Global warming
- Thread starter Frank
- Start date
- Status
But on the bright side if we paint all the darker coloured people white we could avert some of the negative impacts of global climate change!
Can't be warmest ever, right now I'm having -11C temps, and further up north along the coast my parents have -15C!
/xxx logic.
Oi! You could bring him back using logic like that you Swedish? Malcontent! He would feel that his kind of logic has a place back amongst us!
Anyway thats chilly, heres my current stats:
Currently (at 11:00 AM)
Temperature: 20.3°C
Conditions: Fine/Dry
Humidity: 61%
Dewpoint: 12.5°C
Air Pressure: 1014.6 mb, Steady
Wind: 22.2 km/h, West
-Gusting to: 35.4 km/h
What's that in real degrees?
I love the weather right now, mostly high, clear skies, not too windy, and lots of snow making everything really pretty to look at. We've had mostly terrible winters for at least 10 years now in southwestern Sweden, last winter was the first in ages where we had real amounts of snow for any length of time and it looks like we might be in for a repeat performance this year also. That would be awesome.
As an added bonus, these harsher-and-fiercer-than-usual winters have the added benefit of causing major disruptions in swedish rail operations. Maintenance and expansion of the railway network has been neglected since the friggin' 70s, and this is now starting to make itself shown for real. Last winter was disastrous, like 40% of all trains were either cancelled or delayed because of the weather, and snow during wintertime really isn't anything that should surprise anyone in this country!
SO, the fucking conservatives in the gov't will have to divert more funds to start fixing these problems, finally, even though I know they hate it. Those shits want to spend all money on roads instead, if you can't afford (or don't want) to drive a beemer down a highway you can just fuck right off in their eyes. Conservatives hate public transportation because they confuse it with communism.
I love the weather right now, mostly high, clear skies, not too windy, and lots of snow making everything really pretty to look at. We've had mostly terrible winters for at least 10 years now in southwestern Sweden, last winter was the first in ages where we had real amounts of snow for any length of time and it looks like we might be in for a repeat performance this year also. That would be awesome.
As an added bonus, these harsher-and-fiercer-than-usual winters have the added benefit of causing major disruptions in swedish rail operations. Maintenance and expansion of the railway network has been neglected since the friggin' 70s, and this is now starting to make itself shown for real. Last winter was disastrous, like 40% of all trains were either cancelled or delayed because of the weather, and snow during wintertime really isn't anything that should surprise anyone in this country!
SO, the fucking conservatives in the gov't will have to divert more funds to start fixing these problems, finally, even though I know they hate it. Those shits want to spend all money on roads instead, if you can't afford (or don't want) to drive a beemer down a highway you can just fuck right off in their eyes. Conservatives hate public transportation because they confuse it with communism.
Global warming is Al Gore's fault!
Interesting blog entry. I also suggest interested parties take a gander at the further link contained within, for an interesting take on what happens when conservatives value power above the best interests of the people (many of whom actually elected them into office).
Interesting blog entry. I also suggest interested parties take a gander at the further link contained within, for an interesting take on what happens when conservatives value power above the best interests of the people (many of whom actually elected them into office).
Well, the average trend has been about 0.3C/62 year since the last cold period (~1600). If you factor in that 1998 was actually the warmest year yet, that means that the deviation since then has actually been downward.
Or, to put it another way: we're past the top.
Last edited by a moderator:
That's false, on a few counts.
First, 1998 isn't necessarily the warmest year yet. Of the global temperature datasets, only HadCRUT reports 1998 as the warmest year. Others report 2005 as the warmest, with 2010 looking like it will probably be the warmest.
Secondly, there is no trend analysis by which the global temperature trend has been downward since 1998. 1998 was itself an anomalously warm year, with an extremely strong El Nino event. The very simplest trend analyses average the temperature on 5-year timescales to eliminate the majority of the ENSO impact. You can see the results of this 5-year averaging here:
You can see the anomalously warm 1998 in that graph, but 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2009 have all been similarly warm, with 2010 looking to be the warmest of the bunch. What's more, if you look at the 5-year running average, the temperature just keeps going up.
So, it depends a lot on which dataset you take? And I expect the media to pick the one that shows the largest temperature increase for the previous year.
Anyway, even your graph shows that the trend has been pretty flat since 1998.
Btw, yes, I know 12 years don't make it climate. But it runs exactly as expected when you look at the graph I posted at the start of this thread. If a few decades create AGW while still being in line with that historic graph, simply because temperatures go up at a faster pace they did the few decades before it, I'll call it being alarmist, or in the case of AGW, mass-hysteria.
It isn't as cold in the winter as it was 30 years ago, but it's getting there (for the last two years), and I expect it to become even colder next year.
Let's wait for, say another 10 years and compare notes.
Anyway, even your graph shows that the trend has been pretty flat since 1998.
Btw, yes, I know 12 years don't make it climate. But it runs exactly as expected when you look at the graph I posted at the start of this thread. If a few decades create AGW while still being in line with that historic graph, simply because temperatures go up at a faster pace they did the few decades before it, I'll call it being alarmist, or in the case of AGW, mass-hysteria.
It isn't as cold in the winter as it was 30 years ago, but it's getting there (for the last two years), and I expect it to become even colder next year.
Let's wait for, say another 10 years and compare notes.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not really. There isn't much disagreement between the datasets on the overall trend. The primary disagreement is on how sensitive the different datasets are to certain types of variation. The HadCRUT analysis, for instance, is extremely sensitive to the El Nino variation that led to the high 1998 temperature. The overall trend is still basically the same.
Did you look at the red line? Not flat at all.
If the rise in temperature were the only piece of evidence in favor of AGW, I would agree with you. But it isn't. The real smoking gun isn't the rise in temperature of the surface, but rather the decrease in temperature of the stratosphere, as this is the fingerprint of greenhouse gas-induced warming.
Winter has a lot of variability. The trend is still towards warmer winters.
So, the last 20 years of strengthening evidence for AGW haven't been enough for you?Let's wait for, say another 10 years and compare notes.
Check the graph again. It takes 5 years for temperatures below 1998 to not affect the moving average. So 2002, would be the first year the average would only include temps from 1998 and up. Does seem flat, but there aren't many samples.
-FUDie
What are you onto?
The graph shows virtually straight line rise in temperature from ~1960 onwards.
What are you onto?
The graph shows virtually straight line rise in temperature from ~1960 onwards.
'Virtual straight' doesn't work for those who are 'virtual gay'
Are you dense or what? Frank was referring to temps 1998 and onward. Chalnoth didn't see the "flattening" that Frank mentioned. I pointed out that the end of the graph does appear flat, but it's only a few data points.What are you onto?
The graph shows virtually straight line rise in temperature from ~1960 onwards.
Learn to read before you inject your stupidity.
-FUDie
Um, that doesn't actually matter, because the 5-year running average continued to go up. This means that, for instance, the average of 2005-2009 was quite a bit warmer than the average from 1996-2000. In fact, if you look at the 5-year running average, 1998 hardly made any impact whatsoever. This is because it was flanked on either side by unusually cold years.
But your math is off. The five year running average includes the current year and two years before and after. This means that 1998 would no longer count starting in 2001, of and there are averages available up to 2007. Throughout that entire time that the year 1998 was not included in the averaging, not only was the running average higher than it was in 1998, but the slope was still increasing (with the exception of a tiny blip near the end that is smaller than many previous blips due to natural variation).
There simply isn't any evidence of flattening in the five-year running average.
Which is why the idea of graph flattening is nonsense at best, especially considering the strength, consistency and length of the rising trend.
- Status
Similar threads
