The heat is on; NOAA, NASA say 2014 warmest year on record

The heat is on; NOAA, NASA say 2014 warmest year on record
In this July 1, 2014 file photo, Amanda Ouellet wipes her face with a cold wet towel to cool off while working outside holding an advertising sign in Las Vegas. Federal science officials announced Friday that for the third time in a decade, the globe sizzled to the hottest year on record. Both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA calculated that in 2014 the world had its hottest year in 135 years of record-keeping. Earlier, the Japanese weather agency and an independent group out of University of California Berkeley also measured 2014 as the hottest on record. (AP Photo/John Locher, File)

For the third time in a decade, the globe sizzled to the hottest year on record, federal scientists announced Friday.

Both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA calculated that in 2014 the world had its hottest year in 135 years of record-keeping. Earlier, the Japanese weather agency and an independent group out of University of California Berkeley also measured 2014 as the hottest on record.

NOAA said 2014 averaged 58.24 degrees Fahrenheit (14.58 degrees Celsius), 1.24 degrees (0.69 degrees Celsius) above the 20th-century average.

But NASA, which calculates temperatures slightly differently, put 2014's average temperature at 58.42 degrees Fahrenheit (14.68 degrees Celsius) which is 1.22 degrees (0.68 degrees Celsius) above the average of the years 1951-1980.

Earth broke NOAA records set in 2010 and 2005. The last time the Earth set an annual NOAA record for cold was in 1911.

NOAA also said last month was the hottest December on record. Six months in 2014 set marks for heat. The last time Earth set a monthly cold record was in December 1916.

"The globe is warmer now than it has been in the last 100 years and more likely in at least 5,000 years," said climate scientist Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University, who wasn't part of either research team. "Any wisps of doubt that human activities are at fault are now gone with the wind."

Texas A&M University climate scientist Andrew Dessler and other experts said the latest statistics should end claims by non-scientists that warming has stopped. It didn't, as climate denial sites still touted claims that the world has not warmed in 18 years.

NASA, NOAA find 2014 warmest year in modern record
This color-coded map displays global temperature anomaly data from 2014. Credit: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center

2014's heat was driven by record warmth in the world's oceans that didn't just break old marks: It shattered them. Record warmth spread across far eastern Russia, the western part of the United States, interior South America, much of Europe, northern Africa and parts of Australia. One of the few cooler spots was in the central and eastern United States.

"Every continent had some aspect of record high temperatures" in 2014, said Tom Karl, director of NOAA's National Climatic Data Center.

Nine of the 10 hottest years in NOAA global records have occurred since 2000. The odds of this happening at random are about 650 million to 1, according to University of South Carolina statistician John Grego. Two other statisticians confirmed his calculations.

The year 2014 now ranks as the warmest on record since 1880, according to an analysis by NASA scientists. Credit: NASA

Climate scientists say one of the most significant parts of 2014's record is that it happened during a year where there was no El Nino weather oscillation. During an El Nino, when a specific area of the central Pacific warms unusually and influences weather worldwide, global temperatures tend to spike. Previous records, especially in 1998, happened during El Nino years.

Every year in the 21st century has been in the top 20 warmest years on record, according to NOAA.

Temperatures have risen by about 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the mid-19th century and pre-industrial times, said Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, where the space agency tracks warming temperatures.

"We are witnessing, before our eyes, the effect of human-caused climate change," said Pennsylvania State University professor Michael Mann.

This video shows a time series of five-year global temperature averages, mapped from 1880 to 2014, as estimated by scientists at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. Credit: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center

Some non-scientists who deny man-made global warming have pointed to satellite temperature records—which only go back to 1979—which show a warming world, but no record this year and less of a recent increase than the longer-term ground thermometers. But Mann, Dessler, Francis and others say there have been quality and trustworthy issues with some satellite measurements and they only show what's happening far above the ground. They said ground measurements are also more important because it is where we live.

University of Alabama Huntsville scientist John Curry, who measures temperature via satellite, puts 2014 in a cluster of warm years behind 2010 and 1998. He said he is "puzzled that this difference between surface and deep atmosphere continues to occur as it has now for 36 years. Our theories can't explain it. I don't know what is going on."

Georgia Tech professor Judith Curry, who is not in the mainstream of climate scientists, wrote that talk about the record implies that temperatures will get warmer, something she says won't happen for at least another decade. But she added in a blog post in response to the NOAA announcement: "I'm not willing to place much $$ on that bet, since I suspect Mother Nature will manage to surprise us."

NASA's Schmidt says temperatures will continue to rise with year-to-year variations and he wouldn't be surprised if 2015 breaks 2014's record: "The increase in greenhouse gases is unrelenting and that in the end is going to dominate most things going on."

This was the 38th year in a row that the world was warmer than the 20th century average, according to NOAA data. Most people in the world and the United States were born after 1976 and have never lived in a cooler than normal year.

"You want to understand what that (cooler) world is like and you wonder are you ever to going to experience that," said Victor Gensini, a 28-year-old meteorology professor at the College of DuPage in Illinois.


Explore further

November global temps dip, Earth still nears heat record

More information: NASA: data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

NOAA: www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2014/13

© 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Citation: The heat is on; NOAA, NASA say 2014 warmest year on record (2015, January 16) retrieved 17 October 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2015-01-record-breaking-hottest-modern-history-noaa.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.
1328 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Jan 16, 2015
What happened, JamesG?

I thought it was only a scam by climate scientists.

Jan 16, 2015
I would give you a list of climate scientists who disagree but you have chosen to believe the politicized climate dogma. Remember. Even now, they are talking 100ths of a degree difference. They had to dig pretty hard to be able to say what they are saying now. And there is satellite data that disputes this. Basically the "pause" continues. And the USA had its 34th warmest year. Guess we are truly blessed.

Jan 16, 2015
No, James, I got my opinion from earning a Master of Science in this field.

How did you get yours?

Jan 16, 2015
I get mine by listening to PhD's in the field with decades of experience, some of whom are head of their university climate science departments.

Jan 16, 2015
Who are they?

Why would you choose to believe the 3%?

Jan 16, 2015
Statistically NOTHING stays exactly on the mean, so the earth is warming a bit, during the Ice Ages it cooled a bit, and before that it warmed a bit, and before that it cooled a bit, and........

Jan 16, 2015
Perhaps Gimp is unaware of the severity of our condition, and the potential consequences.

Jan 16, 2015
foolspoo,

A carbon tax does nothing to reduce carbon. All it does is redistribute.

Socialism does not regulate the climate.

Jan 16, 2015
The carbon tax was an industry-supplied response to Best Available Control Technology, or BACT. It grew out of Cap-and-Trade, which let polluters cleanup an equivalent amount of pollution anywhere else, instead of their own mess, saving them money.

Capitalism, or organized selfishness, ruins the planet.

Jan 16, 2015
barking mad

Jan 16, 2015
My semantics got screwed up, and the above should have read:

Cap-and-Trade, which let polluters cleanup an equivalent amount of pollution anywhere else, instead of their own mess, saving them money, was an industry-supplied response to Best Available Control Technology, or BACT. The carbon tax grew out of that.


Jan 16, 2015
barking mad


Is that a quote from Freemen Dyson? Does he actually say that, or are you just paraphrasing him?

Freemen Dyson also thinks that
Technology is a gift of God. After the gift of life it is perhaps the greatest of God's gifts. It is the mother of civilizations, of arts and of sciences.
What do you think, is he right? Are you, also, a believer in God?

Jan 16, 2015
Had to have a headline to punctuate the IPCC Paris Agreement talks later this year, didn't they?
Sixth warmest by RSS satellite data, third warmest by UAH data. Just cherry pick the results that support your conclusion and ignore the rest. That's the new scientific method. Now, how do you suppose they're going to explain the growing seasonal sea ice at both poles this year, if it was the warmest year ever?

Jan 16, 2015
I would give you a list of climate scientists who disagree
The 3%. I can show you scientists who disagree that volcanoes are the result of tectonics. They're about 3% as well; do you beieve them?
but you have chosen to believe the politicized climate dogma.
and you have chosen to politicize it.
Remember. Even now, they are talking 100ths of a degree difference. They had to dig pretty hard to be able to say what they are saying now. And there is satellite data that disputes this. Basically the "pause" continues. And the USA had its 34th warmest year. Guess we are truly blessed.
Hogwash. Politicized, denialist claptrap.

Jan 16, 2015
I get mine by listening to PhD's in the field with decades of experience, some of whom are head of their university climate science departments.


No, obviously you don't. You get yours by listening to a small cadre of denialists who support the political agenda that someone is trying to steal your freedoms by faking global warming.

How idiotic is that?

Jan 16, 2015
Had to have a headline to punctuate the IPCC Paris Agreement talks later this year, didn't they?
Politically driven denialism. Lets not deal with the facts, lets pretend empirical measurements are politically motivated,
Sixth warmest by RSS satellite data, third warmest by UAH data.
Only 6th and 3rd hey?
Just cherry pick the results that support your conclusion and ignore the rest. [/]
Like you just did?
Now, how do you suppose they're going to explain the growing seasonal sea ice at both poles this year, if it was the warmest year ever?
Arctic ice, 5th lowest ever recorded (http://nsidc.org/...aximum/) Antarctic ice extent is a result of global warming, and the 4th highest ever recorded.

