Stuck on hot: Earth breaks 12th straight monthly heat record (Update)

May 18, 2016 by By Seth Borenstein
In this April 30, 2016 file photo, people collect water for non-drinking use as the same is pumped out from a construction site at a slum area in Mumbai, Maharashtra state, India. Earth's heat is stuck on high. Federal scientists said the globe shattered monthly heat records for an unprecedented 12th straight month as April smashed the old record by half a degree. (AP Photo/ Rajanish Kakade, File )

Earth's heat is stuck on high.

Thanks to a combination of global warming and an El Nino, the planet shattered monthly heat records for an unprecedented 12th straight month, as April smashed the old record by half a degree, according to federal scientists.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's monthly climate calculation said Earth's average temperature in April was 56.7 degrees (13.7 degrees Celsius). That's 2 degrees (1. 1 degrees Celsius) warmer than the 20th century average and well past the old record set in 2010. The Southern Hemisphere led the way, with Africa, South America and Asia all having their warmest Aprils on record, NOAA climate scientist Ahira Sanchez-Lugo said. NASA was among other organizations that said April was the hottest on record.

The last month that wasn't record hot was April 2015. The last month Earth wasn't hotter than the 20th-century average was December 1984, and the last time Earth set a monthly cold record was almost a hundred years ago, in December 1916, according to NOAA records.

"These kinds of records may not be that interesting, but so many in a row that break the previous records by so much indicates that we're entering uncharted climatic territory (for modern human society)," Texas A&M University climate scientist Andrew Dessler said in an email.

At NOAA's climate monitoring headquarters in Asheville, North Carolina, "we are feeling like broken records stating the same thing" each month, Sanchez-Lugo said.

And more heat meant record low snow for the Northern Hemisphere in April, according to NOAA and the Rutgers Global Snow Lab. Snow coverage in April was 890,000 square miles below the 30-year average.

Sanchez-Lugo and other scientists say ever-increasing man-made global warming is pushing temperatures higher, and the weather oscillation El Nino—a warming of parts of the Pacific Ocean that changes weather worldwide—makes it even hotter.

The current El Nino, which is fading, is one of the strongest on records and is about as strong as the 1997-1998 El Nino. But 2016 so far is 0.81 degrees (0.45 degrees Celsius) warmer than 1998 so "you can definitely see that climate change has an impact," Sanchez-Lugo said.

Given that each month this year has been record hot, it is not surprising that the average of the first four months of 2016 were 2.05 degrees (1.14 degrees Celsius) higher than the 20th-century average and beat last year's record by 0.54 degrees (0.3 degrees Celsius).

Last year was the hottest year by far, beating out 2014, which also was a record. But 2016's start "is unprecedented basically" and in general half a degree warmer than 2015, Sanchez-Lugo said.

Even though El Nino is fading and its cooler flip side La Nina is forecast to take hold later this year, Sanchez-Lugo predicted that 2016 will end up the hottest year on record for the third straight year. That's because there's a lag time for those changes to show up in global temperatures and because 2016 has started off so much hotter than 2015, she said.

Explore further: January 2016 hottest since records began: NOAA

Related Stories

January 2016 hottest since records began: NOAA

February 17, 2016

Last month was the hottest January in modern times, US data showed on Wednesday, the latest in a string of heat records fuelling concerns over the pace of climate change.

Recommended for you

Maximizing the environmental benefits of autonomous vehicles

February 15, 2018

The added weight, electricity demand and aerodynamic drag of the sensors and computers used in autonomous vehicles are significant contributors to their lifetime energy use and greenhouse gas emissions, according to a new ...

53 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

thermodynamics
4.5 / 5 (33) May 18, 2016
Let me make a prediction. El Nino is fading and La Nina is on the way. Those who understand heat transfer will recognize that the string of records cannot continue indefinitely. My prediction is that as soon as the temperature fails to set a record, the trolls on the site will start screeching about the "earth cooling." At some point we will have an increase in Arctic ice, over the present record low and they will scream about the "recovering" sea ice. Just wait and you will see they can't help themselves. We know there have to be ups and downs along the trend up. That seems to be beyond the understanding of deniers.
axemaster
4.5 / 5 (31) May 18, 2016
Oh, you don't have to wait for that. Just now I came across some posts claiming that the Earth is cooling.
Skepticus
4.2 / 5 (19) May 18, 2016
The number of willfully ignorant and obstinate humans on this planet is surprisingly large. Time for the slate to be wipe clean, again!
leetennant
4.6 / 5 (27) May 18, 2016
Let me make a prediction. El Nino is fading and La Nina is on the way. Those who understand heat transfer will recognize that the string of records cannot continue indefinitely. My prediction is that as soon as the temperature fails to set a record, the trolls on the site will start screeching about the "earth cooling." At some point we will have an increase in Arctic ice, over the present record low and they will scream about the "recovering" sea ice. Just wait and you will see they can't help themselves. We know there have to be ups and downs along the trend up. That seems to be beyond the understanding of deniers.


