US spring warming off the charts

A couple (L) enjoys the sunny weather as tulips bloom at Lafayette Park in front of the White House
A couple (L) enjoys the sunny weather as tulips bloom at Lafayette Park in front of the White House in Washington, DC, in March 2012. The continental United States experienced the warmest spring on record this year, with temperatures far above the average over the past century, government scientists said Thursday.

The continental United States experienced the warmest spring on record this year, with temperatures far above the average over the past century, government scientists said Thursday.

The United States, excluding Alaska, Hawaii and overseas territories, had an average temperature of 57.1 (13.9 Celsius) from March through May, 5.2 degrees (2.9 Celsius) above the average from 1901 to 2000, the data showed.

"Spring 2012 marked the largest temperature departure from average of any season on record for the contiguous United States," the said in a statement.

This year's spring was up 2.0 degrees (1.1 Celsius) from the previous warmest spring in the United States which was recorded in 1910, the agency said.

The year from June 2011 through May also marked the warmest 12-month period on record after a hot summer and warmer winter. The average temperature was 3.2 degrees (1.8 Celsius) above average, the agency said.

In terms of monthly figures, the United States experienced the warmest March, the third warmest April and the second warmest May, the agency said.

Scientists have repeatedly warned that emissions of greenhouse gases, largely through industrial activity, are heating up the planet and could spell serious long-term problems, including the extinction of plant and animal species and the flooding of low-lying islands.

UN-led efforts for a new global have moved slowly. Climate change remains a controversial topic in the United States, with many prominent members of the Republican Party casting doubt on the science.

Proposals backed by President and his Democratic allies to mandate cuts in emissions have died in Congress. Critics say the measures would be too costly to a fragile economy.

US emissions of rose in 2010 after a brief downward turn, according to official data.

China has surpassed the United States as the largest emitter. The Asian power has pledged to reduce the intensity of its emissions per unit of economic growth, but not in absolute terms.


Explore further

2011 Britain's second warmest year on record

(c) 2012 AFP

Citation: US spring warming off the charts (2012, June 7) retrieved 21 September 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2012-06-us-spring-warming-off-the.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
0 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Jun 07, 2012
That is a lot!!!

Jun 07, 2012
What caused the 'unusual' warming in 1910?

jdw
Jun 07, 2012
Feels great! Just think, there could be a mile-thick sheet of ice or a warm sea right where I'm now enjoying perfect temperatures and lush growth!

But, give it a few dozen centuries, or even an era or two. It could go either way, really.

Jun 07, 2012
Many of the states warmest consecutive 12 months are still in the 1930s, a few in the 1920s, Maine in 1913 and Arizona in 1896.

And thats with some of the old data artificially cooled by adjustments.

http://wattsupwit...records/

Jun 08, 2012
How can you have 'many' of the warmest consecutive 12 months? 'Warmest' is a superlative.

"Spring 2012 marked the largest temperature departure from average of any season on record for the contiguous United States,"

"This year's spring was up 2.0 degrees (1.1 Celsius) from the previous warmest spring in the United States which was recorded in 1910"

"The year from June 2011 through May also marked the warmest 12-month period on record after a hot summer and warmer winter."

Global temperatures are climbing relentlessly, in spite of La Nina and other natural forcings.

Jun 08, 2012
Parker must be a comedian...
http://www.guardi...er-study

Jun 08, 2012
Given that 1910 was an abnormally cold year, one has to wonder what kind of brain damage IrisqTard is suffering from.


Well, he was smart enough to know the previous record holder for warmest March was 1910.

Jun 08, 2012

Globally on the other hand the 20 years surrounding the 1930's averaged -0.2'C and the last 20 years has averaged about 0.4'C, indicating an overall warming of around 0.6'C.


However .... globally 1944 was only .2C colder than 2011.

.2c is microscopic and well within the margin of error.

And in fact Jan 2011 and Jan 2012 were colder than Jan 1944.

2011 was essentially the same temperature as 1944 when you consider population growth, UHI and heat bubbles improperly accounted for.

And then the scandal of the adjusting dowwards of past US data ... shameful.

Jun 08, 2012
Cherry picking weather again... sigh, would you like to join my evil army? Remember to bring a goat.

Jun 08, 2012
Many of the states warmest consecutive 12 months are still in the 1930s.


What is tragic is that the NOAA has been adjusting the past cooler by 3F.

The 30s are still the warmest, just not on the NOAA crooked books.

http://wattsupwit...re-65130

Jun 08, 2012

Oh I see - you pick one month, in one state, in one country - and want to say that informs us about the global cimate!!!!!!



24 out of the 48 continental states had the warmest consecutive 12 months before 1950.

Thats half.

17 of the 48 had the warmest consecutive 12 months in 2011/2012.

AGW logic:

17 out of 48 are warm: Apocalypse
24 out of 48 not as warm as before 1950: USA is teensy, tiny part of the world.

