
"When did the record of the temperature all over the Earth get started?"
When somebody figured that a meaningless number that could be easily manipulated by models would be useful in scaring stupid people into believing that humans were destroying the planet.
The recent flow of immigrants from India to Canada has been a bit under 150K per year. I wonder how the Canadians would feel about accepting climate refugees at 10 or 100 times that rate.
88F at first pitch at the Brewers game. The roof was open and a nice breeze. Was pretty comfortable really. Weird game. Cubs tried to blow another four run lead. Failed.
Lies, damned lies, statistics and ..... modeling.
"When did the record of the temperature all over the Earth get started?"
Asking the right question. There is no statistically significant difference between the value the model spit out on July 4th than it spit out the day before or the day after, and I suspect that if you took the model apart and examined it various components, you will find that it is designed to read hotter and hotter as time goes by. In fact, I can just about guarantee that the model's own history, if you could find an unadulterated version of it, will show that the readouts from 20 years ago are now different than those it spit out at that time since the underlying data set is being constantly "refined" on a post hoc basis. That reading from yesterday of 17.18 C will, in 20 years time, be 16.xx C.
This is just nuts:
A) While we have a general idea of the temperatures in the historic record, we cannot pin it down to specific days.
B) This is probably driven by the ridiculous, and debunked, Michael Mann hockey stick that pretends that the weather was static for the last couple of thousand years until we started relying on petroleum for power (but still breathlessly quoted by climate religionists). The He just regressed a line through earlier date to an average, ignoring things like the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. They product papers that purport that it didn't happen, it was just regional when the historic record says otherwise.
- The Medieval Warm Period, ca 800-1000: During this time, the Scandinavians were farming Greenland (farms that are being uncovered by the current warming). Researchers have conjectured that the Mayan collapse was related to drought brought on by the extra warmth and changing weather patterns. The same pattern changes resulted in current desert southwest being verdant and source of the power of the Anastasi civilization.
- Little Ice Age a broad cooling between 14th and 19th centuries that hit its depth in the 18th century with winters where the English Channel would freeze over.
"All around, people looking half-dead
Walking on the sidewalk, hotter than a match head"
Assuming that all of their speculation is correct, this is great news.
I means that 125,000 years ago, it was this hot, maybe hotter. We have been burning hydrocarbons at large scale foe ~0.1% of this time. It's not the hydrocarbons.
Maybe it's something else- the natural ebb and flow of energy from the sun, variations in the position of the earth relative to the sun, or the result of debris in the atmosphere from volcanic explosions. Or was it really pre-historic Ford Expeditions?
Next time your have a discussion with a Greta, remind her that the ratio of deaths due to cold compared to heat ranges from 4:1 to 10:1. Heating up the earth will save lives.
Then explain that CO2 is plant food. They do like plants, don't they?
This fools no one who isn’t a stupid Gen-Z, a Millennial, or someone who wants to be fooled.
Scientists (I'll allow them to self-identify as such, it's 2023, after all) created a model that they know will result in steadily increasing temperature estimates regardless of inputs, then point to the estimates to justify their funding for more modeling, while precluding any access to raw data. Stories like this comprise equal parts hubris, snake oil, and useful idiot members of the press.
Yesterday, July 4, our temperature was predicted to be a high of 92. That is warm but certainly not remarkable. When the day ended, the high had reached low 80’s. Which was used by the model?
Serious Question, for all of you oldsters? Does it seem warmer, TO YOU
Yes. Especially for overnight lows here in Madison. It's very difficult to get colder than -20 F now compared to what I recall from 30 or 40 years ago. Similarly, very cool overnight lows in the summer are rarer than I recall.
The great website The Earth’s Temperature (temperature.global) processes surface temperature inputs from stations around the world—about 60,000 per hour. Data is entered every minute.
There is nothing to worry about.
They are not even trying.
It was a lot hotter on the day of the big bang, so it's all been pretty much relative freezing since then.
[File under: "Scientists failing day 1 of science/engineering school, which was the lesson on significant digits in calculations."]
Richard Feynmann called the fascination with computer models "a disease".
Well there is a simple enough correcting mechanism for a peasant brain like mine to determine if there's any merit to this model of theirs.
