Global Warming Thread XIV

[Gene Scarborough]

Coastal residents---get out your fins and masks as the ocean begins to rise and storms become more angry!!!

[Ed Edwards]

Back in Ressurrection #XIII of this topic, the following arguments (against
the graph that proves Global Warming is taking place) were made.
All the last five statements are in error, are deceptive, and or flat out wrong.
when i wrote this, my trailer is the chart at which we look for 1850-2010,
years for which data is know for the chart


Consider this:
1. The source of the graph is the CRU@EAU. (Climate Research
Unit @ the East Anglia University in the UK)



This chart shows that the Global Temperature for the year 2010 was 0.47°C higher than
the average of all the years (probably) from 1951-1980.

There are lots of things this chart DOES NOT SAY that some seem to think it says or act like it says:

In 2050 the Mean Sea Level will be 2 meters higher than in 1980.
All the glaciers of the world will melt by 2100.
(the rest are left as an exercise for the student)

This chart does show that GLOBAL WARMING has taken place and that Global Warming
is +0.47°C, 2010 compared to 1951-1980. This makes 2010 the
third warmest year since 1850.

the figure // +09.47°C, 2010 \\ has a typing error (a stray nine (9).
It has been corrected to read // +0.47°C, 2010 \\

[Ed Edwards]

This chart shows that the warmest years on earth 1850 to 2010 are:
1. 1998
2. 2005
3&4. tie with 2003 and 2010

This chart also shows that 9 of the 10 completed years (2001-2010 in the 21st century (2001-2100)
are in the top ten warmest years: 1850-2010. Again 1998 was the warmest year and
only 2003 was not in the top 10. [the year 2000 is in the 20th century, in fact the
name "20th Century" comes from the year Twenty-ought-ought.
in fact the 20th century is all the 100 years from the start of 1901 thru the end of 2000.

if you want to talk about the 100 years from the start of 1900 through the end of 1999, it is
called "the "1900s" or "nineteen hundreds
left to at the whim of anybody who can type or has a friend with a voice to type program.
The data in the chart, the year 2000 being in the 20th Century are not what one believes,
it is science not politics.

a word to the wise is sufficient. No quantity of words will help the fool

[David Flick]

[David Flick]

[Gene Scarborough]

David---

The eons of the earth are large. Our human time on it equals the last 15 minutes of a year long movie entitled "Earth."

When I see the geologic record being dug into at the Phosphate Mine across the Pamlico River from me, I always note the Sandhills section of NC near Fayetteville. That was the beach eons ago and the mine is the residue of bones from megolithic creatures who died in water some 200' over the land where I now live.

It has happened before and geology is a solid science based on fossil records.

I just hope mankind is wise enough to recognize our part in a process. If we are numerous enough to consume too much oxygen and pollute that which God created, then this earth will get rid of us as it did the dinosaurs. Dinosaurs had brains the size of a small fruit despite their great size. We are supposed to have more mental capacity, but our greed is well-known for short-circuiting our sense of place in the whole picture of our earth!

[Jim]

[Ed Edwards]

Back in Ressurrection #XIII (13) of this topic, the following arguments (against
the graph that proves Global Warming is taking place) were made.
All the last five statements are in error, are deceptive, and or flat out wrong.
when i wrote this, my trailer is the chart at which we look for 1850-2010,
years for which data is know for the chart


Consider this:
...
2. Note that the graph is calibrated in tenths of a degree Celsius.
...


Yes, this is correct.
Yes, this is highly misleading.

It would be better if instead of degrees Celsius,
it measured Absolute temperature (where 0°K = all motion stops)
also known as: Kevin temp
Then, not only would the temps be shown relative to each other,
the relative heat would be shown as well.

The 0°C is the temperature at which (under normal pressure)
the water form of H2O changes to ice form (when temp goes down)
and the temp at which ice form of H2O changes to liquid form of H2O.
(this happens at 32°F)
(this happens at water freezes at 273.15K

But what we want to deal with is the CO2 contribution and other
man-made forcing factors acting upon the temperature
average (for a year, for example) over the surface of the earth.

We are NOT interested in the main heat contributors:
1. THE SUN
2. Internal heat from the formation of the earth some
--- 3.8 BYA (billion years ago)
4. Internal heat from radioactive materials inside the earth

(right now humans cannot do much about these factors, but
we can get together and reduce the CO2 (carbon dioxide) in
the air. As well, we can somewhat reduce some other,
even more insignificent factors.

The business part of my screen with the chart,
takes 1/4 the height of my screen to show 1°C
(BTW, 1°K = 1°C)
273+14 = 287°C, the approximate average (I am doing this in
my head, i'll try to get a better curent figure than:
The average yearly earth temperature (the zero line on the chart)
is 14°C.

287/4 = 72 screens.
So the chart would be 72 screens high.
What does one get for the extra 71.75 screens?
a lot of heat that everybody should alread know that:


The main contributions to the heat of the earth is:
1. THE SUN
2. Internal heat from the formation of the earth some
----- 3.8 BYA (billion years ago)
3. Internal heat from radioactive materials inside the earth

Yep, that is all we get from 71 of the 72 screens.