People do not live in the GAT. They live in cities or regions or states. Some are cooling, some are not and many were the warmest ever in the 1930s or 1920s.


Jun 08, 2012
24 out of the 48 continental states had the warmest consecutive 12 months before 1950.

What a bunch of claptrap Parker. Look at the charts I referenced. All the data shows the globe is warming -


The cherry-picked Global Average Temperature is up a fraction from 1944.

But people live in states or counties. Just because the GAT is up a tiny bit doesn't mean people don't live where it isn't warming or it is cooling.

And people need to make decisions based on their home region. If a farmer lives in a cooling state or region, telling him to plant crops that need warmer temperatures is cruel.

Trying to shut me up so you can peddle your claptrap is sad.

Where I live temperature is down over 1C from where it was 8 or 9 years ago.

And none of the "Climate Change" conmen mention it.

People need to make INFORMED decisions.

Jun 08, 2012
Of course you will find some cherry picked fact


In Washington State, May 2012 was 7.3F colder than the record (1958). It is ranked 35 out of 118 May's which means 83 May's were warmer.

Oregon was ranked 38 out of 118 - 80 were warmer.

Alaska is cold too. BC's May is .7C colder than normal.

The PDO has switched to the cold phase and those phases can last 30 years.

Only 25 more to go.

There may be Regional Warming. But not on the West Coast. It is cold here.

And lying to the people of the West Coast is cruel.

Jun 08, 2012
In Washington State, May 2012 was 7.3F colder than the record (1958). It is ranked 35 out of 118 May's which means 83 May's were warmer.

Oregon was ranked 38 out of 118 - 80 were warmer.

Alaska is cold too. BC's May is .7C colder than normal.

The PDO has switched to the cold phase and those phases can last 30 years.

Only 25 more to go.

There may be Regional Warming. But not on the West Coast. It is cold here.

And lying to the people of the West Coast is cruel.


California May 2012 not as cold. 95 out of 118. Only 23 warmer.

2011 was ranked 30. 88 were warmer.

2010 was ranked 13. 105 were warmer.

Jun 08, 2012
All the data shows the globe is warming


Lets say 25% of the land area warms by 1C over 10 years. And 75% does not.

The GAT will go up .25C.

So the questions then become:

1) Why is most of the world not warming?

2) If only part of the world is warming then blaming CO2 seems silly because the CO2 theory requires all of the world to warm.

3) Is there a reason why it went up? Such as increased sunshine?

http://sunshineho...us-tmax/

4) It it was sunshine or some other climate variable then it is wrong to blame CO2.

5) If warming was longer or stronger int he 1930s because of some unknown mechanism, why would normal people not think it is the same mechanism.

The PDO drives a lerge part of the earths climate. The PDO switched around 2008 from warm to cold. The west coast is colder. That cold may well spread to the rest of the world. The 1998 peak came when the PDO had been warm for 20 years.

Jun 08, 2012
Washington state comprises only about 0.036 percent of the earth's surface.

Gosh, ParkerTard is now so desparate to cherry pick he is now relegated to looking for monthly extremes to choose from.

"In Washington State, May 2012 was 7.3F colder than the record (1958)." - ParkerTard

The fact is, Washington State shows a warming trend of .06C' per decade.


From 1986 to 2011. 25 years.

Cooling at -0.38 degF / Decade.

People can check:

http://www.ncdc.n.../wa.html

Jun 08, 2012
Florida Warming trend 0.04'F per decade.


Pretty low. And it is 0 from 1921. Not much warming at all.

Here is the list of states cooling from 1921. (Plus Ohio since .01F is so small)

https://sunshineh...1921.jpg

Not much of an argument for "Global" warming is it?

Jun 09, 2012
ParkerTard's Denialist blog doesn't seem to agree with the data from the NOAA.

Mostly because it is fabricated nonsense.

"Here is the list of states cooling from 1921. (Plus Ohio since .01F is so small)" - ParkerTard

Liar, Liar... Pants on Fire...


Go back and put 1921 in as the start date for all the NOAA data.

I admit many states warmed from 1895 to 1921.

Alabama 1895 to 1921: Warming at 0.31 degF / Decade (well before CO2)

Alabama 1921 to 2011 : Cooling at -0.19 degF / Decade


Jun 09, 2012
Thanks VD for offering to go back and do trends from 1895 to 1921 and 1921 to 2011 for each state.

It should be fascinating.

And I really appreciate you pointing out how much it warmed from 1895 to 1921.

Wow. Puts modern "warming" to shame.

And here's Arkansas from 1895.

https://sunshineh...1895.png

Notice the warming from 1895 to 1921.

Here are a bunch more. Same pattern. Warming to 1920s. Then cooling for decades. And then some warming that doesn't quite match the warming from 1895.

http://sunshineho...part-1a/

The blue Loess curve is the real climate signal. Natural.