You're really not very good at this. Denialism for the wont of it.

Jan 16, 2015
foolspoo,

A carbon tax does nothing to reduce carbon. All it does is redistribute.

Socialism does not regulate the climate.

Redistribution of carbon violates my property rights. The purchasers of hydrocarbons has a responsibility to ensure the waste from their combustion doesn't violate my rights by being distributed on my property. Either capture of waste is necessary or I should be properly reimbursed for my troubles.

Jan 16, 2015
No, James, I got my opinion from earning a Master of Science in this field.

How did you get yours?
MS in what exactly? And didnt your alleged thesis have something to do with energy usage on a dairy farm? What does that have to do with climate?

Jan 16, 2015
Had to have a headline to punctuate the IPCC Paris Agreement talks later this year, didn't they?
Sixth warmest by RSS satellite data, third warmest by UAH data. Just cherry pick the results that support your conclusion and ignore the rest. That's the new scientific method. Now, how do you suppose they're going to explain the growing seasonal sea ice at both poles this year, if it was the warmest year ever?

http://marshall.o...-trends/
" there is not a single satellite which has been operating continuously, in a stable orbit, measuring a constant layer of the atmosphere, at the same local time every day, with no instrumental calibration drifts."
In other words satellite "derived" tropospheric temps are just that - derived - taking account of multiple possible errors.
It's interesting that deniers bleat about error correction in thermometer data but are quite happy with RSS/UAH data.

Jan 16, 2015
" there is not a single satellite which has been operating continuously, in a stable orbit, measuring a constant layer of the atmosphere, at the same local time every day, with no instrumental calibration drifts."
In other words satellite "derived" tropospheric temps are just that - derived - taking account of multiple possible errors.
It's interesting that deniers bleat about error correction in thermometer data but are quite happy with RSS/UAH data.
Yea, it's called cherry picking. ubamoron is good at that - as are most denialists.
I find it funny that your post has a link to Spencer's blog!

Jan 16, 2015
Capitalism, or organized selfishness, ruins the planet.

I would like to point out that the concept of capitalism, in it's truest sense and form, is reasoned and cautious management of energy and resources.

Organized selfishness is the attempt at taking more off the top than is available.

Jan 16, 2015
A warmer planet means more rainfall & snow. Just what we need to expand production of NonGMO & organic food so we can all become healthier, well at least as healthy as my family is.

Jan 16, 2015
Apparently, the methane produced inside a cow is mostly released from the cows mouth, much like a burp.

I bet you though it was farts, don't lie.
http://sciencelin...key=2569

Jan 16, 2015
It's interesting that deniers bleat about error correction in thermometer data but are quite happy with RSS/UAH data.


Spot on, runrig.

The search for justification by the denierside inevitably leads to such circular and completely non-scientific arguments. They love to point to the "discrepancy" between the two as evidence of the error of the instrumental record, while completely ignoring the fact that they are measuring two different things, and that no reasonable person would expect them to be the same, much less that ANY large data set of this type requires some correction for measurement error, and that what matters most is methodological consistency.

Willful disunderstanding.

The "Warming Hiatus" is, was, and always will be nothing more than a complete fiction, and this newest determination puts that feeble, misbegotten notion out of its misery.

There will be a great wailing and gnashing of teeth from the denierside following its wake, beginning now.

Jan 16, 2015
" there is not a single satellite which has been operating continuously, in a stable orbit, measuring a constant layer of the atmosphere, at the same local time every day, with no instrumental calibration drifts."
In other words satellite "derived" tropospheric temps are just that - derived - taking account of multiple possible errors.
It's interesting that deniers bleat about error correction in thermometer data but are quite happy with RSS/UAH data.
Yea, it's called cherry picking. ubamoron is good at that - as are most denialists.
I find it funny that your post has a link to Spencer's blog!

I just realized, that should have said "your CITE has a link to Spencer's blog"

Jan 16, 2015
A warmer planet means more rainfall & snow. Just what we need to expand production of NonGMO & organic food so we can all become healthier, well at least as healthy as my family is.

Benni,
GMOs are already out there and staking out their little "territories". If they are better survivors of future environmental changes then they will win out. If we, as a consumptive organism, can survive the chemical/nutritional value changes in the GMOs and thrive, then that means the GMO's can considered be "organic"...

Jan 16, 2015
This article is nothing short of breathless. How excited the author is!

"The odds of this happening at random are about 650 million to 1". This is highly misleading, for example. Let's pretend the Earth got warmer and then 18 years ago it stopped getting warmer. What are the chances that a particular year or set of years will be the hottest on record based on the new 18 year mean. It ain't 650 million to 1.

The question is not whether the Earth is warmer. The question is whether it has continued to get warmer.

Jan 16, 2015
It answered that question.

Jan 16, 2015
A warmer planet means more rainfall & snow. Just what we need to expand production of NonGMO & organic food so we can all become healthier, well at least as healthy as my family is.

Benni,
GMOs are already out there and staking out their little "territories". If they are better survivors of future environmental changes then they will win out.
My territory has been staked out, and my family is living proof of this already.

If we, as a consumptive organism, can survive the chemical/nutritional value changes in the GMOs and thrive, then that means the GMO's can considered be "organic"...
Oh please, you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about, that GMOs can ever be considered organic is unintelligible speech combined with nonsensical syllables & figures of speech.

Jan 16, 2015
thermodynamics, Vietvet, saposjoint, greenonions: Interesting list of those who do not like healthy families living by the living laws of nonGMO nature, no wonder they're such a cranky bunch.

Jan 16, 2015
Oh please, you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about, that GMOs can ever be considered organic is unintelligible speech combined with nonsensical syllables & figures of speech.

I'm beginning to think you don't live In the real universe, but rather, one of your own imagining.
EVERYTHING living is a GMO. Whether by nature/time or by us directly.

Jan 16, 2015
Now, how do you suppose they're going to explain the growing seasonal sea ice at both poles this year, if it was the warmest year ever?


Here is a nice graph to show the sea ice recovery.
http://www.skepti...php?g=64

Jan 16, 2015
Oh please, you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about, that GMOs can ever be considered organic is unintelligible speech combined with nonsensical syllables & figures of speech.

I'm beginning to think you don't live In the real universe, but rather, one of your own imagining.
EVERYTHING living is a GMO. Whether by nature/time or by us directly.

......as I suspected, clueless ROC whose time is past.

Jan 16, 2015
After reading this article, I had mixed feeling that what Hansen, Gore, IPPC, every hot button environmental group, Nature, Science, every Academy of Science know to man, NOAA, NASA, 100% of AGWites, 99% of all of Science has been saying was correct and now we are in a no-win situation. Pretty much everyone understands what is going on and the global warming people are right. The question then becomes can we do something about it, and the answer is yes we can, but the long we wait, the less chance of recovery we have.

CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for 1000s of years so once out in the air, its effects will be on going and compounding the previous CO2. With what we've done so far, we already could be pushing a 2C rise by 2060 if not 2050. So now, the Republicans in the Senate have decided now to vote on whether global warming is real or not???

From the article;
The increase in greenhouse gases is unrelenting and that in the end is going to dominate most things going on.

Jan 16, 2015
Oh please, you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about, that GMOs can ever be considered organic is unintelligible speech combined with nonsensical syllables & figures of speech.

I'm beginning to think you don't live In the real universe, but rather, one of your own imagining.
EVERYTHING living is a GMO. Whether by nature/time or by us directly.

......as I suspected, clueless ROC whose time is past.

RU A believer in the 10 commandments, Benni?

Jan 16, 2015
Math is a liberal scam made up by mathematicians in order to get grants from the government

Jan 16, 2015
Math is a liberal scam made up by mathematicians in order to get grants from the government

I dunno Steve...
People were using math long before there were governments to GET grants from...

Jan 16, 2015
Does everyone here understand that a reduction of emissions is a TRUE possibility. All that needs to be done is that 97% of the population make a sacrifice and stop living in this modern technological society. Stop driving, using electricity, cooking etc. If 97% of the human population starts living in caves, emission standards will be met. Maybe 97% of the population would be willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to save the planet and remove themselves from existence altogether?

Nothing pisses me off more than seeing AGW doomsdayers using the internet, watching television, using electricity, driving cars etc. If you are such environmentalists why not put your money where your mouth is? Bunch of little whiners. Either live with the consequences of a warming planet (if its even true or anthropogenically caused) or make the sacrifice and stop living modern comfortable lives!

Jan 17, 2015
This graphic is an amazing visual display:

http://www.bloomb...-record/

Jan 17, 2015
oes everyone here understand that a reduction of emissions is a TRUE possibility. All that needs to be done is that 97% of the population make a sacrifice and stop living in this modern technological society. Stop driving, using electricity, cooking etc.
What an utterly, ridiculously STUPID thing to say! That's your answer dimwit, have everyone move into caves? That is just possibly the stupidest thing I have seen said on these forums, and considering you are competing with rygesson2, ubamoron, benni the pretend engineer and crying water quitter, that is saying a lot.