Will the real estate markets in Malibu and Martha's Vineyard crash this week as the current owners scramble to buy property in Pittsburgh or Denver, or not?
My model > their model.
Climate is not weather.
It was 6 degrees Fahrenheit less on Tuesday than Monday where I live. That’s according to a measurable gauge, not some scientists opinion.
So, hottest day in last 125,000 years…or since 1979. Just a rounding error.
Yet precise to 1/100th of a degree.
BTW, background info: https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/49/which-measurement-is-more-accurate-taking-earths-surface-temperature-from-the-ground-or-from-space/
“Serious Question, for all of you oldsters? Does it seem warmer, TO YOU; than it was in “
Hard to tell. We didn’t have air conditioning back then.
Even the recorded data is baloney. Recording stations are moved; new recording equipment is installed; use of the land around the recording station changed. For example, the recording station in Fallbrook CA is located at the fire station. The station needed to be expanded and the recording station was relocated to area near where the EMT trucks were positioned for their daily maintenance and operation. The exhaust from these trucks was five feet away from the recording station. The records show a marked increase of air pollution and temperatures immediately afterwards. Draw your own conclusions about the recorded data; I have.
The historical surface temperature record is riddled with discrepancies, which is to be expected given its hodge-podge nature. The US Climate Reference Network has been set up to address this issue:
"The USCRN is made up of over 143 stations in the United States. Its purpose is to maintain a sustainable high quality network which will detect, with high confidence, signals of climate change in the US.". (wiki)
The nature and purpose of the USCRN are admirable. We can't fix the past (though climate scientists are constantly fiddling with the historical record to try, with adjustments that always go one way), but going forward let's set up a network of standard, modern instrumentation placed at intelligently selected sites (avoiding urban heat islands, etc.).
Take a look at almost two decades of the USCRN temperature records (it's the second graph down).
Climate scientists don't like to talk about the USCRN.
Must have been. Yesterday, July 4 was the day I finally turned on my air conditioning here in Tennessee.
Do today's reporters even remember the scandal of the East Anglia climate modeling?
Blogger Owen said...
"What obvious garbage. Please, please: go read Judith Curry's new book. Or Steven Koonin's not-so-new book. Or Michael Shellenberger's similarly not-so-new book. Or something by Roger Pielke Jr."
This looks interesting.
Considering the last ice age is estimated to have started about 100,000 years ago and ended about 25,000 years ago, the hottest day in 125,000 years is entirely probably.
"- Little Ice Age a broad cooling between 14th and 19th centuries that hit its depth in the 18th century with winters where the English Channel would freeze over.". (emphasis added)
Really? Holy cow! I didn't know that.
And that's our baseline…
We had a couple of weeks to 125 degrees two or three years ago. No repeat so far,
I wouldn't mind if DC had a day of 1000 degrees suddenly. On a weekday, of course.
Journalism: make a ludicrous statement seem valid and reinforce irrational fears with an appeal to authority.
Just took a look at the national temperature map on the Weather Channel web site. Looks pretty normal to me. Actually, it looks a little below normal. Temperature in much of the country between mid-70s and lower 90s. Barely in the 90s in TX right now. But I do know one thing, that map seems to match up with some memes I keep seeing on Twitter, which show TV weather maps in Germany or the UK 20 years ago and today. 20 years ago the maps pretty much showed summer gradients in various shades of green or yellow, while today everything is orange to red. Even when current temps are lower in the current map vs. the 20 year old map. Looks like propaganda.
I can remember this time about 1980, when I had to make a week long business trip to Ft. Collins, CO, from NE TN. Nearly the entire South and Midwest all they way to the Continental Divide had daily temps of 100+. I can recall on the flight out from TRI, to ATL, to DEN, then the drive to Ft. Collins, I didn't go through, or fly over, any place where the temp was less than 100. It was 101 at TRI, 103 in ATL, 101 in DEN, and 101 in Ft. Collins. That was the big Heat Wave of 1980. It even has its own entry in Wikipedia. And when I lived in TX, later in the 80s, I can recall one month, maybe Aug of 86 or 87, where the daily high was around 105+ for the whole month. Haven't experienced temps like those in any year since, in TX, TN, or GA, where I live now.