Jun 09, 2012
Thanks VD for offering to go back and do trends from 1895 to 1921 and 1921 to 2011 for each state.


Don't renege. Go back and show all the trends from 1921 to 2011.


Jun 09, 2012
why do you have to break everything up into tiny chunks


For understanding.

A GAT increase of .2C over 130 years is microscopic. And all of it is because of cherry-picking stations 1000 stations out of the 6000 available.

The great tragedy is even with the states data demolishing the CO2 myth, the NOAA is altering even more data to make the past cooler than it was.

http://notalotofp...t-again/

They are terrified of people finding out the 20s and 30s were warmer.

It will ruin the con game.

Jun 09, 2012
Come on VD. Quit reneging.

Go back to NOAA and do 1895 trends to 1921 and 1921 to 2011.

I did the first oen for you:

Alabama 1895 to 1921: Warming at 0.31 degF / Decade (well before CO2)

Alabama 1921 to 2011 : Cooling at -0.19 degF / Decade

Absolutely MASSIVE WARMING in 1895 - 1921. Natural massive warming. Non-CO2 warming.

Thanks for bringing that to our attention VD.

Jun 09, 2012
In the name of Satan i am commanding NotParker to shut his mouth! OR i will sacrifice this goat and use voodoo to sew his mouth shut.
We have been compromised, the humans have caught us. They figured out our CO2 robots are turning the Earth into a flaming ball of death. Stop convincing them otherwise it is wasted energy.

Jun 09, 2012
VD: Liar... Liar... Pants on Fire....


Not much of a contribution to the discussion ... but certainly more coherent than usual.

Thanks VD for pointing out the massive 1895 - 1921 warming that took place without CO2.

You have helped point out that natural warming was huge and the same mechanisms caused the much smaller recent warming is some sates.

As I've said, many US states never got warmer than the 1921 or 1930s peaks.

An animated gif:

https://sunshineh...ling.gif

Jun 09, 2012

Now how is it not totally delusional to suggest there was massive warming from 1895 - 1921


The thing about GAT indexes is that they pretend to be about global temperatures but regions warm and cool at different times.

So, for HADCRUT3, the big warming was 1909 to 1942/44.

http://www.woodfo...43/trend

1909 -0.565
1944 0.121

.686C

1978 -0.065
1998 0.548

.613C


Jun 09, 2012
Don't show me data for Alabama - or for your living room


A challenge for you. Did bright sunshine increase at any time in the 20th century as it did in the UK.

http://sunshineho...us-tmax/

You do understand more bright sunshine = more warming.

Jun 09, 2012
Don't show me data for Alabama - or for your living room


USA as a whole?

1895 to 1921 = 3.32F

Or

1917 to 1934 = 4.01F

http://www.ncdc.n.../na.html

Jun 09, 2012
Don't show me data for Alabama - or for your living room


USA as a whole?

1895 to 1921 = 3.32F

Or

1917 to 1934 = 4.01F

http://www.ncdc.n.../na.html


Anyone can check. The warming of the USA was HUGE in the past, before CO2.

Even the biggest AGW liars on the planet admit CO2 had no effect before 1950.

Yet the warming before 1950 dwarfs the miniscule warming recently.


Jun 09, 2012
Don't show me data for Alabama - or for your living room


A challenge for you. Did bright sunshine increase at any time in the 20th century as it did in the UK.

http://sunshineho...us-tmax/

You do understand more bright sunshine = more warming.


Anyone? Can you prove bright sunshine hasn't changed?

Jun 09, 2012
This article just serves to show the bias of the AGW community. Globally, the winter of 2011/2012 has been relatively cool, yet they aren't reporting this. Why?

Globally, this is the 15th warmest winter on record (that actually means, it's cooler).

Jun 09, 2012

"Can you prove bright sunshine hasn't changed?" - ParkerTard

Outside of the mathematical sciences, science never offers proof.

ParkerTard has now demonstrated his complete ignorance of how science works.

Ignorance is the root of all denialism.


Actually, the dumber you are, the more you believe in AGW. You are so dumb you think the sun has nothing to do with warming.

Jun 09, 2012
It's been so cool globally, that the HadCRUT3 data now shows no global warming since 1997!

http://www.woodfo...97/trend

Of course VD will refer to the HadCRUT4 data without bothering to explain that it isn't updated (ends in December 2010).


Jun 09, 2012
Anthony Watts puts this article in context
http://wattsupwit...ll-that/

Jun 09, 2012
confusing weather with climate again.. cherry picking 1997 with todays weather again... sheesh..

Jun 09, 2012
Actually, the dumber you are, the more you believe in AGW.


"A US government-funded survey has found that Americans with higher levels of scientific and mathematical knowledge are more sceptical regarding the dangers of climate change than their more poorly educated fellow citizens."