Sorry, the data's meaning is best expressed as a zero line (left & right,
AKA: x axis) meaning the average annual earth temperature from
1951 through 1980. The yearly temp of the whole surface of the earth
is an offset from that, and is called an ANOMALY.
ANOMALY = a variance from some average

[Ed Edwards]

[Ed Edwards]

Consider this:
...
3. Note that the graph covers the period of history from 1850 to 2010. (160 years)
...

This is correct and very deceptive. The conclusion from this chart is that:
GLOBAL WARMING has taken place and that Global Warming
is +0.47°C, 2010 compared to 1951-1980. This makes 2010 the
third warmest year since 1850.

It can also show other stuff, just read the chart.

the 1850 anomaly is -0.44°C, the 2010 anomaly is +0.47°C
|absolute value|
|+0.47°C| - |-0.44°C| + = 0.47°C + 0.44°C = 0.91°C so this chart says:

2010 earth temperature is +0.91°C in 2010 compared to 1850. -- this is a fact
If or if not +0.91°C is a significant change or not is a matter of opinion
(but in all reality, one aught to ask the opinions of all seven Billion (7,000,000,000) current inhabitants
of the earth and future inhabitants what they opinion is, before you set
your life-style at some abusive level.

[Gene Scarborough]

Jim---

You have now set the record for Conservative Republican manure production ---and those greenhouse gases just might choke the economy further and lead to the elimination of too many environmental laws protecting me and the Pamlico River from pollution by a mining company now owned by Canadians rather than Americans!!!!

Can a Democratic President even go to the bathroom to suit you??????

[Jim]

[Gene Scarborough]

Jim---

The derision and arrogance UNDERwhelms me!

We are talking about "trends" and known sources of pollution and geenhouse gases. You are trying to use specific exceptions to the findings of modern science and monitoring from new space technology.

Remember, this earth exists on a grander scale then the last 100 years even. It is based on cyclical events and the transformation of carbon dioxide into oxygen by the simple process of photosynthesis. Cut down the rain forest of South American with powerful and efficient machines without replanting them and you have, not only a heating of that continent / worsening of hurricanes which will pass by soon / but pollution of every stream and the killing of fish using them to spawn---etc / etc / etc.

I think you are being short-sighted in your view of what is happening right now! Don't forget the movie lasting a year--in which man has appeared in the last 15 minutes of that year!!!

[Jim]

[Ed Edwards]

// Consider this:
...
4. Note that the tiny amount of warming started long before the late 20th century.
... \\

True, but very deceptive.
(another argument is that: no Global Warming has taken place since 1998.
True but deceptive enough to be a lie)

In 1998 the anomaly from the 1951-1980 base was:
0.54°C none of the years 1999 to 2010 have a greater anomaly.
But all the years 1998 through 2010 have been warmer than the
1951-1980 base. In fact, the least year is the year 2000 at
+0.30°C above the 1951-1980 base. And then for good sport,
the year 2000 ties with 1995 as the 13th hottest year 1850-2010!
That fact also says that 137 years were cooler than the LAST
year of the Second Millennium (1001-2000) after Christ.

The first evidence of 'heating' (the kind of "heating" intended
by people who think "no Global Warming has taken place since 1998"
is a meaningful statement):
The temperature of the Earth increased 0.15°C in 1851 compared to
1850. But one year as a base does not help with long
term trends.
[ the absolute value of the 1850 anomaly
MINUS the absolute value of the 1851 anomaly
EQUALS the temperature change:
|-0.44°C| - |-0.29°C| = +0.15°C ]

Lots of information on that chart, and we haven't even gotten to
the ease of computing five year averages with a spread sheet.
Yep, that is what that dark black line is -- points on the chart
at the year where one added: the year +2 years before + two
years after and all that divided by five.
The five year averages show that from 1980 to 2010 the five year
average yearly temperatures of the whole earth have been
above [Warmer Than] the 1951-1980 base.
The five year averages show that from 18 to 2010 the five year
average yearly temperatures of the whole earth have been
below [Cooler Than] the 1951-1980 base.

And the chart has a sign that a 5-year running average is the black
Line. At the end of the chart, we really
do not know what the Global Temperature for 2011 will be,
nor the Temp for 2012. So the black line just repeats the
2008 "five year average" number in 2009 and 2010. That makes
the number for the last three years flat. (also notice that
the line starts with 3 repetitions of the third "five year aveage"
for 1852 = 1851 = 1850 - the flat dark black line at the left side.

Note that the flat spot on the "five year average" line is easy
to see. Charts & Graphs made by folks who do not know their
measurement, data control, and graphing science -- their "oops" is
easy to see. [not seen on this chart]

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: As some of you know I generally lean to the the did of those who deny Man Made global warming . But in looking at The chart presented by KeithE
I started to wonder if if MAYBE there is some thing there other than the usual declared culprit of "the burning of fossil fuels" Could it instead be the vast amount of gun powder and other explosives utilied in the wide range of wars scattered over the face of the globe since the 1700's?