Tuesday’s global average temperature was calculated by a model
Well, at least the numbers are coming from someone who's good-looking.
17.18°C.
So they claim to know the Earth’s average temperature to within five one-thousandths of a degree.
I’m calling shenanigans.
iowan2 said...
"Tuesday’s global average temperature was calculated by a model: Meaning they have no clue. The claim is made by a group/person that looked at ~20 models, gathering data over over a varying time spans."
I looked at twenty-something models - or at least women who looked like models - in pubs over the varying time span called my teens to early/mid twenties. Never came up with the idea that it was the planet itself that was too hot, though.
Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response
But everyone knew that. Right?
"Tuesday was the hottest day on Earth since at least 1979"
Wow! A whole 44 years!
/sarc
As a result, some scientists believe July 4 may have been one of the hottest days on Earth in around 125,000 years
Some scientists believe their frats smell like roses. That doesn't mean anyone else should listen to them
Tuesday’s global average temperature was calculated by a model that uses data from weather stations, ships, ocean buoys and satellites, Paulo Ceppi, a climate scientist at London’s Grantham Institute, explained
So it's not just satellite data?
It's been extensively shown that the ground station data is crap, because NOAA keeps on putting stations in places that suffer serious and increasing heat island effects from urbanization.
Is it's even bigger garbage than they claim
The Channel never froze over (not in human memory anyway). The Thames River did, and that was notable enough.
Temperatures have been generally declining for the last 10,000 years.
Or possibly 125,001 years. Or maybe only 124,999 years. Or perhaps....
It was much warmer 10,000 years ago. The Artic was ice free during the summer. Today, the Artic is choked with ice; a Russian ice breaker had to divert from its original course because it couldn't break the ice in its path.
What the WaPoo is reporting is the Urban Heat Island affect on night time temperatures. The concrete, rocks and asphalt in the urban areas are retaining heat and warming the night. The vast majority of the temperature recording sites are in urban areas and do not give accurate temperatures that do not have the UHI effect included.
Here in Austin, we dropped 8F versus last week. So a July 4th cold spell was enjoyed by one & all.
How hot is it?
Roosevelt says "IT'S DAMN HOT. AND TONIGHT IT'S GOING TO BE HOT AND WET!"
https://youtu.be/DpktBGInl60
Good morning Vietnam!
Rip Robin Williams
John Henry
Clickbait. No one cares if there is a hot summer day in July in the northern hemisphere. But hottest day in xxx,xxx years? Perfect for the holiday time when all are on vacation and lazy editors demand simple copy from lazier writers.
Dr. Paulo Ceppi is a Lecturer in Climate Science at the Grantham Institute. What does a lecturer do? You betcha - he gives lectures but how does that make him a Climate Scientologist?
Dr. Paulo Ceppi is currently working as a Postdoctoral Research Assistant in the Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, United Kingdom.
Meteorologists observe weather not climate. Welcome to "The Church Of Climate Scientology: How Climate Science Became A Religion."
Modern climate science is dominated by the hypothesis that CO2 is the major driver of climate—so much so that increasing it from .03% to .04% of the atmosphere has brought us to the verge of catastrophe.
Can climate prediction models actually predict climate? The answer is no.
Bull. Like airport chaos and shark bites July and August bring on hysterical articles about the perfectly normal. Take Dallas, for instance, which has had 100 plus days every year since records were kept. Current highs are no higher than they were in 1912.
The world is indeed getting warmer, slowly. When that happens, you will steadily have records for hottest days/years. The important question is, how fast and how much of a problem?
I'm so old I remember when the weather was the safest subject to discuss.
This is the climate alarmist narrative. If you think about it, over the last two hundred years man has adapted to his climate. Air conditioning has been invented, we have efficient home heating systems, new forms of insulation and weatherstripping….you name it. All this has made the hot, humid South livable and has made the Northern climates inhabitable. Are we to believe that man will suddenly no longer be able to adapt to changes in climate? Seriously? We need to do as little harm to our environment as possible but we should stop spending trillions on the wasted effort to control the climate and continue to adapt.
All valid points, agreed, but what about the clicks we got?
The atmosphere has 780,000ppm of pure nitrogen.
Nitrogen is inert. We need oxygen to live and right now, in the US, we only have about 210,000ppm of oxygen in the air we breathe. If it gets much lower we are going to strangle.