Jun 09, 2012
Hadcrut4 shows a warming trend of .1'C over the last 15 years.


2011 was cold. HADCRUT4 has no data from 2011. Only people who log in and prove they have an IQ above 100 get access. They laughed at VD's application written in crayon.


Jun 10, 2012
Anthony Watts is a nobody who runs a denialist blog.

Ad hominum attack and name calling. What are you hiding? Anthony Watts runs the leading climate blog on the web with over !00,000,000 hits. He's far more influential than The Journals "Nature" and "Science" put together. Ignore him at your peril.

Jun 10, 2012
Hadcrut4 shows a warming trend of .1'C over the last 15 years.


No data for the cold 2011. If you weren't one of the ignorant uninformed AGW believers you would understand that.

Jun 10, 2012
Over the last 20 years, springtime temperatures in Washington State have fallen more than three degrees.

And is cooling at -1.66F per decade.

http://stevengodd...century/

So much for CO2 ...

Jun 10, 2012
I suggest we just all report notparkers posts and hope he one day gets banned.

Jun 10, 2012

24 out of the 48 continental states had the warmest consecutive 12 months before 1950.

Thats half.

17 of the 48 had the warmest consecutive 12 months in 2011/2012.


that's not a fair comparison, idjit.

You're comparing all the individual record 12 months periods for individual states across a 60 year period to that of a 1 year period.

Can't you see that 17 states having their 12 hottest consecutive months in a single year is a much bigger deal than 24 states having their 12 hottest consecutive months across 60 years?

1 record per 3 years average vs 17 records in one year...

wow. When properly digested, your own data refutes you.

Besides that, 31 states just had their hottest march-april-may ever, and additional 5 states had their second hottest march-to-may period ever, and another 4 had their third hottest ever.

All told, 40 states were in their top 3 hottest such period ever for 2012, and 46 states were above normal, with 43 being "much above normal".

Grow up, fool.

JRi
Jun 10, 2012
Good for them! Here in Scandinavia the spring has been very cold. For example, a week ago in Stockholm, it was colder than it was in December.

Jun 10, 2012

24 out of the 48 continental states had the warmest consecutive 12 months before 1950.

Thats half.

17 of the 48 had the warmest consecutive 12 months in 2011/2012.


that's not a fair comparison, idjit.

You're comparing all the individual record 12 months periods for individual states across a 60 year period to that of a 1 year period.


21 were 1931/1932 or 1933/1934.

That beats your 17.


Jun 10, 2012
ParkerTard's latest lie is easy to expose.

Here is the temperature history for Washington State (spring) since 1900.

https://docs.goog...UUTg4OXc

Average temperatures for that region in the 90's was around 9.5'C
Average temperatures for the last 10 years are around 8.5'C

The difference is 1C'.


Huge.

But I was use F. And the numbers were accurate. 1934 was a lot warmer than 2011.

Jun 10, 2012
Am doing so.

"I suggest we just all report notparkers posts" - stan


When you lose every argument I guess trying to ban someone smarter than you makes sense if you have no interest in learning anything ... ever.

Jun 10, 2012
May is getting cold.

Arizona May is cooling at -4.2F/decade from 2000 to 2012
California May is cooling at -3.41F/decade from 2001 to 2012
Colorado May is cooling at -2.58F/decade from 2000 to 2012
Idaho May is cooling at -3.53F/decade from 2001 to 2012
Minnesota May is cooling at -1.26F/decade from 1985 to 2012
Montana May is cooling at -2.46F/decade from 2000 to 2012
Nebraska May is cooling at -1.09F/decade from 1998 to 2012
Nevada May is cooling at -4.51F/decade from 2001 to 2012
New Mexico May is cooling at -3.07F/decade from 2000 to 2012
North Dakota May is cooling at -2.12F/decade from 1985 to 2012
Oregon May is cooling at -3.57F/decade from 2001 to 2012
South Dakota May is cooling at -1.44F/decade from 1985 to 2012
Texas May is cooling at -1.16F/decade from 1998 to 2012
Utah May is cooling at -4.18F/decade from 2000 to 2012
Washington May is cooling at -2.38F/decade from 2001 to 2012
Wyoming May is cooling at -3.07F/decade from 2000 to 2012

Jun 10, 2012
June (just the ones more than -.5F/dec):

Arizona -2.58F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
California -2.69F/dec. from 2000 to 2011
Colorado -1.15F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
Connecticut -0.64F/dec. from 1999 to 2011
Idaho -3.1F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
Iowa -0.71F/dec. from 1986 to 2011
Maine -1.05F/dec. from 1999 to 2011
Massachusetts -0.93F/dec. from 1999 to 2011
Michigan -0.67F/dec. from 1994 to 2011
Minnesota -1.73F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
Montana -1.96F/dec. from 1986 to 2011
Nebraska -1.24F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
Nevada -3.97F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
New Hampshire -1.4F/dec. from 1999 to 2011
North Dakota -1.83F/dec. from 1986 to 2011
Oregon -2.76F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
South Dakota -2.08F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
Utah -2.95F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
Vermont -0.68F/dec. from 1994 to 2011
Washington -2.22F/dec. from 2001 to 2011
Wisconsin -0.8F/dec. from 1994 to 2011
Wyoming -2.21F/dec. from 2001 to 2011