What a bloody moron.

Jan 17, 2015
So much arguing but it won't help a thing. Humans are hell-bent on destroying themselves one way or another so just disinfect the sidewalk and enjoy your naturally-fried GMO eggs while you can.

Jan 17, 2015
It was meant to be ludicrous moron and the 97 number is fictitious (although could be actual figure potentialy). Where is your society after implication of substitutions. By the time you have nuclear you've used heavy gas guzzling machinery. What is your proposal based on current availability of resources? Population anthropogenic reduction? You dont even know the world you live in, yet condemn everything we've adapted to thriving in through consumption of resources as consumptive organisms. I think we'll learn to live in a warmer world just as will most animals. As you know familial trees descend. Birds are dinosaur descendants. I think we'll adapt to changes as will most everything else. Its no huge fireball impacting the Earth after all!

Realistic plan? Go.

Jan 17, 2015
Does everyone here understand that a reduction of emissions is a TRUE possibility. All that needs to be done is that 97% of the population make a sacrifice and stop living in this modern technological society. Stop driving, using electricity, cooking etc. If 97% of the human population starts living in caves, emission standards will be met.
Nothing pisses me off more than seeing AGW doomsdayers using the internet, watching television, using electricity, driving cars etc. If you are such environmentalists why not put your money where your mouth is? Bunch of little whiners. Either live with the consequences of a warming planet (if its even true or anthropogenically caused) or make the sacrifice and stop living modern comfortable lives!

Satire, Kron? Oh, after I commented, I saw that that was your intent...

Jan 17, 2015
I'm not even convinced on the science not even 1 sigma that the Earth does not have a natural buffer for the change. WE ARE TALKING IN TERMS OF 1 DEGREE CELSIUS CHANGE. I know weather occurs at build of high heat energy, greater energy greater weather. After weather energy drops. Logically I'm stating that the Earth will not suffer much of an impact even as a biosphere. Life included. Polar bears will grow brown hair through time inversely as their predecessors adapted to white pigmentation when adapting to arctic climate.

Jan 17, 2015
I have a solution to global warming. Everybody should just open the doors to their fridges and that will fix everything!

http://images1.fa...1024.jpg

Jan 17, 2015
Bloomberg just posted a very enlightening animated graph that shows the annual progression of monthly temperatures over the past 135 years.

This is one of the best, if not the most revealing animated sequence I have seen showing temperature changes.

http://www.bloomb...-record/

Jan 17, 2015
A record by 0.04 degrees C....good grief.

Jan 17, 2015
Green
Do you think this is within normal measurement accuracy?
Do you think that this is statistically significant?
This is what Berkeley Earth said..."The global surface temperature average for 2014 was nominally the warmest since the global instrumental record began in 1850; however, within the margin of error, it's tied with 2005 and 2010 and so we can't be certain it set a new record."

Jan 17, 2015
Love the picture that goes with this article. Amanda is really feeling that extra 0.04 degrees.
Perhaps this "record" is being oversold methinks.

Jan 17, 2015
Nothing pisses me off more than seeing AGW doomsdayers using the internet, watching television, using electricity, driving cars etc. If you are such environmentalists why not put your money where your mouth is? Bunch of little whiners. Either live with the consequences of a warming planet (if its even true or anthropogenically caused) or make the sacrifice and stop living modern comfortable lives!


Human nature my friend..
a) I do.
b) most look at the selfish f****s and think why bother - I'll be dead in 20/30 yrs anyway.

In other words it has always been those people who drag the world down.

BTW: nothing pisses me off more than the selfish, ideologically driven lemmings, following themselves in cheerleader DK ignorance and thinking that 3% is really 97 and/or it's all a socialist scam.


Jan 17, 2015
think we'll learn to live in a warmer world just as will most animals. As you know familial trees descend. Birds are dinosaur descendants. I think we'll adapt to changes as will most everything else. Its no huge fireball impacting the Earth after all!


Now did you ever see that Fawlty Towers episode (The Rat) ?
"Can't we get you on Mastermind, Sybil? Next contestant: Mrs. Sybil Fawlty from Torquay. Specialist subject - the bleeding obvious."
http://www.imdb.c...5/quotes

Of course Mankind will adapt, the point is there'll be a lot of pain and economic upheaval causing mass migration from coastlines where defences are unfeasible and drough/floods/famine.
It's like saying we'll all die so lets not try to cure disease.
FFS

Jan 17, 2015
Love the picture that goes with this article. Amanda is really feeling that extra 0.04 degrees.
Perhaps this "record" is being oversold methinks.


It remains the case that people like you do not understand why such a seemingly small rise is such a big deal. In short, you poopoo the situation because you have no understanding of its import, and you have no understanding of its import because you haven't taken a few minutes to learn about it.

Do you have an inkling of how much energy it takes to raise the temperature of the entire planet's climatory system by 1C?

Take 10 minute and read this: http://globalwarm...ming.htm

Jan 17, 2015
It will be good for the rest of the biosphere if Homo sapiens renders itself extinct.

Jan 17, 2015
Green
Do you think this is within normal measurement accuracy?
Do you think that this is statistically significant?
This is what Berkeley Earth said..."The global surface temperature average for 2014 was nominally the warmest since the global instrumental record began in 1850; however, within the margin of error, it's tied with 2005 and 2010 and so we can't be certain it set a new record."


Again, your answer displays your lack of knowledge. You are saying that because you don't understand why it is important that it must not be important.

Maybe you should take some time to learn why it might be important instead of displaying your lack of understanding for all to see?

Jan 17, 2015
Nothing pisses me off more than seeing AGW doomsdayers using the internet, watching television, using electricity, driving cars etc. If you are such environmentalists why not put your money where your mouth is? Bunch of little whiners. Either live with the consequences of a warming planet (if its even true or anthropogenically caused) or make the sacrifice and stop living modern comfortable lives!


They want you to practice the dogma they teach in The Church of the Holy Hockey Stick which will have services here the entire weekend. Their reasoning being that if they can get YOU to make the sacrifice of practicing what their religion teaches, then they (a member of their Church) gets an exoneration to continue not practicing what they teach.

Jan 17, 2015
Green
Do you think this is within normal measurement accuracy?
Do you think that this is statistically significant?
This is what Berkeley Earth said..."The global surface temperature average for 2014 was nominally the warmest since the global instrumental record began in 1850; however, within the margin of error, it's tied with 2005 and 2010 and so we can't be certain it set a new record."


That's your argument? It's all a hoax because 2014 might not be the hottest year in over 160 years of accurate measuring, it might be number 2 or even number 3? It doesn't strike you as suspicious that 9 out of the 10 hottest years in 160+ years worldwide happen to fall in the last 20 years? Geez, you denialists are grasping at straws.

Even putting aside the fact that your pretend-argument is flawed deeply, do you honestly believe there's no problem if the average temperature rise ends up at 3.8 degrees centigrade in a century rather than 4.0? You are a disgrace to science.

Jan 17, 2015
@Greeno........please tell us in all honesty if you have stopped driving a car. I have yet to see anyone congregating here with the Holy Hockey Stick crowd who will disavow the use of their car, and until you've done that all you're doing is contributing to the hot air you are complaining so much about

Jan 17, 2015
We're all gonna die! Everything is gonna die! The Earth is gonna explode and everything as we know it will end!

Jan 17, 2015
Cantdrive is correct in a way, . . . his world is certainly going away, that with filthy fuels, pollution, a two-tiered society, us in debt to foreign American-haters for oil.

We are going to do it ourselves, and tell the Bush/Saudi Complex to get lost.

Jan 17, 2015
The Establishment politicians will jump at any chance to put you under their thumb. What better way to control the means of production and every aspect of human life, than by scaring the plebs with tales of doom?

Jan 17, 2015
Yeah, I remember the two draft-dodgers screaming "WMD!" and "Bring 'em on!" while cowering in their undisclosed locations.

It sure scared the goobers. Not me, I knew better, being a Vietnam Vet.

Jan 17, 2015
The Establishment politicians will jump at any chance to put you under their thumb. What better way to control the means of production and every aspect of human life, than by scaring the plebs with tales of doom?


Ah, your true motivation has finally come out. You don't care about what Dyson says, except that he supports your preconceived idea that there is some fantastic conspiracy by someone somewhere to control your life and steal your riches and they have managed to get tens of thousands of scientists the world over to fudge their findings so that this mysterious someone can fool us sheeple and create a world government to enslave the US and force everyone to be nice to each other.

Or something.

Did you hear the pop/hiss sound? That was the balloon of your credibility. Just another denialist wrapped in his imaginary sphere of conspiracy.

Jan 17, 2015
Benni - your stupid and condescending attitude are really sickening.The personal choices we all have to make - are exactly that - personal choices. What do you know about my life? Nothing. I have a wife, and kids. I have two jobs. My wife has a job.My kids both work.I could not do my jobs without a car.Then I would have no income.Do you have the right to make those choices for me? My electricity comes from 100% wind power.Does that count for anything in your condescending little world view? Do you see the point I am making?