[Gene Scarborough]

A great and worthy postulation, Ed!!!

Jim will enjoy his comfort until icecicles are forming on his nose or his AC no longer copes with the growing heat of summer.

Consider this: Why are our recent hurricaines more and more vicious?

I believe it is because they come out of NW Africa / transverse the Atlantic / go by South American and then come into North America. Each year the relative relationship of old rain forest to bare land or new forests now growing is less of the old and mega-cooling rainforests. This results in more and more heating of the atmosphere which stirs the storm to a greater intensity.

Wise managers of the environment recognize they must cooperate with the natural cycle of nature. If you exceeed the area of loss to natural forest fires, then you have altered the cycle. Greedy timber barons don't really care about this. We now have monster and powerful machines which can take down an acre an hour. This is a far greater rate than anything natural.

When man does not replicate nature, then he is altering the face of the planet in a non-natural way. Just keep it up and pray a monster tidal wave does not suck away coastal populations as it did in Japan this year.

Just a thought, Jim!

[Gene Scarborough]

A great and worthy postulation, Ed!!!

Jim will enjoy his comfort until icecicles are forming on his nose or his AC no longer copes with the growing heat of summer.

Consider this: Why are our recent hurricaines more and more vicious?

I believe it is because they come out of NW Africa / transverse the Atlantic / go by South American and then come into North America. Each year the relative relationship of old rain forest to bare land or new forests now growing is less of the old and mega-cooling rainforests. This results in more and more heating of the atmosphere which stirs the storm to a greater intensity.

Wise managers of the environment recognize they must cooperate with the natural cycle of nature. If you exceeed the area of loss to natural forest fires, then you have altered the cycle. Greedy timber barons don't really care about this. We now have monster and powerful machines which can take down an acre an hour. This is a far greater rate than anything natural.

When man does not replicate nature, then he is altering the face of the planet in a non-natural way. Just keep it up and pray a monster tidal wave does not suck away coastal populations as it did in Japan this year.

Just a thought, Jim!

[Ed Edwards]

[Ed Edwards]

[Ed Edwards]

In the post above
by David Flick » Sun Jul 10, 2011 2:42 am


4 images are given, I have comments:

Image #1
http://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-cont ... _graph.jpg
each pixel is about 1,000 years wide
-2.0°C (compared to 1961-1990) represents the last 1,000 years
1. from other data we can see that that probablly 1000BC -1850BC
was cooler than the last 150 years
2. the trend says it should get cooler in the next 1,000 years
(we will not know, though, until 3011 AD)

Image #2
http://www.jazclass.aust.com/blog/photos53/blog478a.gif
a blue dot 27 pixels wide on my is marked 2006.
This chart is 3 pixels wide on Image #1.
The chart say the 3,000 year average is 23°C
this chart shows that the last 1,000 years has been the coolest
in the last 3,000 years
It looks like the temp has been trending downwars the last 3,000 years

Image #3
http://joannenova.com.au/globalwarming/ ... it-web.gif
each pixel is about 3,000 years wide
looks like the last 10,000 years earth has warmed up 10°C
looks like the next 3,000 will be a down trend
But the temp went up the last 150 years, since the start of the
fossil burning industrial age.


Image #4
http://www.kednos.com/physics/climatolo ... trends.jpg
this is about the same as Image #3
and it looks like the greenhouse gas trends are cyclic (naturally)
and should be reducing by natural cycles.
This chart is way to busy and hard to read

Well, that exercise was a waste of time.
we didn't find out much from the exercise except to confirm what I already knew:

1. The earth is heating up in the last 50 years when half the fossil
fuel ON THE WHOLE EARTH was burned up so we can eat,
drive 40 miles to wal-marts, and jet to exotic foreign places
(rich world) and/or eat a bit, maybe (poor world)

2. Predicting the future is rather IFFY - especially as it
pertains to stuf that never happend yet.

3. Unless we repent, we all likewise shall perish

[David Flick]

[Gene Scarborough]

You're up mighty early Mr. Flick!!!

Is it possibly because you have yard work to do before the un-godly heat of global warming gets to you????

What if Al is totally right and you die of heat prostration today---yesterday was the hottest on record in Eastern NC / we are suffering from drought / the country has had the worst blast of ugly weather in ages / BUT "Al doesn't know what he's talking about"---along with thousands of other earth monitoring scientists?????

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: So Gene hw would you explain these stats from the 12027 zip Current conditions as of 1:50 PM EDT
Partly Cloudy 12027 that is Burnt Hills NY. Maybe God like us best.
real temp
79
feels Like:
78 °F
Barometer:
30.03 in and falling
Humidity:
39 %
Visibility:
10 mi
Dewpoint:
52 °F
Wind:
NNE 9 mph
UV Index:
8
UV Description:
Very High

[Gene Scarborough]

God took a liking to eastern NC this morning with dry air / fresh breezes / low humidity-----but no tree work to do on a day great for such.

Won't use the 2 words of opposite extremes used to describe such!!!! One ain't nice.