Jun 10, 2012
States with the warmest May before 1900

Georgia 76.2 1896
Idaho 58.2 1897
Indiana 68.4 1896
Kentucky 71.5 1896
Michigan 62.4 1896
Mississippi 77 1896
North Carolina 72.3 1896
Oklahoma 75 1896
South Carolina 76.5 1896
West Virginia 67.3 1896


Jun 10, 2012
States with the warmest May after 1900 and before 1950

Alabama 76.1 1933
Colorado 59.5 1934
Florida 78.6 1905
Iowa 68.8 1934
Louisiana 77.3 1933
Maine 57.6 1911
Massachusetts 61.4 1944
Montana 59.6 1934
Nebraska 68.5 1934
New Hampshire 59.7 1911
New York 61.6 1911
Pennsylvania 64.8 1944
South Dakota 68.3 1934
Utah 61.8 1934
Wyoming 57.5 1934


Jun 10, 2012
States with the warmest May this century

Arizona 72.1 2000
California 69.6 2001
Delaware 69.2 2004
Maryland 69 2004
Nevada 62.1 2001
Rhode Island 61.8 2010

Jun 10, 2012
States with the warmest May before 1900

Georgia 76.2 1896
Idaho 58.2 1897
Indiana 68.4 1896
Kentucky 71.5 1896
Michigan 62.4 1896
Mississippi 77 1896
North Carolina 72.3 1896
Oklahoma 75 1896
South Carolina 76.5 1896
West Virginia 67.3 1896



I wonder why CO2 skipped warming May? And June too.


Jun 10, 2012
CO2 pretends June isn't there.

Alabama 82.9 1914
Arizona 83.1 1896
California 76.6 1896
Connecticut 70.2 1925
Idaho 65 1918
Illinois 78.5 1934
Indiana 76.8 1934
Iowa 77 1933
Maine 66.1 1930
Maryland 75.9 1943
Massachusetts 69.4 1930
Michigan 70.8 1919
Minnesota 72 1933
Mississippi 83 1914
Nebraska 76.9 1933
Nevada 70.5 1918
New York 69.5 1949
Ohio 75.5 1934
Oregon 64.9 1918
Pennsylvania 72.2 1943
South Dakota 75.7 1933
Vermont 68 1949
WestVirginia 74.3 1943
Wisconsin 72 1933

Jun 10, 2012
CO2 pretends June isn't there for all but these:


Colorado 67.3 2002
Delaware 77.4 2010
Louisiana 83.9 2011
New Jersey 74.4 2010
Rhode Island 69.6 2010
Texas 85 2011
Utah 70.2 2007
Virginia 76.3 2010

Jun 10, 2012
NASA GISS temperatures are not yet available for May or June.


You like datasets missing data. As for June, the data is up to 2011. Obviously!

Try and stay with the program.

Jun 10, 2012
notparker or the 200 idiots behind the nickname.
Get this through your thick skull. Cherry picking doesnt work.

Jun 10, 2012
Jesus Christ it's a full time job trying to 1 star all of NotParker's posts. I gave up after like the 1000th idiotic one.

Better to just smoke a joint and pretend he's a naked lady.

Jun 10, 2012
States with the warmest May this century

Arizona 72.1 2000
California 69.6 2001
Delaware 69.2 2004
Maryland 69 2004
Nevada 62.1 2001
Rhode Island 61.8 2010


Why did CO2 forsake the month of May?


Jun 10, 2012
NASA GISSTEMP (GLobal) 2012

Jan 34
Feb 39
March 46
April 56
May NA
June NA

"You like datasets missing data" - ParerTard

As I said, the data for May has not yet been analyzed


NOAA/NASA disagrees.

"Alaska had its 22nd coolest May since records began in 1918, with a temperature 2.2°F (1.2°C) below the 19712000 average."


Jun 11, 2012
Things I've always wondered about the global warming conspiracy:

1. When was the conspiracy conceived?
2. When and where did they hold meetings to plot this?
3. Who were the organizers?
4. What made them decide they could successfully corrupt a global collection of professionals to abandon all integrity?
5. How did they manage to contact 97% of the planets climate researchers and leave no evidence?
6. What the hell did they offer all these people to abandon their dignity?
7. What the hell did they threaten them with to guarantee they would comply and not expose the contact, the offer, or the threat?
8. How do they manage to coordinate all of the world's researchers now under their control?
9. How did the other 3% of researchers manage to ALL get hired by oil companies and conservative think-tanks?
10. Since this was so very stealthily done, RIGHT UNDER OUR NOSES, what can we do to prevent this from happening to all other research fields?