.....then all of you need to quit your jobs! What with all those cars out of circulation (3-4 by my count), look at all the CO2 that would not be spewed into the atmosphere........but ooooohhhh....that's right, now I get it, it's somebody else's civic world duty to stop driving cars so you & your family can claim rights to somebody else's carbon footprint!

Greeno, get over your condescending attitude expecting others to do what you won't.

Jan 17, 2015
Benni, you are losing the argument, . . to reality.

Jan 17, 2015
My electricity comes from 100% wind power.Does that count for anything in your condescending little world view?


So, 100% wind huh? Let me tell you a little story. A proposed multi-turbine installation 20 miles from the area in which I live went down in flames a short time back, the reason being is that a prototype site killed a lot of birds but, but that report wasn't included in the impact study. Want to know what kinds of birds? Raptors mostly.

This hilltop installation overlooked a gorgeous river valley filled with beautiful 5 acre property sites, the richest source of property tax for that town, but the greedy town mothers & fathers didn't care, all they could dream about is the additional tax revenue from that wind farm. The For Sale signs started to go up when the affected owners were ignored in Town Meetings. Not a single sale could be made because appraisers were cutting property values by 50% effectively putting owners underwater who had mortgages......cont'd

Jan 17, 2015
Benni seems to be unaware of other kinds of power sources, and their negatives, which greatly outweigh those of Alternative Energy. The bird problem will be dealt with. Have you found a way to store nuclear waste? Coal toxins?

Jan 17, 2015
......cont'd

....one owner became so disaffected with the coming property devaluations that he went the route of the most effective solution a home owner could embark on, they trashed their house severely enough to make it unlivable. They turned off the heat, let the pipes freeze & burst over the winter while spending 3 months in Florida in their other home, they then let the town have it for the taxes due on it, about $10K, others caught on to the idea & threatened to do the same. Most living in that valley were very well off people, fewer than half had a mortgage & can afford the loss.

The town now threatened with the loss of millions of dollars of property tax money through devaluations woke up.

Don't mess with people's expectations, when they buy into a pristine environment don't force changes on them you promised wouldn't happen.

Jan 17, 2015
Gosh, Benni, don't you have any professionals in your area, who understand how to site power facilities?

Would those neighbors rather live next to a coal plant?

Jan 17, 2015
I can only imagine what Benni the pretend engineer is saying, but let me say this. Whether or not someone choose to drive a car or any other thing that uses energy has nothing, what so ever, to do with whether or not the global atmosphere is warming. It is a red herring to challenge all red herrings, and only a whack-job denialist would use that as an argument against the fact of global warming.

Most CO2 added to the atmosphere right now is the result of coal and gas fired electrical plants. That is a fact. I would like to see carbon capture or some other technology used by those plants to reduce the amount of CO2 they are adding to our atmosphere. Or, if that can't work, I would like to see those plants replaced. That I drive a car or use electricity does not change that.

The ridiculousness of the denialist crowd's argument: "you drive a car, so global warming isn't happening" is so obviously ridiculous as to be laughable.

Jan 17, 2015
more CO2 is good for the earth. No I'm not kidding.
We have REAL environmental issues like toxic glyphosate (roundup) that is in our water, rain, breast milk and is bio-accumulating in our bodies.

Can we talk about REAL environmental issues?

Jan 17, 2015
more CO2 is good for the earth. No I'm not kidding.
We have REAL environmental issues like toxic glyphosate (roundup) that is in our water, rain, breast milk and is bio-accumulating in our bodies.

Can we talk about REAL environmental issues?


So lets ignore one in favour of the other? That makes no better sense then saying that because Al Gore flies in a jet he can't talk about how CO2 loading of the atmosphere is changing it. It's a ridiculous red herring argument!

Global warming has the potential to affect our species for thousands of years. Certainly other pollutants should be studied, but how in the name of anything good does that equate to ignoring the dangers of too much CO2 in the atmosphere?

Utterly asinine arguments from our denialist clan in this thread.

Jan 17, 2015
Benni - the 2nd issue is wind power. Wind turbines do not negatively affect property values


Oh, is that so? Tell that to the people near our area who couldn't sell their properties after the foundations for the turbines started going in. Take your studies & stuff them into the vortex of your wind turbine. Nobody wants listen all night long as the wump, wump racket made from the downstroking of those blades bounce off the side of your house making you sick from the nonvarying repetitive frequency.

Self serving studies exonerating so called green energy is obviously just dandy for you so long as the wind turbine isn't in your backyard? But when it sits 1-2 miles off property sites people spend hundreds of thousands dollars additional money to improve after they've already paid a million just to get into the house, they don't like it when people like you come along with your fabricated studies & flip a middle finger in their faces, that is the epitome of condescension.


Jan 17, 2015
"But when it sits 1-2 miles off property sites people spend hundreds of thousands dollars additional money to improve after they've already paid a million just to get into the house, . . . "
--------------------------------------

Okay, okay, we'll put in a coal plant there.

And, by the way, . . don't step on benni's lawn!

Jan 17, 2015
"....one owner became so disaffected with the coming property devaluations that he went the route of the most effective solution a home owner could embark on, they trashed their house severely enough to make it unlivable."
-------------------------------------

Benni, you just showed us the character of rich conservatives.

Nothing more.

Jan 17, 2015
While we are on the subject, here is an timely article from Time (see that pun there Ira?) http://time.com/3...-oceans/ discussing some of the most recent science and its impact on our deniarville dwellers.

I can hear the shrinking of the cabal from here!

Jan 17, 2015
for the record Benni - I am a supporter of an all of the above energy mix
Sure you are, so long as the turbine isn't close to your front or backyard.

The most noticeable thing for me about your position Benni - is that you are eager to outline the drawbacks of wind turbines (even to exaggerate them) - but are not concerned about the drawbacks of our current fossil fuel system


No, greeno, that isn't the problem, the problem is the condescending attitude you have towards those who get lied to about these so-called benefits of "impact studies" with the environmental hazards part deleted. These people bought properties so they could marvel at the sight of raptor birds riding the thermals created by pristine hillsides of unspoiled forested land & not your goofy concept of being "green".


Jan 17, 2015
A record by 0.04 degrees C....good grief.

Well, don't you know that a footrace can be won by 0.05 of a second. I guess you would say, "good grief" to the winner. How about a horse race? Would you give back your winnings if your horse won by 1/2 inch with the comment, "good grief"?

Jan 17, 2015
more CO2 is good for the earth. No I'm not kidding.

That's the scary thing - You're not are you?

I know ... it's plant food.....
Like fertilizer works even without water.

Jan 17, 2015
While we are on the subject, here is an timely article from Time (see that pun there Ira?) http://time.com/3...-oceans/ discussing some of the most recent science and its impact on our deniarville dwellers.

I can hear the shrinking of the cabal from here!

Maggnus:
Good grief, I continue to despair at the level of US politicians intelligence.
Then they do say - you get the ones you deserve.

"No part of this bad-news trifecta is likely to change the minds of the rump faction of climate deniers—particularly in Washington. Texas Senator Ted Cruz, who is set to assume chairmanship of the committee that oversees science in general and NASA in particular had this to say to CNN about climate change: "The last 15 years, there has been no recorded warming. Contrary to all the theories that they are expounding, there should have been warming over the last 15 years. It hasn't happened."


Jan 17, 2015
BTW chaps...

Kudos to all with countering mr Hill.
However he is a classic Troll, and you know what they say?....
Correct..... "don't feed the Trolls"

I hit the "ignore" option on him/her/it a while back on the conviction that he/she/it was a waste of time/space/DNA.

Jan 17, 2015
the problem is the condescending attitude you have towards those who get lied to about these so-called benefits of "impact studies" with the environmental hazards part deleted.


Either you didn't read the Nature Conservancy report- that was very balanced and discussed in depth the problems with wind turbines

Not in my front or backyard it wouldn't count as being balanced with regard to placement of WTs. It is part of my job to parse "impact studies", it's just stunning how much is purely speculative or totally biased hogwash.

I don't think you could quote anything that I have said on this board that could be characterized as condescending
Too easy, you've amply demonstrated how little you actually know about anything in the field of Engineering/Science. Do you even have a garden, or does that cul de sac you live in not even leave you enough space for one? Care to know how many acres I've got, probably you don't, but I don't want the likes of you near it.


Jan 17, 2015
BTW chaps...

Kudos to all with countering mr Hill.
However he is a classic Troll, and you know what they say?....
Correct..... "don't feed the Trolls"

I hit the "ignore" option on him/her/it a while back on the conviction that he/she/it was a waste of time/space/DNA.


Yea he's been on my ignore list for a while too. I find it interesting that those few I ignore make this a much more entertaining and informative site, as they actually have nothing to add the the conversation and are seriously not worth the trouble of even responding to. Ryggeson2, Ubamoron, RealityCheck, JVK and a few others. Now shootist too, given he has finally admitted that he disagrees with the idea of global warming due to his political beliefs.