The govt is fucking with us. They have convinced us to worry about 400ppm of Co2 when nitrogen is almost 2000 times as much and just as deadly.
WAKE UP, SHEEPLE! We need more oxygen, not less co2.
John Henry
Speculation and opinion, that's all this is.
But don't let the heat stop you from protesting George Floyd.
I’m glad so much consideration is being given to global warming deniers, because if the deniers get their way and are wrong the only consequences will be continued massive damage from fires, flooding, droughts, heatstroke deaths, mass migrations, mass extinctions and crop failures. Whereas if mainstream opinion and the obvious scientific evidence is followed the only drawback will be less profitable coal, oil and gas barons (less black lung, too) and some adjustment challenges as energy sources are transitioned. There would also be a more decentralized grid as more property owners and consumers install their own power, which conservatives also find contemptible for some reason - apparently because they favor big energy utility monopolies and extraction rights over self-sufficient consumers.
So it’s a matter of values. Conservatives, if they have any, value favoring unhealthy mature (senescent) industries while gambling away any safeguard of your health and agriculture itself. Whereas for mainstream normals and those who value the evidence it’s the opposite.
Conservatives are definitely pro-death.
Keep in mind, the global warming deniers actually have no explanation for (or presume unknowable) how it is that earth is 60 degrees warmer than space. They actually think that the answer to this question must be unknowable. Why? Because people were paid by industries that gave us black lung disease and flammable tap water to say so.
Dumb and evil go together.
It was cool and rainy here. I guess the global warming hysteria missed the front range.
Observe the typical conservative commenter’s inability to grasp the difference between a single geographic location (“here”) and a global average.
Conservative AGW deniers really are that ignorant. Not a shock. Why however that they’re so devoted to investing so much personal energy into that ignorance is a little more puzzling. It’s probably a conviction that old, dirty inefficient uninnovative corporations that are much bigger and wealthier than smaller companies and newer technologies must be worshipped. The same way that they think supporting a guy with some inherited wealth like Trump will make them richer, too.
They want to BE a coal or gas company. It seems to be an actual source of of personal identification. Big, greedy, dishonest, unhealthy and completely unconcerned with how its/their actively actions harm everyone else. It’s how they aspire to be. An educator or acting coach might ask what kind of a tree you would be. A conservative wonders what kind of an oil rig or coal plant they would be. Probably one that resembles the orc factories of Middle Earth. A hell on earth is what they long for. Literally. Hot and fiery. It makes them feel powerful.
""This July 4 was hot. Earth’s hottest day on record, in fact."
Well, as long as we're playing this game. The global temperature has not increased for the last 8 years and 10 months
Blogger Narr said..."The Channel never froze over (not in human memory anyway). The Thames River did, and that was notable enough."
That's more believable. Thanks, Narr.
@hpudding: it is precisely because hysterical climate loonies do not grasp "the difference between a single geographic location (“here”) and a global average" that nonsense like that WaPo article, which is based on a computer model , that they are assiduously mocked by people who know science.
The claim in the article was that the EARTH's temperature was "possibly" the warmest in 125,000 years. Yet global temps have only been uniformally taken since 1979.
What's more, computer models are NOT experiments, nor are their results "data". Models are filled with assumptions that have not themselves been tested. So their results vary .
If you want to see evidence for that claim, look at this graph:
Want some real science? Look HERE:
https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/68-models-vs-obs-1979-2021-oceans-Fig01-550x413.jpg
and here:
See fifty+ models results graphed out?
Explain why their outputs vary so much, and NONE confirms to the actual physical record.
THEY ARE ALL WILDLY WRONG.
NOr is there any surge in global termperatures. Look here:
https://temperature.global/
The rest of your screed is just another of your content-free ad hominem bitter vetch against "conservatives".
You don't offer anything scientific here to support your position. Then again, you never do.
Got some real science to educate us with? Bring it on!
"Want some real science? Look HERE:
https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/68-models-vs-obs-1979-2021-oceans-Fig01-550x413.jpg"
I tried to get puddin to look at data, Anna. He's not interested. He thinks it's some kind of trick.
hpudding said...
