Effects of Climate Warming Already in Evidence

Lycos Environmental News Service ^ | 03/29/2002

[Robert A Cook PE]

Actually, the average temperatures DECREASED in the middle of the century .... from the mid-30's through the early 80's temperatures went DOWN.

Only in the last 20 years have they risen - and they've risen by less 1/4 of what these "programs" predict for the ACTUAL increase in CO2 concentration..

[Victoria Delsoul]

Only in the last 20 years have they risen - and they've risen by less 1/4 of what these "programs" predict for the ACTUAL increase in CO2 concentration..

Yes. Thanks for your post.

[green team 1999]

another remote viewing proven correct,by major ed dames (dr.doom),only 20% of the people worldwide will survive!

[Always Right]

John Daly's Still Waiting for Greenhouse site has a feature about the Nenana Ice Classic (also written up in this month's issue of Discover magazine) that cites a similar trend.

John Daly cites the Nenana Ice Classic as an example of how Global Warmers lie. Did you read the article, or are you like the typical Gorebull Liar who only accepts what supports their outrageous theory. Here's a graph from the "cite" that shows the "similar trend":

As usual, when ALL the data is shown, it shows what outright absolute LIARS Global Warmers are.

[Always Right]

The funny thing about the Climatic Research Unit's Global Tempreture trend is you only get warming if you believe the data from: 1) over the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia 2) West Africa 3) Central Brazil 4) Polynesia 5) Pacific Ocean west of Mexico and 6) Northeastern Siberia. In other words a bunch of poorly controlled stations (and areas that will benefit from any global warming treaty). The data from North America, Western Europe, and Australia agree with the satellite data which shows no real warming trend over the last 30 years.

In summary, good data = no warming, suspect data = significant warming. The 'experts' are 100% sure there has been significant warming. And the 'experts' lie.

[Robert A Cook PE]

"Some" of the experts lie.

Many analyze and report valid, accurate, correct results.

The news media prints and exploits ONLY those "eco-extremist experts" who DO lie.

And the thousands of "ecologists" who blatantly exaggerate these lies.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!

[Always Right]

"Some" of the experts lie. Many analyze and report valid, accurate, correct results.

Those "some" of course include the ones who run and control the IPCC. There are many good scientist who put out good data, but then that data is convoluted and spun by the IPCC.

[Phantom Lord]

If I had to place money on a coming heat wave or a coming ice age I would go with the ice age.

I as refering to the "scientific consensus" of the 70's and early 80's that was all the rage and what was making up their "doom and gloom" predictions, a coming ice age. And guess what they said was going to cause this ice age? You got it, our burning of fossil fuels and the resulting release of CO2.

I wonder what the people in Siberia, who have had record cold winters the past 2 years, think about the global warming theory?

[Phantom Lord]

I got 22 inches of global warming in Raleigh NC this year!

[Phantom Lord]

Have you gone to www.john-daly.com?

Like im going to go to an alcoholic, wife beating professional golfer for information on global warming.

Just kidding, I know its a different John Daly.

[discostu]

Actually rainfall here and humidity here is down, especially in the mid zones, the east side is still getting plenty of rain). It's cooler but dryer (we've noticed things wetting up in Phoenix, our water table went up for the first time in a few decades, normally Phoenix causes a suck which makes the water table in this area one of the few that runs uphill). Still keeping solid desert humidity (you know, complaining when it gets up over 10, complaining a lot when it hits 20... being a transplanted Chicago boy I laugh at myself when I do that), we just aren't getting the highs, either the spikes or the sustains (right around the 117 year we also did 100 consecutive days over 100, now it won't stay that high more than 2 weeks in a row).

Weather has always been interesting to me, started when I walked all over learning to observe the weather was a survival skill. One thing I have learned for sure about weather is that if you want to predict the weather next year you need at least 4 year's data, and that ratio seems to hold. Simply put we just don't have the data available to have any clue what the weather is going to be like in 2102. Just gotta ride it out, one of the big strengths of human beings is that we're adaptable, when the time comes we'll be ready one way or the other.

[discostu]

Tucson is in a wierd dip or something. Phoenix, 100 miles straight north from here, is generally hotter than us. We've always had cooler temperatures than places you think should be cooler than us. Remember distance from the equator isn't the only determiner, altitude has an effect, and so does the terrain. We've learned that highly reflective ground surfaces (like concrete, or some types of sand) raise temperatures. There's probably other stuff too that I'm just not smart enoughto know about.

Of course we still spike up over 100 regularly, and over 110 a couple times a year. Once you get in that range it's just HOT and the actual number isn't that important.

So according to our impromptu and highly unscientific study the desert areas are getting cooler. Maybe that's the cause of global warming, maybe that desert heat is finally dispersing over the rest of the planet. That's as good an explanation as what the envirowhackos are proposing.

[Alberta's Child]

I don't dispute the notion of "global warming" (just check out any receding glacier in a mountainous region for evidence) -- what I don't accept is the idea that man-made influences are the cause of this warming trend. There was an article a few months ago that identified a gradual shrinking of the polar caps on Mars, and as far as I know the Big Three auto makers haven't even started selling cars there, let alone gas-guzzling SUVs.

[cogitator]

Actually, the average temperatures DECREASED in the middle of the century .... from the mid-30's through the early 80's temperatures went DOWN.

Recent models have successfully duplicated this trend.

Overall Assessment of Abilities See Figure 13.

Only in the last 20 years have they risen - and they've risen by less 1/4 of what these "programs" predict for the ACTUAL increase in CO2 concentration.

This is outdated information and I don't know what you're basing it on. Improved models more closely duplicate the observed temperature increase.

Climate Forcings in the Industrial Era

[cogitator]

When an environmentalist can explain to me why Viking burial grounds have been found in parts of Greenland that are today permanently frozen, then maybe I will consider the possibility of "global warming" as a consequence of human activity. This and many other observations (including crocodilian fossils found in the Arctic, and hippopotamus fossils found in Europe) are evidence that long-term climactic change is a natural phenomenon.

It's pretty obvious that long-term climatic change is a natural phenomenon. The changes that have occurred over the past 150-200 years aren't considered long-term, and they have likely been influenced by human activities. That doesn't mean that none of the change in that period has been natural, it only means that some of the change probably hasn't been natural.

[cogitator]

Have you gone to www.john-daly.com? He gives reasons why the large spike in the latter half of the twentieth century is probably a result of measurement errors and shoddy data. He shows why this graph is suspect by contrasting it with the temperature charts for the US and with global satellite data.

Yes, I've been there and I've corresponded with Daly several times. For one thing, it's hard for me to rate the opinions of a retired ship's radio officer over research results from some of the best climate scientists in the world. Furthermore, when someone doesn't know (and doesn't check to find out) that a satellite has two radar units rather than being two separate satellites, and thinks that K2 is in the Himalayan range rather than the Hindu Kush, it's hard for me to take him seriously when he discusses measurement errors and shoddy data.

Having said all that, Daly does highlight problems with the ground measurement network which have also been covered in recent reports from the National Academy of Sciences. And he does a good job of finding uncertainties in current trends. But like I said, I can't consider him as more authoritative than scientists in the climate research community.

[Sabertooth]

Effects of Climate Warming Already in Evidence

As in... The end of the Ice Age.

Global Warming started 10,000 years ago.