It's just like Twain has been quoted as saying - when you argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. Every one of the idiots I listed above fit that axiom, just with varying degree of idiocy.

Jan 17, 2015
Care to know how many acres I've got, probably you don't, but I don't want the likes of you near it.


Does this strike any one else as a really weird comment - on a thread about climate change and temperature records? I know nothing about this person - other than a few exchanges on the comments section of physorg. why would I care if 'the likes of you' go near my garden. Does he think I will poison it or something?


Egocentricity seems to be a hall mark of those who give false credentials and seem to think that because they don't believe in empirical evidence, that that means that facts are arbitrary.

He no doubt thinks that someone gives a fiddlers fart about his usually wrong opinions.

I think it is a case of immaturity. Well, and in his case at least, narcissism.

Jan 17, 2015
I think it is a case of immaturity. Well, and in his case at least, narcissism.


OK maggie ROC, then we can just chalk it up to my younger age compared to yours.

Jan 17, 2015
Keep off benni's lawn!!

Jan 17, 2015
I hit the "ignore" option on him/her/it a while back on the conviction that he/she/it was a waste of time/space/DNA.

But then - you remove the whole entertainment value of the comment section...:-)

Jan 17, 2015
Do you even have a garden, or does that cul de sac you live in not even leave you enough space for one? Care to know how many acres I've got, probably you don't, but I don't want the likes of you near it.

Tell us, Benni.
Show us what a condescending, schmuck YOU are...

Jan 17, 2015
Benni
Reviewing your posts it appears that in about 20 years YOU will be RealityCheck:
❶ Ranting ✓
❷ Obsessive compulsive behaviour ✓
❸ Narcissistic personality ✓
❹ Infallibility complex ✓
❺ Smug superior attitude ✓
❻ Foul language ✗

Once the kids leave home you can relax the language and the student will become the master.

Jan 18, 2015
Seriously guys, don't spill your own politics and personal nonsense here. If no one is going to discuss the article what's the point?

That is absolutely true guys, those disturbed troll are here to disrupt any constructive discussion and you are playing in their field; they control the game. The only way to change Phys.org is to use the tool that they provided: put them on ignore like I do.

Although most posters here are mature man, you are playing with seriously deranged people just for entertainment or so you think, you are the ones being played with.

Jan 18, 2015
I hit the "ignore" option on him/her/it a while back on the conviction that he/she/it was a waste of time/space/DNA.


Have to call you on this, Mag...:-)
If you had put him on ignore, you wouldn't know what flagrant bullshit he was posting....:-)
Face it. You're in it for the entertainment value, too...:-)

Jan 18, 2015
I hit the "ignore" option on him/her/it a while back on the conviction that he/she/it was a waste of time/space/DNA.


Have to call you on this, Mag...:-)
If you had put him on ignore, you wouldn't know what flagrant bullshit he was posting....:-)
Face it. You're in it for the entertainment value, too...:-)

What do you think would happen if we were to create a group to have civil conversations between thoughtful and coherent people and put the rest on ignore? Those trolls would probably be pissed off like there is no tomorrow and that would be much more funny.


Jan 18, 2015
I read some of these deniers posts and think, wouldn't it be awful if we let people this stupid kill us all?

Jan 18, 2015
If all the "know it alls" would keep their traps shut, GW could be dramatically reduced.

Jan 18, 2015
Those trolls would probably be pissed off like there is no tomorrow and that would be much more funny.

Yeah, but...
You wouldn't get to see it to know what you were ignoring....

Jan 18, 2015
And OZ...
Way cool, how you did that recent post...

Jan 18, 2015

.....then all of you need to quit your jobs! What with all those cars out of circulation (3-4 by my count), look at all the CO2 that would not be spewed into the atmosphere........but ooooohhhh....that's right, now I get it, it's somebody else's civic world duty to stop driving cars so you & your family can claim rights to somebody else's carbon footprint!

Greeno, get over your condescending attitude expecting others to do what you won't.


So Benni, I don't drive. By your own pseudo-logic, you have to accept MY moral authority. So stop poisoning me, you filthy bastard. There, that hurts, don't it?

Jan 18, 2015
benni does not want a wind farm near his million-dollar squat.

Let's build him a coal plant, or inform him that is what we do to poor folk all the time, we export our pollution and noise to their parts of town, building our filthy plants there, away from the coddled and spoiled rich.

Jan 18, 2015
So hottest year on record:

Where are the massive brown-out reports, the heat related deaths, news reports of massive heatwaves shocking everywhere but where you live?

The last significant heatwave in Russia was 2006. There was one in Greece...

Anyone?

Jan 18, 2015
The "heat wave" is world-wide.

And more subtle than many are able to discern, hobbled by political prejudice.

Jan 18, 2015
@Greeno
Firstly - I tried really hard to explain to you that my decisions about my life are my business - nothing to do with you. You seem unable to comprehend what to me is a basic point of life. I have never tried to influence another persons personal choices. The issues involved with climate change, the environment, health, food supply etc. etc. - are complex and personal. You cannot find anywhere that I have expected others to do what I won't. So your basic premise is just made up bullshit. You should also read Maggnus' response above about the issue of personal choices whether to drive a car or not. It seems to me that you get all bent out of shape over someone using a 'bad' word or two - but have no problem getting on this board and being condescending, childish, and stupid. I will take a few bad honest bad words any day.
And you wonder why I accuse of dishonesty? You proselytize the AGWite religion, but refuse to live it, yourself!


Jan 18, 2015
I hit the "ignore" option on him/her/it a while back on the conviction that he/she/it was a waste of time/space/DNA.


Have to call you on this, Mag...:-)
If you had put him on ignore, you wouldn't know what flagrant bullshit he was posting....:-)
Face it. You're in it for the entertainment value, too...:-)


Having him on ignore doesn't mean you can't look at an occasional post. When I see something someone has quoted from one of his low-brow rants, and it interests me enough, I'll open a couple of his posts to see what BS he is spouting. The nice part about that is I make the choice of what spittle-laced drivel I want to see, the rest remains hidden.

Most of what he says is meaningless anyway, so I don't miss much.

Jan 18, 2015
Hey uba - I grow quite a bit of my own food on my .6 acre lot. I am on 100% wind power.


Greeno- I am sure that if you live on a 0.6 acre lot you do not have 100% wind power. What's the distance to your closest neighbor? Now that I've clued you in as to why you're a pretend greenie, here's why; on a lot that small in size there is hardly a town or municipality in the country that will allow you to put up a wind turbine of sufficient output that you could generate the needs of the standard household in America.

Tell us, do you live on a hilltop or in a valley? Probably don't want to answer those questions do you?

So how are services inside the Church of the Holy Hockey Stick going today? Anybody hit the
sawdust trail & get converted by promising to put up a wind turbine or something your religion approves of for membership?

Jan 18, 2015
I cannot currently afford to put solar panels on the house - as I would have to take down about 5 massive oak trees - that currently shade the house - but that is a project I plant to undertake in about 2 - 3 years.

Concerning your carbon footprint, I am not shure it would be a good trade off.

Jan 18, 2015
Hey uba - I grow quite a bit of my own food on my .6 acre lot. I am on 100% wind power.


Greeno- I am sure that if you live on a 0.6 acre lot you do not have 100% wind power. What's the distance to your closest neighbor? Now that I've clued you in as to why [blah blah blah]

Tell us, do you live on a hilltop or in a valley? **Probably don't want to answer those questions do you? **

So how are services inside the Church of the Holy Hockey Stick going today? Anybody hit the
sawdust trail & get converted by promising to put up a wind turbine or something your religion approves of for membership?


Benni, I see you fail to respond to my post. So you're a cowardly hypocrite, too. What a surprise...and to then accuse someone else of not wanting to answer questions just goes to show that irony is beyond your comprehension as well. Pathetic. Utterly pathetic.

Jan 18, 2015
So Uba,
Thomasquin and Greenonions prove themselves for what they are:
Thomas gives you 2 hours to respond to his all-important post. Like Captain Stumpy, he is the most important thing in your life, obviously if you went and had lunch, you have no response to his post.
And Green has been pretty much exposed as well. I bet he was laughing himself at the credulousness of Bennie and the forum as he posted.

And those who would believe Green... well it is very difficult to generate your own power. In my town they'll turn you off the grid. They charge you a base rate instead of a use-rate, in further discouragement. All because they can't charge you for what you don't use.

It is all very nauseating.

@gkam, your statement is dismissive, but I ask again, where are the articles about record-breaking heat related deaths? Answer: Nowhere, despite these record-breaking temps....

Jan 18, 2015
WP, why would you assume global warming dictates "Heat Waves"? Are they necessary for your belief, which is irrelevant?


rgw
Jan 18, 2015
It must have been quite a shock to that poor woman in the picture when she found out that Las Vegas is a very hot, dry desert.

Jan 18, 2015
to WP:
http://www.weathe...20130731]http://www.weathe...20130731[/url]

http://www.huffin...365.html

http://www.weathe...20130731]http://www.weathe...20130731[/url]

How many do you want?