*Keep in mind, the global warming deniers actually have no explanation for (or presume unknowable) how it is that earth is 60 degrees warmer than space. *
They actually think that the answer to this question must be unknowable. Why? Because people were paid by industries that gave us black lung disease and flammable tap water to say so."
+
Gawd you are an Inga-class DITZ.
The Internet ABOUNDS with scientific articles on that topic:
https://atmos.washington.edu/academics/classes/2001Q4/211/notes_greenhouse.html
It's the baseline for discussing what--if any---effect CO2 has on "climate change."
You really ought to steer clear of this "science" stuff: it's waaay over your head.
p.s. the claim that fracking "caused" flammable tap water has been destroyed a long time ago. Fracking per se does not cause that problem, but faulty operations and equipment can.
Yes, coal miners (like my grandpa) got "Black Lung", but that wasn't because coal companies "caused" miners to get it. If you have any cogent reasons as to how miners 75-100 years could have been protected against that disease---OTHER THAN NOT GOING INTO THE MINES IN THE FIRST PLACE--tell us here.
But you won't. You are a drive-by troll.
"On July 6, 1936 twenty-five states were over 100F, seven states were over 110F and North Dakota reached 121F. To put that in perspective, Phoenix, Arizona hasn't reached 121F in almost thirty years. Recent generations have never experienced a heatwave like that."
#ClimateScam
No, Pudding for brains- leftist crapweasel.
Your fake Climate "science" is the real scam. The global warming... er climate change scam is being perpetrated by the same oligarch billionaires who hire the lackeys to deliver your scam thru the on air talent narrative pimpers in your obedient hack-D press
The left's bogus war on carbon dioxide.
Climate Change Institute, eh? Sounds like a funding hog, a grant-writing industry, a self-actualizing money machine. Look at the map, and the 75% of the whole world - and coincidentally, all of the population centers - is drawn in burn-em-up red.
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/
so: Don't trust anyone over 30°.
Got some real science to educate us with? Bring it on!
It’s always interesting to hear the uneducable demand to be educated, as if that’s anyone else’s job. And as if being “dared” to do so underscores some type of necessarily heightened challenge in it, of convincing religious believers in the omnipotence of the oil coal and gas industries to believe that their propaganda is not some type of ultimate truth to which NASA, NOAA, the military, insurance industries, basic observation and reason are all inferior. 70% of Americans know better. The 64% of Republicans over 65 who don’t can and literally will be left in the dust - as will their sorry progeny.
If someone is actually stupid enough to think unprecedented increases in floods, droughts and fires (hundreds in the Canadian wilderness! less than halfway before summer is over) are not enough to shake the arrogant confidence they have in their “information gathering” skills (from personal websites!), then nothing will. It doesn’t matter to them if tropical diseases and pests spread further north or into higher altitudes each year, if winters shorten each year (the cause of the former), if spring comes earlier each year, if more coral reefs bleach and die off each year, or how many billions more in damage from fire it costs each year… No evidence will change the minds of those who don’t have minds to change. Those minds are not their own anyway; they belong to what they perceive as the ultimate “power” of those industries that were caught lying about AGW decades ago.
The cons actually believe that being able to grow food is less important than being able to burn coal/oil/gas. It’s all about what they perceive to be as the financial or “cultural”/historical power of oil and gas. And that power is so strong to them that they think science and even agriculture itself (without which there wouldn’t even be industry) must yield to it in their hierarchy of valueless power and control. A hierarchy in which facts and reason play no role.
Never trust your future to people who live in the past and never forget that conservatism is the ideology that believes reason should be politically subordinated to a powerful institution - in this case the fossil fuel lobbies. To them might makes right and it’s a waste of time to explain to them any facts that weren’t drawn from some lonely crank’s personal website or blog. Even after the Trump administration tried to force utilities to buy coal (the fuel that kills miners of it before they’re 50) at a LOSS compared to other resources, his supporters still genuflect to burning carbon. It’s a religious duty for them.
Based on a cursory review of the 100+ comments above it appears that no one here believes this BS.
h pudding - who delivers this food you speak of? If you hate the fuels needed to run life, do get rid of all of it in your life. now.