This is simply unimaginable!

Jun 11, 2012
Mando Zink Start herehttp://www.quadra...nt-s-egg

"We need to get some broad based support,
to capture the public's imagination...
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts...
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest."
- Prof. Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports

Jun 11, 2012
Mondo. I think you may have been watching too many Hollywood movies. I'm not going to call you a liar as I think you actually believe the 97% of climate scientists meme so I think you have to go back to some basic issues of this debate. If you are really interested and not just another troll please read thishttp://www.forbes...-debate/ which sums things up pretty well

Jun 11, 2012
VD How does that make my quote any less odious. He's basically advocating that the media be utilized to spread untruths regarding climate issues rather than facts. This basically sums up how this issue became a runaway train. I'm thinking it's time we put the breaks on.

Jun 11, 2012
I'm a little confused.... I quote a leading Climate Scientist advocating lying and that makes me a liar. Help me out here VD?

Jun 11, 2012
What amazes me with this subject, whether on nutty CNN posts or here, is the willingness of doubters and skeptics to just shrug it off. I am not certain why they fight the notion so hard. Reducing greenhouse gases is a good thing even if the scientists are wrong whereas if they are right doing nothing could be catastrophic.

Jun 11, 2012
You posted a doctored quote with portions edited away.

"I quote a leading Climate Scientist advocating lying and that makes me a liar." - Gregor1

That makes you a lying piece of filth.
It looks to me like he included the relevant portion. The portion you added was a preamble describing correct behavior, which the subsequent part gregor1 quoted essentially dismisses.

There's a hopeful expression in the conclusion stating a desire to be both honest and exaggerate (lie) simultaneously, but this is obviously not possible.

Jun 11, 2012
What amazes me with this subject, whether on nutty CNN posts or here, is the willingness of doubters and skeptics to just shrug it off. I am not certain why they fight the notion so hard. Reducing greenhouse gases is a good thing even if the scientists are wrong whereas if they are right doing nothing could be catastrophic.
This isn't necessarily true. Reducing greenhouse gasses might cause more problems than it solves. It's hard to grow corn on an icesheet.

Jun 11, 2012
Things I've always wondered about the global warming conspiracy:

1. When was the conspiracy conceived?
In spite of certain e-mails and other evidence, I wouldn't call it a broad-based "conspiracy" so much as a system generated error. That is, the system is set up to reward those siding with AGW, and punish those who aren't.

Jun 11, 2012
I wouldn't call it a broad-based "conspiracy" so much as a system generated error.
This is correct insight. This is similar mechanism, like the refusal of dense aether model or tired light cosmology or cold fusion with mainstream physics. The phenomena which are mediated mostly with longitudinal waves of energy tend to be ignored with mainstream physics, which is centered to deterministic, i.e. transverse wave model approach. There is no organized conspiracy, but widespread distrust and various incentives, which do support the deterministic models (which are opened to description with formal math) into account of holistic fuzzy logics. The schematically thinking people simply cannot imagine these phenomena working and because they have no math developed for it, they tend to ignore it systematically. Because the contemporary system of physics is rewarding only those, who can publish formal description.

Jun 11, 2012
Regarding the AGW hypothesis, I tend to support rather astrophysical origin of global warming (dark matter heating the Earth crust with accelerated decay of radioactive elements in marine water). IMO the sudden waves of droughts (Texas) or hot weather (spring in the USA) do support the global warming theory, but their sudden character doesn't support the AGW hypothesis more, than any other wave of cold weather (Stockholm this year). The Anthropogenic Global Warming is supposed to have a gradualist effect and the sudden climate changes could therefore have quite different origin, which is independent to human activity.

Jun 11, 2012
A case in point is this very article.

This article serves to show the bias of the AGW community. Globally, the winter of 2011/2012 has been relatively cool, yet they aren't reporting this. Why?

Globally, this is the 15th "warmest" Winter/Spring period (January through April) on record (that actually means, it's cooler). And it's the 21st "warmest" Winter period (January through March). And the 24th "warmest" deep winter (January and February) Why aren't they reporting this?

So in spite of the unusually warm North American Winter, the world was actually relatively cool! Why are they trying to scare people with misleading headlines?

Jun 11, 2012
If you consider my hypothesis nonsensical, then I can assure you, that the mainstream physicists can go way further (1, 2, 3). Note that these physicists are using the global warming concept in the exactly the same context, like I do. I.e. the passing of dense cloud of dark matter through some area of Universe.

Jun 11, 2012
That's simple ubavonatuba. Dr. Stephen Schneider set this up years ago. Disinformation

Jun 11, 2012
"NOAA/NASA disagrees."