Jan 18, 2015
WP, why would you assume global warming dictates "Heat Waves"? Are they necessary for your belief, which is irrelevant?

What Water_Prophet's statement seems to indicate is that he believes that the current warming is the new normal. That is, heat waves weren't required to make the year the warmest. I'm sure he knows that heat waves will occur and that, when they do, there will be deaths accompanying them.

There's something else that's interesting about Water_Prophet's statement. 2014 was the warmest year on record. Without the help of ENSO. So, above, when some of the anti-science group mention that the record is only "100ths of a degree difference", what they're saying is that a year without any help from El Nino is warmer than years with an active El Nino - even warmer than 1998 that had one of the strongest El Ninos on record.

Jan 18, 2015
"It must have been quite a shock to that poor woman in the picture when she found out that Las Vegas is a very hot, dry desert."
-------------------------------------------

You have told us more about yourself than about deserts.

Jan 18, 2015
It must have been quite a shock to that poor woman in the picture when she found out that Las Vegas is a very hot, dry desert.
LOL. I've been there in July, it was terrible! Even the bus stops have misting systems.


Jan 18, 2015
Benni - the utility in my city - offers the option of designating how much of your power comes from wind. When they build a new wind farm - they open the market for people to sign up for wind. You can designate how much wind you want - I think it is increments of 10%. I opted for 100%.


Well, well, well........whoda thunk it.......you lead us on to believe you have a wind turbine & what you've really got is co-mingled coal & wind......you sly fox of a ROC. Why is it you people in the Church of the Holy Hockey Stick need to resort to narratives containing double & even triple meanings hoping it will gain you even the slightest modicum of credibility.

Do you now understand why so many are tired of reading quotes from your Holy Books of the Apocalypse? No, probably you don't, which is the reason why a famous orator once stated that "religion is the opiate of the people". You're so addicted to the opiate that you've become a glutton for punishment to get more of it.

Jan 18, 2015
Well, gkam, except for the Australia link... the server cannot be found. Rather odd if you ask me, but let me just quote what you prodded as your indisputable proof:
While North America freezes under record polar temperatures, the southern hemisphere is experiencing the opposite extreme as heat records are being set in Australia after the hottest year ever.


It was very cold, if not record cold in quite a few countries. How do the scales not balance?

Here's the thing: The record Heat Wave was because monsoon season was delayed. That's causal. A hot Sun and delayed clouds, I am sure you will disagree, for no other reason than to continue your CO2 religious beliefs, is a very good reason to have a record heat wave.

Now in N America and Europe, whose area is certainly much larger, 3-18x larger, depending how you call it, it was cold. AND, here's a point you will certainly ignore, unseasonably COLD from November to June.

So a few working references would be nice.

Jan 18, 2015
WP
http://www.weathe...20130731

http://www.accuwe...35829667

But heat waves are not the sole signal of Global Climate Change. Stop trying to change the topic.

Jan 18, 2015
@gkam
Err... topic... can I trouble you to read the article's title?
Your links still don't work AND even if they did, they do not answer the news about non-existent brown outs, heat deaths and other demonstrables.

Pray-tell where are these? I've been looking.

Jan 18, 2015
And all of your bullshit about religion, and addiction. I am an atheist, my main interest in life is science and technology - I am interested in rationalism - and nothing I have said could be construed as me telling others how to live their lives (that is your schtick) - or being apocolyptic - I am just interested in the science.


..........thus concluding this Sunday's church services brought to this website by the Church of the Holy Hockey Stick & sermons inspired from their Books of the Holy Apocalypse.

Jan 18, 2015
Give it up, benni.

Jan 18, 2015
38% confidence ratio is as good as outright fabrication. These people have no honor and no credibility.

http://www.dailym...ght.html

Jan 18, 2015
"You want to understand what that (cooler) world is like and you wonder are you ever to going to experience that," said Victor Gensini, a 28-year-old meteorology professor at the College of DuPage in Illinois.

No, Professor Gensini,

There is no need to feel so deprived.

It is not humanly possible to discern the difference between 'the hottest year on record' and one which averages a few tenths of a degree cooler.

Jan 18, 2015
But those animals, humans, and birds which come down with tropical diseases up North notice, don't they? Tropical diseases are already in Alaskan birds. Invasive species abound.

Jan 18, 2015
@gkam,

LOL-
Is that the heat or the humidity?

Temperature has not changed much, but humidity has gone up 435ppm.

Jan 19, 2015
What a load of garbage. Just look at the picture for this article. Boy, she really looks like she's sweltering in that record heat!

From the Daily Mail:

"The claim made headlines around the world, but yesterday it emerged that GISS's analysis – based on readings from more than 3,000 measuring stations worldwide – is subject to a margin of error. Nasa admits this means it is far from certain that 2014 set a record at all.

Yet the Nasa press release failed to mention this, as well as the fact that the alleged 'record' amounted to an increase over 2010, the previous 'warmest year', of just two-hundredths of a degree – or 0.02C. The margin of error is said by scientists to be approximately 0.1C – several times as much."

Link:

http://www.dailym...ght.html

Jan 19, 2015
Quick question, Benni.
Who maintains all your "acres"?
You? Or do you have "minions"?

Jan 19, 2015
Temperature has not changed much, but humidity has gone up 435ppm.

Humidity goes up generally because heat goes up. That's simple enough for even an 8 yr old...

But I do have to admit the leading picture is a little misleading. It's Las Vegas, fer cryin' out loud - it's ALWAYS hot there.
At least it's a dry heat...

Jan 19, 2015
Climate has been on record for what ? 4 billion years? And how long is our record?... 100 years maybe?!
So that is 1/4000000000*100 = .000000025% of the total climate record. And that is even with temperature stations moved around, temperature records 'tweaked' because some did not like what they implied...etc...etc.. Might be wise to wait until you have a few thousand years under your belt before you go off making 'butterfly effect' predictions on the future of our climate...

Jan 19, 2015
Climate has been on record for what ? 4 billion years? And how long is our record?... 100 years maybe?!
So that is 1/4000000000*100 = .000000025% of the total climate record. And that is even with temperature stations moved around, temperature records 'tweaked' because some did not like what they implied...etc...etc.. Might be wise to wait until you have a few thousand years under your belt before you go off making 'butterfly effect' predictions on the future of our climate...

Well, a warming trend HAS been noted since the last ice age... 12k years is a pretty good sample...

Jan 19, 2015
WP
http://www.weathe...20130731

http://www.accuwe...35829667/

But heat waves are not the sole signal of Global Climate Change. Stop trying to change the topic.
Why did thermodynamics, zz5555, Maggnus, Vietvet, and greenonions uprate this post with 5's, when the links don't even work? Is this what you think comprises quality science? No wonder you bought into the manufactured AGWite hysteria.

Jan 19, 2015
But those animals, humans, and birds which come down with tropical diseases up North notice, don't they? Tropical diseases are already in Alaskan birds. Invasive species abound.
I guess chatterbots don't know much 'bout history...

"Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum
...Success was also enjoyed by the mammals, who radiated extensively around this time."

http://en.wikiped..._Maximum


Jan 19, 2015
Humidity goes up generally because heat goes up. That's simple enough for even an 8 yr old...

But I do have to admit the leading picture is a little misleading. It's Las Vegas, fer cryin' out loud - it's ALWAYS hot there.
At least it's a dry heat...
Gee whizz WG why do you come out with these kinds of questions when it is time for bed :-( Here I think that is going to be a good enough answer for Vegas https://www.youtu...s1sPXBfA

Jan 19, 2015
WP
http://www.weathe...20130731

But heat waves are not the sole signal of Global Climate Change. Stop trying to change the topic.
Why did thermodynamics, zz5555, Maggnus, Vietvet, and greenonions uprate this post with 5's, when the links don't even work? Is this what you think comprises quality science? No wonder you bought into the manufactured AGWite hysteria.


Uba: I can't speak for the others, but when the links didn't work I used Google to search for: "heat wave australia 2014" and it gave me pages. I recalled hearing about them last year. All you have to do is search and you have shown you have not done that. Hence, a resounding 1 for your continued lack of common sense.

Jan 19, 2015
When you have a herd of humans you simply repeat the lie again and again until the very repeating gives it a measure of believability. The lie here is 2014 is the warmest, it is not it is similar to several other years 2010, for example, as the claimed temperature difference in within the margin of error. You get warmest only by including the 3 digits to the right of the decimal point when these digits are meaningless math divisions as nobody actually measures to that degree of accuracy, It is an illusion for political theatre as any science type could tell you if honest.

The greavest error is how they measure the temperature and report it. The Giss data set used to make this claim is not reporting the actual measured temperatures it is reporting the model temperature which adjusts the temperature to what they think it should be. In the northern hemisphere they add an adjustment of about 1.5 degrees to fix a claimed cold bias and than ignore the RSS and UAH data with no warming.

Jan 19, 2015
Humidity goes up generally because heat goes up. That's simple enough for even an 8 yr old...