Fires, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, - they never occurred until oil and gas came around.
record numbers of humans on the earth - to notice the fires, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes and droughts... Ugh. Make it all stop, oil and gas lobby. Life was Camelot before oil and gas ruined everything. The kids who think life was Camelot until oil and gas came around (to deliver their smart phones and food). ..are uncomfortable on a planet where the climate... changes. They were promised static perfection.
How many dire predictions and date stamp time limits have come and gone since the climate change extremists hatched out of Al Gore's movie?
"A top climate scientist is warning that climate change will wipe out all of humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years." (2018 date stamp)
&
"Top Climate Scientist: Humans Will Go Extinct if We Don't Fix Climate Change by 2023."
Who are these highly intelligent Climate Scientists?
Curious that the Chi Coms own most of the cobalt mines around the globe... Don't ask questions.
Obey the anti oil and gas lobby.
Where exactly did they stick the thermometer?
If someone is actually stupid enough to think unprecedented increases in floods, droughts and fires (hundreds in the Canadian wilderness! less than halfway before summer is over)
You mean the fires that have already been proven to be set intentionally in forests that were overdue for natural fires that humans prevented?
if more coral reefs bleach and die off each year,
You mean like the Great Barrier reef that has already recovered except in areas being attacked by starfish?
The cons actually believe that being able to grow food is less important than being able to burn coal/oil/gas.
There is more food being grown around the world today than at any other point in human history. India is actually exporting food. Carbon is plant food dummy, and the Earth is greening globally.
Your talking points are twenty years out of date, just like all the failed predictions of gloom.
The only difference between you and the Jonestown idiots is that you want to take all the rest of us with you.
Notice every single Climate Alarmist media-pimp ends with...
*The oil and gas industry must be destroyed*
1979 and 125,000 year's ago are significant: 1979 was toward the end of the panic about global cooling caused by pollution. 125,000 thousand years ago was the last interglacial period, like the one we're in. The intervening time was a glacial period, commonly called an "ice-age" though technically, an ice-age is a period of prevailing glacial periods with relatively short inter glacial periods in between. The net of all this information, is that if we're the hottest since 1979 or 125,000 years ago, so what? 1979 was a relatively cool period in the current interglacial and happens to be when weather satellites were first launched. 125,000 years ago was the height of the last interglacial, which is though to be warmer than this one.
"If someone is actually stupid enough to think unprecedented increases in floods, droughts and fires…"
That's the thing, and it's a crucial point; there isn't an increase in floods, drought, or fire. You should ask yourself why you believe that to be true. Undoubtedly, the answer will be because the press has told you so. You should dig deeper and look for the original sources.
Don't be hard on hpuddinghead- he did dissect a worm once in high school, so he is a science expert.
hpudding said...
"Keep in mind, the global warming deniers actually have no explanation for (or presume unknowable) how it is that earth is 60 degrees warmer than space. They actually think that the answer to this question must be unknowable. Why? Because people were paid by industries that gave us black lung disease and flammable tap water to say so.
Dumb and evil go together."
There is a an absolutely enormous fusion reactor out in space a few million miles from us. The reactor is so huge and the reaction so violent it sends ultraviolet rays out into space and into our planet. And because we(earth) have an enormous electro magnet at our core we(earth) have managed, over millions of years, to acquire an atmosphere. This atmosphere not only captures the heat that the earth generates, but also insulates us from 'space'. Hence the delta T.
Or rumors to that effect.
You should really visit a library.
Jersey Fled said...
"Based on a cursory review of the 100+ comments above it appears that no one here believes this BS."
Puddin' believes it. He has absolutely no idea how it works, but he believes it. Puddin's got faith.
We are in a recession right now mainly because the self-regulating Earth deniers (like puddin) are in charge and making changes to the world's economy, trending towards "zero carbon" which is how the scientifically illiterate (like puddin) spell Armageddon. For the mathematically literate, zero carbon = zero life on Earth. For every Progressive scheme mass death is a feature not a bug.
hpudding must think his mindless Ted Kaczynski-level rant, filled as it is with bad-faith arguments and unsubstantiated claims, is "science".
Pitiful.
@ the yapping dog: The Earth's climate has been changing for 4.6 billion years.
STFU and deal with it.