"Alaska had its 22nd coolest May"


Alaska had its 23rd coolest March-May since records began in 1918, with a temperature 2.7 F (1.5C) below the 19712000 average.

1.5C colder!!!!

Temperatures in the Northwest and along the coast this month were 2-4 F (1-2 C) below normal, similar to but less cool than May 2010 and 2011. Average May temperatures do not show recent warming or cooling in the Northwest, though the past two years were anomalously cool.

Exactly what I said!

Jun 11, 2012
Gregor - I read your Forbes article carefully. An article you posted clearly articulates that there is a scientific consensus on a number of fundamental points. The globe is warming (.7 C in past 100 yrs), C02 emissions are a contributory factor,


Even the most fanatical AGW web site like Skeptical Science agrees CO2 had nothing to do with warming before 1940 (and most sane people say 1950)

Therefore attributing pre-1950 warming to Co2 is part of an elaborate con-game.


Jun 11, 2012
"Therefore attributing pre-1950 warming to Co2 is part of an elaborate con-game." Parker changing the subject again. But since you bring it up - who are you accusing of blaming pre 1950 warming on C02? Could you show me where Skeptical Science claims that "C02 had nothing to do with warming before 1940"?


"The climate at any one time is affected by several factors which can act independently or together. The main factors include solar variability, volcanic activity, atmospheric composition, the amount of sunlight reflected back into space, ocean currents and changes in the Earth's orbit.

Before 1940, the increase in temperature is believed to have been caused mainly by two factors:

Increasing solar activity; and

Low volcanic activity (as eruptions can have a cooling effect by blocking out the sun"

http://www.skepti...tury.htm

Jun 11, 2012

C02 levels were clearly rising in the early part of the 20th century


Go ahead. Elaborate.

Jun 11, 2012

Before 1940, the increase in temperature is believed to have been caused mainly by two factors:

Increasing solar activity; and

Low volcanic activity (as eruptions can have a cooling effect by blocking out the sun"

http://www.skepti...tury.htm


And bright sunshine does change over time. Up and down and up again.

http://sunshineho...unshine/

Jun 11, 2012

C02 levels were clearly rising in the early part of the 20th century


Go ahead. Elaborate.


http://drtimball....rrupted/

Jun 11, 2012

Can you not read a graph? Look at the graph on the link you provided. Here is another one that is a little more clear.

Early 20th century - let's say 1900 to 1920. Do you notice the line slopes upwards? That indicates an increase.

On to the Skeptic article - I implied that C02 was a contributing factor. Skeptic says "Before 1940, the increase in temperature is believed to have been caused mainly by two factors:" Do you see the word 'mainly'? You can't read!!!! Mainly means they are not the only 2 factors - so consistent with what I posted - C02 was a contributory factor.....


1) Do you have any numbers and the source. May source says numbers were higher in the 1700s. I posted it.

2) Say your graph suggests a 1% increase by 1910 ... and 2% by 1920. and say 5^ by 1940. Hard to tell.

Are you suggesting a miniscule increase in Co2 caused a .7C increase in temperatures ... and then cause a drop in temperatures from 1945 to 1979 etc?

Jun 11, 2012
Did your CO2 graph come from ice cores like GISP2?

http://jonova.s3....-new.png

Jun 11, 2012
Skeptic says "Before 1940, the increase in temperature is believed to have been caused mainly by two factors:" Do you see the word 'mainly'?


Do you agree I was telling the truth about Skeptical Science ... and I remind you they are fanatics.

Even the fanatics left out CO2 from the plausible cause list of pre-1940 warming.

Sane AGW scientists put it at 1950.


Jun 11, 2012
Final comment - except maybe to emphasize that I am trying to reason with a fool - stupid me. Consistent with what I have posted - and the links I provided - and the link you provided - C02 levels were rising in the early part of the 20th Century - and it is considered that they were a contributory factor in the warming trend of that time period.


1) My link shows pre-1950 CO2 levels were fabricated by dropping all measurements showing high values

2) A miniscule change in CO2 did not cause the 1909 to 1943 warming.

3) If CO2 caused the 1909/43 warming, it also caused the post-44 cooling and post-1998 cooling. Which you will never admit to.

Arguing with AGW cult members is always a waste of time. When they try facts, they lose. So they always go back to name calling.


Jun 11, 2012
You see - the word 'mainly' - means that this is not the only influence - which leaves the door open for the possibility of C02 being a contributing influence - so no - I don't agree. Final comment....


Ok. If CO2 started rising in 1850, which of the following two slopes were caused by Co2?

http://www.woodfo.../to:1943

Jun 11, 2012
Surely any reasonable person would then conclude that we should be paying close attention to this issue? Do you agree?