But I do have to admit the leading picture is a little misleading. It's Las Vegas, fer cryin' out loud - it's ALWAYS hot there.
At least it's a dry heat...
Gee whizz WG why do you come out with these kinds of questions when it is time for bed :-( Here I think that is going to be a good enough answer for Vegas https://www.youtu...s1sPXBfA

Dang... that was so fast, it made me dizzy....

Jan 19, 2015
Uba: I can't speak for the others, but when the links didn't work I used Google to search for: "heat wave australia 2014" and it gave me pages. I recalled hearing about them last year. All you have to do is search and you have shown you have not done that. Hence, a resounding 1 for your continued lack of common sense.
B.S.. As Water_Prophet explained, the Australia link worked fine from gkam's previous posting. gkam's reposting the broken links (the post i was referring to) was a complete failure.


Jan 19, 2015
And still the coward Benni refuses to respond to the point put to him, despite posting a pathetic accusation to another person of refusing to respond to questions. The denialist right has got his back, though. With friends like those, you don't need enemies. Not even if you're such a filthy hypocrite as Benni.

Jan 19, 2015
Climate has been on record for what ? 4 billion years? And how long is our record?... 100 years maybe?!
So that is 1/4000000000*100 = .000000025% of the total climate record. And that is even with temperature stations moved around, temperature records 'tweaked' because some did not like what they implied...etc...etc.. Might be wise to wait until you have a few thousand years under your belt before you go off making 'butterfly effect' predictions on the future of our climate...


Systematic daily tables have existed, for my country, The Netherlands, since 1706. Annual data can be gleaned from indirect sources over millennia. The source material is ample.

Jan 19, 2015
But those animals, humans, and birds which come down with tropical diseases up North notice, don't they? Tropical diseases are already in Alaskan birds. Invasive species abound.
I guess chatterbots don't know much 'bout history...

"Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum
...Success was also enjoyed by the mammals, who radiated extensively around this time."

http://en.wikiped..._Maximum



You don't even know what history is. "History" refers to the past from the introduction of writing to the present. Everything before that we call "pre-history". Get your facts straight first before you try and make fun of others for getting theirs wrong.

Jan 19, 2015
JamesG claimed
I would give you a list of climate scientists who disagree but you have chosen to believe the politicized climate dogma
Explain this proposition:-

"How can adding a greenhouse gas to the atmosphere such as CO2 with known thermal properties of re-radiation NOT increase thermal resistivity ?"

Heat goes somewhere, can u explain it ?

JamesG claimed
Remember. Even now, they are talking 100ths of a degree difference. They had to dig pretty hard to be able to say what they are saying now
Confirming you know nothing about comparative specific heat & why a small rise in Ocean temp is SIGNIFICANT !

JamesG claimed
And there is satellite data that disputes this. Basically the "pause" continues. And the USA had its 34th warmest year. Guess we are truly blessed.
USA near North Pole - doh !

http://woodfortre....9/trend

Jan 19, 2015
Climate has been on record for what ? 4 billion years? And how long is our record?... 100 years maybe?!

Actually, we have data for much longer than that.
Well, a warming trend HAS been noted since the last ice age... 12k years is a pretty good sample...

That's not quite true. The warming trend from the last glaciation ended ~8000 years ago. Then the global temperatures started to fall. They've only started rising recently due to the excess CO2 coming from human activities. The data indicates that we're back above where the earth was ~8000 years ago.

Jan 19, 2015
Yes but here is what CO2 lovers don't understand. Excuse me, won't understand.

If a little change (135ppm) of CO2, drives a change in temperature, that causes a 435ppm increase in a much more powerful GHG, then that in turn should drive an even bigger change.

I think everyone agrees with the idea that CO2 is a GHG, and water vapor is even more powerful. If you want to use the persistence argument you are ignorant of 2 things: The IPCC's definiton of persistence: How long it takes a GHG to chemically breakdown, and failing that, indistinguishable particles and modern physics.

So somehow you think the feedback effect only works for CO2, not water vapor. OK, lets go down that road. CO2 induces a temp increase, which increases water vapor, which does not effect another feedback effect because of it's evaporative property.

This just means that CO2 isn't important enough to effect change in the first place. Stay with me CO2 fans. Work it out. Two scenarios, same result.

Jan 19, 2015
Look everyone it's username "thermodynamics" such an austere username, and he supports a cartoonist with a website; skeptiscience.com, whose opinions are at least as good as yours or mine and may be a neo-Natzi.

Please read the link to get a good insight into this...[censored].
http://www.popula...nce.html

I expect if it weren't true, Cook would be loving the libel suit proceeds.

My particular love is how Cook omitted information characteristic to disproving his assertions.

And yet, boys and girls, it must be man is changing the environment, why lead us after wild geese?

Heil climate, thermo? is that what you're trying to say?

Jan 19, 2015
Water_Prophet with the VERY BEST he can do
Look everyone it's username "thermodynamics" such an austere username, and he supports a cartoonist with a website; skeptiscience.com, whose opinions are at least as good as yours or mine and may be a neo-Natzi
Why can't U Water_Prophet focus on qualifying your claim ?

Why can't you show how "trivial" & "a red herring" CO2 is re your claims ?

Why are u so full of it ? ie CLAIMS as well as sh.t ?

Show one piece of QUANTITATIVE data to support your claims - can U ?

You go around in circles but just cannot do what a Physical Chemist does !

You also don't write like a Physical Chemist - Y is that ?

Science Water_Prophet - can u for a change ?

Jan 19, 2015
Water_Prophet claimed
Yes but here is what CO2 lovers don't understand. Excuse me, won't understand
Really ? Then show the spectral absorbancy long wave to space ?

Water_Prophet claimed
If a little change (135ppm) of CO2, drives a change in temperature, that causes a 435ppm increase in a much more powerful GHG, then that in turn should drive an even bigger change.
Show the absorbancy then, comparative, ie Area under curve on this:-
http://www.chem.a.../sim/gh/]http://www.chem.a.../sim/gh/[/url]

Water_Prophet claimed
I think everyone agrees with the idea that CO2 is a GHG, and water vapor is even more powerful
Look at the comparative wavelengths here:-
http://www.chem.a.../sim/gh/]http://www.chem.a.../sim/gh/[/url]

THEN show the numbers ?

Can U do it quantitatively & definitively - because your tangential layman speak goes nowhere !

Jan 19, 2015
Water_Prophet claimed
So somehow you think the feedback effect only works for CO2, not water vapor. OK, lets go down that road. CO2 induces a temp increase, which increases water vapor, which does not effect another feedback effect because of it's evaporative property
Really ? show the feedback equation as a graduate Physical CHemist should be able to do ?

Can U ?

Water_Prophet claimed
This just means that CO2 isn't important enough to effect change in the first place
Wrong !

As I said before look at Mars 95% CO2 yet 35deg C in SHADE.

ARe you ill Water_Prophet or disabled, why claim to ge a graduate in Physical Chemistry when you cannot deal with the issue of CO2 without resorting to layman speak ?

Water_Prophet claimed
Stay with me CO2 fans. Work it out. Two scenarios, same result.
No. Show the comparative absorbancy & areas re this shown to you before ?

http://www.chem.a.../sim/gh/

Jan 19, 2015
So somehow you think the feedback effect only works for CO2, not water vapor. OK, lets go down that road. CO2 induces a temp increase, which increases water vapor, which does not effect another feedback effect because of it's evaporative property.

But, it does affect/effect another, much longer feedback loop by condensing and falling, bringing many airborne particulates back to the ground. Which then do their voodoo in other ways as surface elements (as part of an even LARGER feedback loop) rather than in the air...

Jan 19, 2015
@Whydening, yep, that's the point, and the point is no effect from one, still less effect from the driver. No effect from the driver means we need to look elsewhere.
If water vapor eats up its own impacts, which are much bigger, CO2's do still less, or get absorbed in the background noise.
Except of course, when we shine reality on it, evaporative effect is ~5x greater than GHG. So the quantification is much much more powerful than the intuitive analogy, and thus should dismiss the believe that CO2 is a driver.
You've come a long way since thermo and stumpy tried to use their skeptiscience as serious science in that battle of the shams.

Jan 19, 2015
Stay with me CO2 fans. Work it out. Two scenarios, same result.
We tried that, remember? You saw how the numbers were coming out, so you stamped your feet and claimed it was't fair, then you prematurely tried to claim victory when the number run wasn't even finished yet, then you tried to change the parameters, then you pouted and cried, then you changed your handle and tried to pretend you were someone else. Why ever would anyone want to go through that with you again?

What, are you angling to change your name and pretend you're someone else again? You should go with Crying Waterbaby.

Jan 19, 2015
But, it does affect/effect another, much longer feedback loop by condensing and falling, bringing many airborne particulates back to the ground. Which then do their voodoo in other ways as surface elements (as part of an even LARGER feedback loop) rather than in the air...
I always find it amusing to see someone who makes no claim to being a scientist and reads/posts here only because he is interested in science in general, has a better understanding of how things work than a crying-waterbaby type, who claims to hold degrees and pretends unique knowledge of a subject he clearly does not actually understand.