The same people who refused to accept that La Nina was masking warming in air temps (and who consistently used air temp records in isolation without reference to other measures of warming) now insist on using El Nino as the reason that air temps are so high, disregarding the same indicator they were insisting on and still ignoring other measures.
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (28) May 18, 2016
And speaking of records, here's a record: five posts without a single denier!

Let's see how high we can push that. :D

Meanwhile, to the article, this is unsurprising and we can expect the trend to continue for several months yet. A way of interpreting this intuitively is to think of a pot of boiling water, and El Nino as being a spot where a bubble of steam is emerging, meaning the water is regionally hotter, and La Nina as a bit later or earlier, when the same spot isn't having a steam bubble and it's regionally a bit cooler. But it's a pretty inexact analogy; still, it gets the idea across. We can expect to see the ENSO continue doing this, making a time series where there are abrupt rises in temperature, followed by periods of lesser rises, flat temperatures, or even slight declines; overall, however, the temperature must continue to rise.
leetennant
4.4 / 5 (25) May 18, 2016
Which is why we use 30 years as a proxy for climate change in the first place. To iron out these short-term peaks and troughs in the dataset.
Mark Thomas
4.3 / 5 (24) May 18, 2016
The time for denying climate change is past. Cigarettes cause lung cancer and man-made greenhouse gases cause global warming, period. These are established facts. The deniers can start looking for something else to deny.
aksdad
1.5 / 5 (22) May 18, 2016
El Nino is fading and La Nina is on the way. Those who understand heat transfer will recognize that the string of records cannot continue indefinitely

Exactly. Just like the big El Niño of 1998, evident in this graph from satellite measurements:

http://nsstc.uah....2016.png

According to the satellite data, there was no warmer year after 1998 until 2015. In fact there was a 17-year hiatus in warming until last year. What happens in the next few years is anyone's guess. The long-term trend is warming, but for how long? When do we turn a corner and start cooling as earth did several times in the past?

https://www.ipcc..../072.htm

Or will human CO2 be enough to mitigate or prevent the next ice age?
aksdad
1.7 / 5 (27) May 18, 2016
man-made greenhouse gases cause global warming, period. These are established facts.

Also established facts:

-Earth's temperature has fluctuated 12° C all by itself over ~100,000 year cycles.
-Global sea levels have fluctuated 125 meters (410 feet) all by themselves over ~100,000 year cycles.
-Earth's temperature has fluctuated 1° C or more all by itself over ~200 year periods in the recent past.
-The ~0.5° C warming from 1910 to 1945 is widely accepted by climate scientists to be entirely natural (hardly any human CO2 emissions then).
-The ~0.6° C warming since about 1975 is considered to be mostly caused by humans and blamed on CO2 emissions.
-Physics says doubling atmospheric CO2 will raise temperatures about 1° C.
-CO2 is estimated to be about 0.028% of the atmosphere in the 1800's.
-CO2 is about 0.040% now.
-It will take until about 2090 for it to double from 0.028% to 0.056%, possibly raising global temperature 1°C from the average in the 1800's
leetennant
4.5 / 5 (26) May 18, 2016
We're already past 1 degree so I'm not sure what "physics' you're talking about but it isn't our Earth physics. Maybe it's the physics from the unicorn world. I hear everything is possible there.

But thanks for dropping by and ably demonstrating our point. It's been instructive.
aksdad
1.7 / 5 (24) May 18, 2016
I'm not sure what "physics' you're talking about but it isn't our Earth physics

Oh, sorry. I thought everyone who commented on global warming here already knew it.

https://en.wikipe..._forcing

The relationship between carbon dioxide and radiative forcing is logarithmic and thus increased concentrations have a progressively smaller warming effect.

The 12° C temperature fluctuations between ice ages are clearly not just the result of atmospheric CO2. Neither, according to climate scientists, is the 0.5° C between 1910 and 1945.

In simple words, CO2 isn't the only thing that warms the earth. In fact it's not even a primary contributor, historically. So the 1° C warming in the 20th century that you're talking about is not all caused by CO2. In fact, how much is caused by CO2 is subject to debate. In the real world, not unicorn world.
aksdad
1.6 / 5 (25) May 18, 2016
All the Global Climate Models are based on the radiative forcing equation of CO2, massaged with (mostly) positive feedback mechanisms that they think accelerate warming; for example, warming melts glaciers which increases warming further. There is very little consideration of negative feedback mechanisms like warming over oceans (70% of earth's surface) causes cloud formation which reflects infrared radiation and cools the surface. Based on comparisons of temperature measurements, all the GCMs overestimate the effects of positive feedback. See here from the IPCC AR5:

https://www.ipcc....S-14.jpg
xponen
4.3 / 5 (17) May 18, 2016
It would take an apocalyptic event if we were to have any sort of global cooling now, like the volcano eruptions in past century.
Da Schneib
4.8 / 5 (23) May 18, 2016
According to the satellite data, there was no warmer year after 1998 until 2015.
1. Yes, according to the satellite data. However, the IPCC Fifth Action Report says,
In summary, despite unanimous agreement on the sign of the observed trends, there exists substantial disagreement between available estimates as to the rate of temperature changes in the tropical troposphere, and there is only low confidence in the rate of change and its vertical structure.
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf See page 72. So there is only *low confidence* that the correct troposphere temperatures are actually being shown by the satellite data.

So this is just another denier lie; the satellite data still have some systemic problem that needs to be worked out.

[contd]
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (23) May 18, 2016
[contd]
In fact there was a 17-year hiatus in warming until last year.
There was no "global warming hiatus." See http://link.sprin...5-1495-y

This is an open-access article that appeared in Climatic Change, November 2015, titled "Debunking the climate hiatus."
We find compelling evidence that recent claims of a "hiatus" in global warming lack sound scientific basis. Our analysis reveals that there is no hiatus in the increase in the global mean temperature, no statistically significant difference in trends, no stalling of the global mean temperature, and no change in year-to-year temperature increases.
So this is just another denier lie, and this one doesn't even have any basis at all in real measurements.

Minor typo in my previous post, that was page 772 not 72.

Whenever you get another of these deniers and start looking at their claims in terms of the actual results, you catch them lying again. Over and over and over.
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (22) May 18, 2016
Back to the UAH satellite temperature anomaly graph aksdad posted, simple test: is there more blue on the left and more red on the right?

Yes.

Another common denier ploy is to post data that say one thing and then claim exactly the opposite of what the data say. Every time you check their stuff out, it's full of lies. They've always got an excuse, but how many excuses do you need to see before you figure it out? The answer is, a lot fewer than they present.

It's getting hotter. Period. Now stop lying.
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (23) May 18, 2016
Another example of a subtle lie:
The 12° C temperature fluctuations between ice ages are clearly not just the result of atmospheric CO2... In simple words, CO2 isn't the only thing that warms the earth.
No one ever claimed either that the temperature fluctuations between ice ages are "just the result of atmospheric CO2," nor that "CO2 [is] the only thing that warms the earth." In fact exactly the opposite. This is called a "straw man" argument, in other words making up lies about what people said and proving those wrong instead of addressing what they actually said.
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (23) May 18, 2016
In fact it's not even a primary contributor, historically.
And even more subtle lying: historically, CO2 has never risen this fast. And we're talking about millions of years of climate data from multiple sources: lake beds, ice cores from the Antarctic and glaciers, seabed cores, and more. So whether it was a contributor or not historically is completely beside the point. This is a non-sequitur: the conclusion does not follow from the argument presented.

Yet more lying. How many lies do you need to see before you start dismissing a source?

Here's another one:
See here from the IPCC AR5
The instrumental record ends before 2015. I bet he didn't even look at the graph, someone told him it supposedly shows all the models are wrong.

How many lies do you need to see?
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (19) May 18, 2016
It would take an apocalyptic event if we were to have any sort of global cooling now, like the volcano eruptions in past century.
No, it would take a lot more than that.
Mark Thomas
4 / 5 (12) May 18, 2016
The irony here is the AGW threatening our way of life on Earth is exactly what we need to perpetuate our way of life on Mars. We need to warm Mars up enough to thicken its atmosphere and melt some of its ice.

leetennant
4.8 / 5 (19) May 18, 2016
It would take an apocalyptic event if we were to have any sort of global cooling now, like the volcano eruptions in past century.
No, it would take a lot more than that.


For volcanic eruptions to give a sufficient cooling effect, they would have to be so extreme that we probably wouldn't survive them anyway And the accompanying CO2 emissions would increase global warming in the long-term anyway. We're looking at geoengineering now to remove a large chunk of CO2 we've put in to the system. That'll end well.
philstacy9
3 / 5 (7) May 18, 2016
There is a thumb on the scales of social justice.
Shootist
1.6 / 5 (21) May 19, 2016
Waiting for dairy farms in Greenland.

Waiting
.
.
.
Waiting
.
.
.
Not happening . . .

The hockey stick is contrived nonsense. "the polar bears will be fine" -- Freeman Dyson.
john berry_hobbes
3.6 / 5 (25) May 19, 2016
Why can't they identify spam that isn't commercial? That consummate idiot shootist puts the exact same misquote in every last thing he posts. How is that not spam and why would any site not block that account? They can disable posting, but leave the account active. Why wouldn't you do that when you have some self serving crap in every.last.post the idiot ever makes?

I'm thinking that "fckthierreyhenry" was right when he said that he was some fan boy sexual predator lusting after the guy. And is there no standards for screen names?
Ojorf
4.8 / 5 (16) May 19, 2016
Can't agree with you more John, it's a mystery.

Here is a spiral graph of the average monthly temps from 1850 to 2016 from the HadCrut4 dataset.
Check out the acceleration over the last few years:

https://cdn1.vox-...iral.gif
Osiris1
1.4 / 5 (9) May 19, 2016
Shooosh, going up a degree F per year. In less than thirty years the tropics will be unlivable....Moslem problem solved
SteveS
3 / 5 (2) May 19, 2016
Waiting for dairy farms in Greenland.

Waiting
.
.
.
Waiting
.
.
.
Not happening . . .

The hockey stick is contrived nonsense. "the polar bears will be fine" -- Freeman Dyson.

When the Norwegian merchant, Anders Olsen, retired from his position at the Royal Greenland Trade in 1782, he and his Greenlandic wife, Tuperna, settled in Igaliku in the vicinity of the ruins of the former Norse Episcopal residence, Gardar. This marked the beginning of a Greenlandic farmers' dynasty with traditions that extend up to the present time.

The settlers built houses of stones that were removed from the medieval bishop's courtyard and reintroduced cattle- and sheep-breeding.
http://www.kultur...-arctic/
Phys1
4.8 / 5 (18) May 20, 2016
Waiting for dairy farms in Greenland.

Waiting
.
.
.
Waiting
.
.
.
Not happening . . .

The hockey stick is contrived nonsense. "the polar bears will be fine" -- Freeman Dyson.

Freeman Dyson is wrong.
Phys1
4.5 / 5 (17) May 20, 2016
Exactly. Just like the big El Niño of 1998, evident in this graph from satellite measurements:

http://nsstc.uah....2016.png

According to the satellite data, there was no warmer year after 1998 until 2015. In fact there was a 17-year hiatus in warming until last year.

1998 was exceptionally hot. Otherwise the trend in your plot is clearly upward.
"The exceptionally warm El Niño year of 1998 was an outlier from the continuing temperature trend, and so gave the appearance of a hiatus"
https://en.wikipe...g_hiatus
What happens in the next few years is anyone's guess. The long-term trend is warming, but for how long? When do we turn a corner and start cooling as earth did several times in the past?

Whatever the long term climate variation, AGW will be adding a sharp short term rise to it.
BackBurner
1.6 / 5 (20) May 20, 2016
The time for denying climate change is past. ... man-made greenhouse gases cause global warming, period.


Where did you hear that? Seriously, if you have proof you really should publish. There are plenty of journals that would love something like that. You'd likely win the Nobel in physics.
BackBurner
1.4 / 5 (18) May 20, 2016
Sanchez-Lugo and other scientists say ever-increasing man-made global warming is pushing temperatures higher


And this Sanchez-Lugo fellow knows it's man made how? Try asking important questions Seth, this is supposed to be a science blog.
gkam
2.4 / 5 (17) May 20, 2016
Send backburner to Northern Phalodi.
antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (16) May 20, 2016
Let me make a prediction...bray...bray..bray...

Wow! The Chicken Little cult has found their prophet and it predicts cooling when the "science" claims it must get hotter. So, let me paraphrase that other infamous cult -- Beware of false prophets, it claims to know, but brays like a jackass.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4.8 / 5 (19) May 20, 2016
@Backburner: Oh, i don't know, maybe at the internationally agreed on clearing house for trusted clinate science? [ http://www.ipcc.ch/ ]

"Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era, driven
largely by economic and population growth, and are now higher than ever. This has led to atmospheric
concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that are unprecedented in
at least the last 800,000 years. Their effects, together with those of other anthropogenic drivers,
have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been
the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. {1.2, 1.3.1}"

[ http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf , p4]
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4.8 / 5 (22) May 20, 2016
@Backburner, antigoracle: "And this Sanchez-Lugo fellow".

Sanchez-Lugo is a merited climate scientist: "At NOAA's climate monitoring headquarters in Asheville, North Carolina, "we are feeling like broken records stating the same thing" each month, Sanchez-Lugo said."

When *you* start to monitor and research the changing climate at a professional research level, you can start braying about 'fellows' and 'scientists'. Until then you are two publicly expressed anti-science fools with obviously rudimentary mental capabilities, armed with a keyboard and that chewing gum that falls out every time you type.

gkam
2.5 / 5 (16) May 20, 2016
Did the Deniers send us their failed candidates for their propaganda work? Whatever their own jobs/professions, they do not understand that is not how we communicate in science.
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (13) May 20, 2016
When *you* start to monitor and research ...anti-science fools with obviously rudimentary mental capabilities, armed with a keyboard and that chewing gum that falls out every time you type..

LOL.
OK. Now wipe the spittle from the corner of your mouth and keyboard and ---
- Research Climategate, especially the parts about destroying data to prevent the heretics getting their hands on it and redefining the peer review process to stop the heretics from publishing.
- Research why the AGW Cult needed to get rid of the MWP
- Monitor why NOAA/NASA have so cooked the data that many scientists have no faith in that data anymore.
- Research why their are 66 peer reviewed studies to explain the global warming pause and a single (debunked) that claims the pause did not exist.
- Research if manmade CO2 is warming the globe, why is the Atlantic cooling and why this is not making the news.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4.8 / 5 (18) May 20, 2016
Oh, I forgot: "You'd likely win the Nobel in physics."

No, but the Nobel Peace Prize 2007 was shared between the climate scientists in IPCC and climate aware Al Gore, and the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1995 was shared between chemists that found a similar man made effect on the ozone layer. [ http://www.nobelp...ead.html ; http://www.nobelp...ess.html ]

The Peace Prize was prescient as I remember it, since the Syrian war is claimed by UN to be promulgated by the long dry period there, which in part can be attributed to man made global warming.

@antigoracle: Give *science* references, or stop hammering your keyboard on a science site - the spittle is visible when you dropped your gum. Again.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (12) May 20, 2016
Send backburner to Northern Phalodi.
'Off with his head!' cries George kamburoff the Moghul of physorg and the greater world.
antigoracle
1.5 / 5 (15) May 20, 2016
The Peace Prize was prescient as I remember it, since the Syrian war is claimed by UN to be promulgated by the long dry period there, which in part can be attributed to man made global warming.

There you go again, being the consummate Chicken Little, just parroting what you, in your wilful ignorance, want to hear from the AGW Cult.
Talking about the Nobel Peace Prize, guess who they gave it to just 2 years later? http://thinkprogr...l-prize/
Talking about the Syrian war -- http://phys.org/n...sis.html
Shootist
1.8 / 5 (16) May 20, 2016
Hypocrite! Leo DiCaprio takes private jet to collect environmental award http://27x.net/692i | #tcot
deniersdoom
3.9 / 5 (22) May 21, 2016
So the moronic @antigoracle thinks Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is a cult? If deniers ever googled the word anthropogenic they would find the definition is "(chiefly of environmental pollution and pollutants) originating in human activity.". Of course anyone that has heard of global warming knows that except the rightwing fruits who frankly care little about anything except their little world.

Deniers obviously live in a small secluded world otherwise they may sing a different tune.

deniersdoom
3.8 / 5 (24) May 21, 2016
Deniers; here are some facts. Today in Phalodi in the Rajasthan state of northwestern part of India the temp broke a country record of 123.8 F. The previous national record was 123.1 that occurred in 1956. We are talking really hot. Deniers would probably kiss Obama's feet than to suffer just one day without AC in that kind of heat. The bad news for all of us, is these kinds of extremes are happening much more frequently as AGW takes hold.
Phys1
5 / 5 (13) May 22, 2016
@deniersdoom
Soon ignoracle will address the subject of your wife's underwear as he has done in the past. He is a floating turd.
deniersdoom
3.5 / 5 (13) May 22, 2016
Hi Phys1, thanks for the note on the Ignoracle. I'll be sure to mention that to him. He needs to sniff my wife's underwear more. If that is how you reason with poor gullible denier stock, he can have at it all day for all I care. All twerps need feeding.

tt2
1 / 5 (5) May 23, 2016
Seems we have a bunch of pompous "educated idiots" here, to say the least.
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (13) May 23, 2016
Deniers; here are some facts. Today in Phalodi in the Rajasthan state of northwestern part of India the temp broke a country record of 123.8 F. The previous national record was 123.1 that occurred in 1956.

LOL. Here are some facts.
So, in 1956, a NON EL NINO year, a temperature record was set. Now, 60 YEARS LATER, during the STRONGEST El NINO, a new record was set. So, the ignorant Chicken Littles, in their desperate search for their doom and gloom, imagines this is validation of man made globull warming.
Seriously Chicken Littles, I know you are incapable of opening your minds to the truth, but at least try and open your eyes.

BTW- Welcome back AGreatWhopper aka Helomenelo...
Mike_Massen
3.7 / 5 (15) May 23, 2016
BackBurner asks
Where did you hear that?
Basic Physics, taught in some high-schools (& Calculus), has to be part of Uni Engineering curriculum, ie Irrefutable basic Physics of Heat transfer !

BackBurner asks
..you have proof you really should publish
Basic & implicit already in respect of Provenance ie References for papers over a 100 yrs ago !

WHY is it all dumb deniers Ignorant of the core Physics, see 1 ?
https://en.wikipe...transfer

leads inexorably to:-
https://en.wikipe..._forcing

BackBurner says
.. likely win the Nobel in physics
Some did long ago, why do you get on a Science agglomeration site without *any* preparation, ie Physics, man up !

BackBurner, try your best, are there *any* other heat sources comparable to greenhouse gas radiative forcing power whilst our Sun has comparatively low output ?

Basic stuff
1. All atoms can radiate/absorb light
2. Everything moves all the time

Learn Physics ?
Mike_Massen
3.7 / 5 (16) May 23, 2016
antigoracle claims
.. ignorant Chicken Littles, in their desperate search for their doom and gloom, imagines this is validation of man made globull warming
Ugh ! WHY is it that you, shootist, dogbert & a small set of dwindling deniers maintain willful ignorance of basic ie Radiative Transfer (RT) ?

antigoracle been here since April 2009, learned NOTHING of simplest basic Physics, what does it tell us about your; intelligence, integrity, basic knowledge & manners too ?

antigoracle says
..I know you are incapable of opening your minds to the truth, but at least try and open your eyes
Tellus WHY you can't learn basic Physics of RT ?

What do we call those who refuse doggedly to learn basic simple Physics so they might be able to converge on essential truths & get smart ?

Key education offers immunity from propaganda !

Instead, we see the denier dumpsters all over odd places robotically making claims trying but, failing to pick edges.

so very.. .. sad :/
Zzzzzzzz
3.8 / 5 (13) May 23, 2016
Sanchez-Lugo and other scientists say ever-increasing man-made global warming is pushing temperatures higher


And this Sanchez-Lugo fellow knows it's man made how? Try asking important questions Seth, this is supposed to be a science blog.

Supposed to be a science blog or site - yes it is. That begs the question - what are YOU doing here?
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (12) May 23, 2016
Muttering Mike, Wikipedia (2 links) scholar, science charlatan and Bonobo "monkey" enthusiast, blabbers. Muttering Mike, you gave a 5 to the comment I was responding to, but just as you used deflection from repaying those you robbed, you choose to deflect here. Why don't you respond to the FACTS I presented that debunks the claim you gave that 5 to.
Have a look at the uncooked data for Jaipur and Jodhpur
http://data.giss....amp;ds=1
http://data.giss....amp;ds=0
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (12) May 23, 2016
Bet there's not a lot of deniers left in India right now. Looks like they're going to bear the brunt of AGW.
gkam
3 / 5 (10) May 23, 2016
If the current state of Human intelligence holds, they will burn more coal to power their A/C.

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

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.