Yes I agree and that's why I'm interested.As soon as you get the UN involved you have an international conspiracy I'm afraid and if you read the Quadrant art. I posted you'll see the genesis of that . My frustration is with the endless media exaggeration and the hysterical claims of some scientists whose "facts" are easily checked with google. Parker fights cherry picking with cherry picking which is valid as he sights his sources. VD and his ilk uses abuse and ad hominem to polarize and obscure, which doesn't help. We are only going discover the truth if we cut through the BS I'm afraid.

Jun 12, 2012

It is never acceptable to cherry pick data.


How about cherry picking trend lines?

Like claiming the earth warmed by .8C from 1900 and blaming it all on Co2?

And then realizing your argument fails because even the most fanatical defender says CO2 had no import role in pre-1940 warming. Oh you can weasel around the word "mainly", but you never actually come up with a value for CO2's influence on pre-1940 warming and the post 1870 cooling etc.

You dishonestly try and blame CO2 for ALL the up parts since 1850 even thought at most CO2 rose 5% from 1850 to 1940.

And then you whine and run away.

The warming and cooling is cyclical natural processes.

Jun 12, 2012
@DJR....
I told ya not to engage him. It's like a never ending game of whack a mole but no matter how hard or how many times you deliver that winning blow....there he is again. Best to just laugh at his gluttony for punishment and move on....Gregor, same thing...add 7 IQ points.


Why do you run away from a fact filled argument? Afraid of losing for the millionth time?

Jun 13, 2012
You dishonestly try and blame CO2 for ALL the up parts since 1850 even thought at most CO2 rose 5% from 1850 to 1940.

And then you whine and run away.

You really are ignorant... I never blamed C02 for "All" the up warming. That is an ignorant lie. You are an ignorant liar. Go ahead - look back through all of my posts on this thread. I have consistently and repeatedly said that C02 was a contributing factor. I acknowledged Skeptics post that recognized the warming was "mainly" due to other factors. Do you now understand how ignorant you are? How futile it is to try to engage you with reason? You lie - twist the facts - frustrate people to the point of absurdity - and yes the only reasonable course upon recognizing the ignorant specious, malicious tactics you use is to disengage


What percentage of the .7C warming from 1909 to 1943 do you blame on Co2?

Which percentage of the .7C warming from 1979 to 1998 do you blame on Co2?

Why?


Jun 13, 2012
I have never claimed to be able to identify a specific percentage. I have said that C02 levels were rising in the early part of the 20th century - that C02 is understood to be a contributory factor in terms of global warming - and therefore it is reasonable that C02 played some role in the warming experienced - probably very minor - as the levels were rising very slightly.


I try and take the AGW theory seriously ... but it can never be pinned down.

You wish to argue that I am wrong from a position of ambiguity.

And I bring facts and you bring nothing.

You are the troll.

Jun 13, 2012
You wish to argue that I am wrong from a position of ambiguity.

No - I argue that you are wrong for making accusations that are clearly false. You claim that I " blame CO2 for ALL the up parts". This is false - this is a lie. This exposes you as being not interested in truth - but interested in causing conflict. On any one given day - you can be seen starting conflict on one - often multiple articles. Here is an example - http://phys.org/n...ths.html I will repeat what I said earlier "Your practice of spamming the internet for the clear purpose of causing conflict is reprehensible. You embody the term troll."


You blamed most of the .7C warming since 1900 on CO2.

Now I ask a simple question: Which part of the 20th century warming and cooling were CO2 caused?

The pre-1940 warming? How much? 1%? 2%?

The post-1940 cooling? How much?

etc

But, no answers. You rant trying to distract.

You are a troll.

Jun 13, 2012

No I did not - you truly cannot read. I don't know which part of the warming was caused by C02


But you said: "it would make sense to me that C02 was at least in part responsible for the pre 1940 warming"

So you don't know how much, but you are sure it is some, but you won't tell us how much.

How can anyone have a discussion with you if you don't even take a position on anything?

Troll.

Jun 14, 2012
So you don't know how much, but you are sure it is some, but you won't tell us how much.


I reality all warming in the 20th century was natural ups and downs with CO2 playing no discernible role.

The major driver may have been bright sunshine which did increase and drop and rise again in synch with the small ups and downs in temperature.

The fact that dir the Troll claims some unknown role for Co2 but won't even point to any references for pre-1950 warming is pathetic.

Jun 14, 2012
In part...

Krakatau, Indonesia
On August 27, 1883, the island volcano of Krakatau in present-day Indonesia exploded violently.



No reflected in the data. Temperatures were already dropping like a stone after the 1878 peak.

http://woodfortre.../to:1890

Plus, the largest eruption of the 20th century was Katmai-Novarupta eruption in Alaska in 1912.

And 1909 was when temperatures bottomed out and started going up again.

http://woodfortre.../to:1943

VD, that wasn't as pathetic an attempt as you usually make.


Jun 14, 2012

Lying to serve his financial masters is ParkerTards way of life.
He is mentally diseased and needs to get psychiatric help.


I see you've returned to your dementia.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more