Jan 19, 2015
..if you have stopped driving a car
Typical benniTROLL BS
why is it that the only possible solution to the problem is for all the scientists to stop driving a vehicle because that is what YOU believe should happen? like your comment about
if they can get YOU to make the sacrifice of practicing what their religion teaches
&
expecting others to do what you won't
this strawman fallacy
problem is, it is not effective to continue to show you that you are stupid because you refuse to see that in the argument
Let me tell you a little story
strawman, distraction and irrelevant
so long as the turbine isn't close
mine is in my yard next to the house
generate the needs
you only recharge the batteries, and if you have a multiple set like I do, then you run off of one while charging the other (called planning ahead)
no need for constant generation

you've amply demonstrated how little you actually know about anything in the field of Engineering/Science/GREEN tech

Jan 19, 2015
Yes but here is what CO2 lovers don't understand. Excuse me, won't understand.
&
should dismiss the believe that CO2 is a driver.
@ALCHE/h2oCrybaby

so why is it you still haven't refuted that study that i linked proving you wrong with regard to your beliefs about H2O and CO2?
Should be easy considering all the claims of yours regarding physics, science, and more... so where is it?
@gkam
Err... topic... can I trouble you to read the article's title?
you mean like your OT reply to Uba above?

I noticed that you always have an argument why you are right but you've never had any studies to support your conclusions or to refute the studies posted

IOW - troll/baiting

Jan 19, 2015
Ah, Stumpy! another SkeptiNazi, I am amazed you can show your username around here after you supported John Cook, as well.

Show you my citations? Show you my proof? Refute your ego?:
http://www.popula...nce.html

This not only shows you defer to a cartoonist, that is to say a joke, but a disgusting one.
And no, I am still ignoring you.

Jan 19, 2015
Maggnus, I always find it interesting that someone who until I told him, didn't know what a mole was, complaining.
As far as stamping my feet, no, I warned you(s) long before you had your love feast and celebration that you were going against house rules. What was your response: I am only going against house rules because it was established science. Yeah, Science of Doom is established science, right up there with Dr. Octopus' arms and Iron Man's suit.

But then, but then, but then! You let CO2 have twice its absorption band AND absorb everything in it's band. Over iterations that is a quite powerful mistake to make. 1.5^10 is ~60, 1.6^10 ~ 100. AND you thought I was stupid enough not to see it.

And and and you still fell short by (memory fails) 2-3 orders of magnitude (OOM)! Splendid victory! Even if I say "you're right, all those wonderful mechanics are correct," you still failed by 2-3 OOM,
and and and you weren't bright enough to notice!

Jan 19, 2015
I always find it amusing to see someone who makes no claim to being a scientist and reads/posts here only because he is interested in science in general, has a better understanding of how things work than a crying-waterbaby type, who claims to hold degrees and pretends unique knowledge of a subject he clearly does not actually understand.

Aww... Cut it out or I'm gonna blush....
I humbly thank you for the compliment, tho...:-)

Jan 19, 2015
This seems appropriate again:

Alchem's criticisms were non-specific for a reason - he can't follow what you're doing. He's taken my questions and your answers to them and extrapolated that into "you're wrong, you cheated!" It should have been accompanied with "but I don't really know why or how" but he didn't want to admit that.

If he was actually trying to work on this, he would have outlined his arguments. "1.43 is wrong because...." or "I think you used an incorrect variable in your calculation here, because...." His bluff is called, so he folded his hand.

Forget him (well, unless and until he starts actually contributing) and just keep going. If nothing else, the thread will be usable to strike him down when he posts to the next article that he has some hidden model.

I've never witnessed someone actually cry in a post before!



Jan 19, 2015
I just read in another article that 2014 wasn't just the hottest year ever recorded by man, but it was the hottest year in the last 5000 years (based on proxies like ice cores, tree rings etc). So while to the deniers there was this hiatus from 1990 that was all BS of not knowing how to predict trends and now we see another record fall braking the deniers "phony pause".

It's kind of funny, I think back to last year, and I think I was arguing that regardless of the effect of polar vortex on USA, that it would turn out to be the hottest year ever based on simple probability of linear progression. The deniers jumped all up and down on me about that claim, but where are they now? All fired choking on there $8 per post I bet.


Jan 20, 2015
Show you my citations? Show you my proof?
@ALCHE
That is what i am asking for
You claimed that
if you are going to link to poor studies, and then run away when they're debunked, we go nowhere
located here: http://phys.org/n...ute.html
But you have NEVER proved ANY linked study wrong, & you cannot prove you have
NOR can you link ANY conversation that we've had where you DO prove any study wrong...

you have linked a graph in the past, and posted some info, but you also do not understand how it relates to CO2, WV and the feedback cycle, and that was told to you
It is also information that is included in the study i linked regarding CO2, but you ignored THAT part too

and i don't care if YOU want to ignore me...I will keep bringing it up so that nooB's learn that:
you are full of sh*t
you post pseudoscience
you misrepresent the facts with minutiae you don't understand

i'm still waiting for all your "proof"

Jan 20, 2015
Err, howhot2, how did they accurately know the temp of the Earth >200 years ago?
Just askin'.

@Yes Stumpy, I'm still ignoring you and calling you a quasi-Nazi coward, for using that I ignore you to get cheap shots in.

@Forum, whatever Stumpy says is endorsed by this man, a cartoonist, ?neo-nazi?:
http://www.popula...nce.html
who writes:
http://www.skepti...nce.com/

Consider the source.


Jan 21, 2015
@ Water_Prophet

1) Accurate thermometers were developed, practically simultaneously and independently by a number of people, in the mid 17th century. The Dutch meteorological institute (KNMI) has a continuous, uninterrupted list of measurements from 1706 onwards.

2) Misusing the word nazi is not just disrespectful and an insult to the victims of nazism, it also makes you look like an even bigger moron. Seriously, there's enough idiocy in your posts without that.

3) Your screaming "nazi" at everything is a perfect illustration of the concept "if you can't argue with the message, attack the messenger".

Jan 21, 2015
Yes Stumpy, I'm still ignoring you
@ALCHE
the funny thing: you didn't ignore me when you read some of the above, so we know you lie about that part
Consider the source.
YES, LETS

you don't mind NOT ignoring me when you want to post off topic rants about a person- and then you go linking a site that is KNOWN for being biased and irrelevant as well as LYING and only posting fringe crackpot science or pseudoscience, but then you want everyone here to "consider the source"????

you use the excuse of "ignore" when it comes to presenting evidence and studies to refute the science posted at you

i've given you lots of studies
you still haven't refuted ANY of them

Not cheap shots, ALCHE, but facts
(after all, YOU are ignoring ME, not the other way around)
you have none

Jan 21, 2015
Climate change is caused by humans.

Jan 21, 2015
@ Water_Prophet

1) Accurate thermometers were developed, practically simultaneously and independently by a number of people, in the mid 17th century. The Dutch meteorological institute (KNMI) has a continuous, uninterrupted list of measurements from 1706 onwards.

2) Misusing the word nazi is not just disrespectful and an insult to the victims of nazism, it also makes you look like an even bigger moron. Seriously, there's enough idiocy in your posts without that.

3) Your screaming "nazi" at everything is a perfect illustration of the concept "if you can't argue with the message, attack the messenger".


A fine example of Godwin's Law or Reductio ad Hitlerum.

Simply put, the person who resorts to shrill claims that Nazis are involved automatically loses the argument. I can hardly believe Crying Waterbaby would resort to such. But, then again, consider who it is.

Laughably dense.

Jan 21, 2015
Here is an interesting discussion regarding details of the world's warmest year ever. I wasn't aware that the measurements showed the land temperatures were only the 4th highest - meaning that the oceans accounted for the rest.

http://www.slate....ing.html

I wonder how Moncton's model accounts for that?

Jan 21, 2015
Well, Thom, so, having thermometers doesn't mean they deployed them relevantly throughout the world.

Me screaming Nazi is because those schleps support skeptical science, who author is this man:
http://www.popula...nce.html
He is a cartoonist with a website.

Jan 21, 2015
Me screaming Nazi is because
@ALCHE
it is because you can't argue against the science being posted so therefore you must distract from this very fact with any argument you can... and what better way than to choose a biased enemy of the site posting such a visceral article, regardless of the truth of it?

your link is to a biased site which has been proven to lie right here on PO more than once

you have STILL failed to provide ANY equivalent evidence to refute ANY studies from ANY links given to you showing that those studies were wrong or that they should be considered with sxkepticism

the whole of your argument is distraction from the topic (your lack of scientific evidence and failure to prove the studies wrong)

you wield the "ignore" function only when you're being proven a liar and that you have no evidence (like above)

Where are those refutes you gave of the studies?
I've searched EVERY post you've given on PO and found NOTHING

Jan 22, 2015
Here is more information with regard to the oceans and how much they are warming. So much. that the old charts showing the increase have to be redone - we've gone off the scale.

http://www.thegua...s-charts

Just another sign of how much energy is being added to the system. It's now reached the point that even the Republicans in America had to admit that there is warming. The contrarians that continue to deny the fact of global warming find themselves on less tenuous ground with each passing day.

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