Yes, coal miners (like my grandpa) got "Black Lung",
Then I assume he got payment for it funded by taxes. You must be proud to need the government to compensate people stupid and unsuccessful enough to be incapable of finding work in any capacity except in a dark, toxic hole in the ground so that they can lose 40+ years of a typical lifespan without being able to breathe normally. Assuming they don’t die decades earlier. Talk about pitiful.
No wonder you want to treat the planet like a steaming hot trash heap. Some people deserve to have homes, and healthy lives. No, they’re not all losers who will do anything for a coal mine operator, an oil exec or a gas baron. We already know how people like that, including you and him, prefer to live. And not live. Keep your primitive 19th century way of life (and death) and worldview to yourself.
Serious Question, for all of you oldsters? Does it seem warmer, TO YOU; than it was in
the 1970's?
the 1980's? 1980 United States heat wave:
"The heat wave began in June when a strong high pressure ridge began to build in the central and southern United States allowing temperatures to soar to 90 °F (32 °C) almost every day from June to September. The high pressure system also acted as a cap on the atmosphere inhibiting the development of thunderstorm activity, leading to exceptionally severe drought conditions. "
the 1990's?
the 2000's?
the 2010's?
We had rain the last two days. High today was 88F, 6 degrees below the average.
You should really visit a library.
Or you could learn to figure out what the actual point is. No, the reason space is 60 degrees cooler than earth is not because the sun exists. But thanks for trying.
That's the thing, and it's a crucial point; there isn't an increase in floods, drought, or fire. You should ask yourself why you believe that to be true. Undoubtedly, the answer will be because the press has told you so. You should dig deeper and look for the original sources.
I think they’re called thermometers.
Farmers also work. They’re a little more honest about how their seasons and pest controls are getting all fucked up because of long-term climatological trends that the fossil extraction lobbyists won’t tell you about. Those fancy pantses are busy covering all that up. But you trust them anyway. Or at least some guy with some blog who parrots their tune because he thinks a measurement of a substance in the atmosphere is “little” by his own subjective, personal reckoning. Not because of how it relates physicochemically to its interaction with thermal energy.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jan/12/exxon-climate-change-global-warming-research
But who needs agriculture anyway when you’ve got a legacy industry that needs propping up, right? Or a war against zoonosis as an explanation for anything.
Carbon is plant food dummy,
And carbohydrates are a human food dummy. (Whatever “dummy” adds to these terms). Except that only a dummy would then conclude that scarfing on more and more carbs is a great way to preserve his health.
But gahrie advocates a kind of planetary diabetes and declares himself victorious. It would be funny if it wasn’t so stupid.
and the Earth is greening globally. Your talking points are twenty years out of date,
Including or excluding what’s been done to the Amazon in just the last 10 years? Talk about out of date.
Denying greenhouse effects means you’re two hundred years out of date in even understanding a basic scientific principle. (The same one modeled at Exxon before they concealed their findings and hired the tobacco lobbyists to lie for them to the public the same way they did for their previous clients. Again, conservatives are so dense that they’re actually buying what tobacco lobbyists are selling off their politicians for. Brilliant. Next they’ll become tobacco truthers).
The Earth's climate has been changing for 4.6 billion years.
STFU and deal with it.
You’ve been around for 4.6 billion years?
Human civilization hasn’t.
Are you advocating living like a bacterium? A slime mold? A mud fish? Exactly which kind of lifeform that you identify with are you advocating that people should live like so as to “deal with” the primitive earth conditions that you long for?
So the last time it was this hot we made it another 125k years?
Sounds like we're good to go.
"Keep in mind, the global warming deniers actually have no explanation for (or presume unknowable) how it is that earth is 60 degrees warmer than space. They actually think that the answer to this question must be unknowable.
I don't know what point you're trying to make, but the answer is because of all the water vapor in Earth's atmosphere.
"Denying greenhouse effects means you’re two hundred years out of date in even understanding a basic scientific principle."
If you actually think climate catastrophe skeptics deny the physics of greenhouse gases you're really ignorant. Understanding a scientific debate requires you to understand the other sides's argument. You don't even try.
"I think they’re called thermometers."
Thermometers don't measure the incidence of floods, drought, or fire. Answer the actual question: why do you believe that floods, drought, and fire are increasing? What's your source?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा