I’m saying that to be consistent, the people claiming that a very cold winter disproves global warming should be the ones saying that hot weather clearly supports it. I’m not saying it, the knee-jerk disbelievers should be. Or maybe they are using a temporary phenomenon as evidence only when it suits their preconceptions and political goals? Couldn’t be that.
Fair enough, but stop referring to the 97% of climate researchers as warmists. Proponents have the science to support their points, even skeptics that are scientists are beginning to run afoul of deniers when they state the obvious to the people that used to love them:
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/08/engelbeen_on_co2.php
In the case of Spencer IIRC he posted an article in a denier blog explaining that human CO2 indeed was causing warming, talk about eating their own, suffice to say deniers are not happy when they realize that the few skeptical scientists that are left are not really in favor of all the stupid denier talking points.
By “warmists” I didn’t mean just sicentists, but all people who beleive it without a real grasp of the data, because let’s face it (regardless of the truth/falsity of AGW) most people who talk about it have no real scientific clue.
Only idiots deny that humans have caused an increase in CO2 levels and that increased level of CO2 ought to put some warming “pressure” into the climate system. In the same way, only idiots talk about sea levels increasing into tens of meters or 8°C increases in 100 years.
I see, so even the 97% who are deserve that moniker…
No one can take you seriously. In the previous discussions you really could fool many by the sources you brought and positions you took back then.
OK then. If any idiots post stupid stuff like that here, then feel free to have at them!
Since they have not (in this thread) then cool off man!
Maybe, but according to these guys there is a decent probability it will be >7 degrees C in 100 years. I kind of doubt they are idiots, YMMV.
Oh, btw (on edit), I am not one of those idiots, please don’t “have at me” like Euphonious Polemic suggested. I’m just saying is all…
You can only get 7° by assuming absurdly high forcings and multipliers, but I really don’t to debate AGW here, I’d rather have rats chew at my balls; let’s go back to the OP.
I agree that some sceptics take every cold-wave as an opportunity without realising it weakens their overall arguments. Those sceptics are stupid.
It’s been cold in the SF Bay Area this summer and Northern CA had good precipitation this year.
Ice core samples clearly demonstrate the weather for a long ,long time. It is not a guess what the weather used to be. It is not about snow in Texas one time. We know well the weather is warming up.
Local cold spells and hot spells don’t give much info about trends in the weather but the worlds warmest July ever recorded can not be ignored.
[quote=“Euphonious_Polemic, post:10, topic:549597”]
The way I hear it, we will have a significant increase in “water resources” due to melting of glaciers and polar ice caps. Folks on the coasts will will have so much more water available they’'ll be swimming in it.
Or rumor has it.
How are these global avergae temperatures computed? Argentina is having its coldest winter in 200 years, and there have been hundreds of deaths in Peru from the cold.
The southern hemisphere seems to be cooling…why would that be?
How do the global warming people account for the distortions in temperature caused by environmental alterations (e.g. farmlands replaced by buildings and blacktop roads)? Or the local wind patterns changing because of landscape alteration?
I’m sure it’s more complex than this, but they basically take temperatures many locations (dozens or hundreds or thousands, I dunno) at the same time, and avergage them to an “earth” tempurature. There must be some kinds of adjustments for lack of past data. I’m sure it is possible to gather far more temperature readings from far more places today than it was 50 years ago.
The also have core samples from glaciers and the polar ice caps that provide very accurate data (on a limited set of data types) going back thousands of years.
How they draw the conclusions they do from the data they have is beyond my knowledge.
I see what you did there. 
Did you read the thread? You know, the thread about how a short-term trend can’t be uncritically extrapolated indefinitely into the future? The very thread you’re in now?
Because it’s WINTER there, right now. Of course it’s going to be cooling there. That’s kinda the whole point of winter.
However, and here’s the important part- even with the cold weather they’re experiencing right now, this is the hottest **global **average year we’ve ever seen. Their cold weather does not balance out the hot weather everyone else is seeing.
I was wondering that myself. All things being equal, the East Coast hotness could make a significant difference by itself if not balanced out by other places! Is there evidence this is the hottest year yet so far?
Whaddaya mean “account for”? That’s part of the problem, just like C02 emissions are part of the problem – it’s all anthropogenic climate change.
Look, the climate deniers haven’t had time to check the weather forecast lately, okay? They’ve been busy. You know, wife went back to school, gotta drop the kids off at Boy Scouts, prepping for fantasy football season, etc.
They’ll totally get back to you, they promise.
Congratulations on your good luck with your SHORT TERM WEATHER this year.
Too bad the LONG TERM CLIMATE of your area is going to be changing to be dryer and warmer.
Assuming this is not a whoosh, I am amused by the people who are stepping in to prove the OP’s assertion that climate change deniers have no concept of the difference between seasonal local weather patterns and long term global climate change.
Maybe I’m missing some sarcasm, but think most people accept global warming, but the main debate is “weather” it is due to people or just a natural cycle.
Venturing into GQ area here:
As far as weird color sunrises and sunsets, the Chicago area has been having orange sunrises and sunsets… quite shockingly orange. This link (picture included) from the Chicago Tribune says that the orange sunrises are due to Canadian wildfires.
Chicago is also experiencing its 15th warmest summer and one of its wettest summers as well.