# I'm sick of this Global Warming! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 16, 2013, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440 "2013-08-16T18:57:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 175
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3481 "2014-12-14T23:46:57Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > So you agree it’s pretty idiotic to claim that “the drought is over” based on a Scientific American article . . . No, I think it’s pretty idiotic to claim the drought is over, period. We’ve had two short rainstorms. The reservoirs are still nearly empty, and the snowpack, while getting a nice little boost, is still below normal levels. The people who are saying “the drought is over” aren’t basing it on a Scientific American article. They’re basing it on two days of rain. And that’s pretty idiotic. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3482 "2014-12-14T23:55:29Z")
It’s a shame of course that an actual scientific topic gets shut down, but let’s face it, some people don’t want scientific discussions to happen. > [@](#): > > Again, he is implying that he knows more than what the experts from NASA GISS and others report. [GIGO](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17182709&postcount=705) I’m not “implying” that, I am straight up claiming it. In regards to the trends, and the reason for “the pause”, you and everyone else reading the topic also now know more than they do. > [@](#): > > So they want to say different, but they’re being stifled … somehow, is that what you’re saying? [MrDibble](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17182725&postcount=708) > [@](#): > > I clearly explained that the NH winters seem to be so cold, that they actually cause the entire world to seem like it has “paused” in warming. Because of the way “science” adds the global averages together to get an annual global mean, it’s creating an illusion that there is a pause. In reality, if you look at just the NH warm season trend, the warming doesn’t seem to have paused at all. > [FX](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17182687&postcount=703) Now six months later, there is a new paper that is saying what I was saying. > [@](#): > > While the period associated with the recent slowdown of global warming, 1998-2013, is too brief to estimate trends reliably, cooling was evident in NH warm and cold anomalies during January and February while other months in the NH continued to warm. [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL062323/abstract](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL062323/abstract) Of course we are not constrained by the long time period for papers to be accepted, nor do we have to pay 48 bucks to read here. [1998-2014 Jan](http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/nmaps.cgi?sat=4&sst=3&type=trends&mean_gen=01&year1=1998&year2=2014&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=250&pol=rob) [1998-2014 Feb](http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/nmaps.cgi?sat=4&sst=3&type=trends&mean_gen=02&year1=1998&year2=2014&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=250&pol=rob) [1998-2014 spring](http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/nmaps.cgi?sat=4&sst=3&type=trends&mean_gen=0303&year1=1998&year2=2014&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=250&pol=rob) [1998-2014 summer](http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/nmaps.cgi?sat=4&sst=3&type=trends&mean_gen=0603&year1=1998&year2=2014&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=250&pol=rob) Yep, same thing is still evident. Only difference in regards to here is now GIGO and company can’t keep repeating their idiot claim that the experts aren’t saying it. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3483 "2014-12-14T23:59:43Z")
The amusing thing is how much the troll is bothered by people pointing out he’s a troll: he can’t stop referring to it. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3484 "2014-12-15T00:00:15Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > And that’s pretty idiotic. Well to be fair, in the areas where they got 14 inches of rain, the drought is over for them. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3485 "2014-12-15T23:49:36Z")
Sounds like the NH is warming more than you would like to admit: > [@](#): > > Average temperatures are increasing faster in Alaska than they are in the rest of the United States, warming 3.4 degrees Fahrenheit in the last 50 years. The higher temperatures are causing the subsurface layer of permanently frozen soil typically found in the Arctic to thaw in some areas. > **[As The Planet Warms, A Remote Alaskan Town Shows Just How Unprepared We Are](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/shishmaref-alaska-climate-change-relocation_n_6296516)** > > As The Planet Warms, A Remote Alaskan Town Shows Just How Unprepared We Are ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2014, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3486 "2014-12-16T01:02:22Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > Well to be fair, in the areas where they got 14 inches of rain, the drought is over for them. So much fail here. It’s astounding how much a troll thinks he knows about meteorology and how much he can get wrong when you can google real facts. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2014, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3487 "2014-12-16T03:35:11Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > Well to be fair, in the areas where they got 14 inches of rain, the drought is over for them. Even if 13.85 inches ran off into the ocean? ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2014, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3488 "2014-12-16T10:38:02Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Even if 13.85 inches ran off into the ocean? I spent only 12 seconds on that story, but even I grasped the point that runoff water is useless. Are you telling me even that thought process was beyond the troll’s capability? I get an error message on all the troll’s posts and only get to read him when he’s quoted. In fairness to him, I hope someone quotes him [del]when[/del] if he ever says anything intelligent. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2014, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3489 "2014-12-16T14:37:51Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Sorry I got here late. Can someone sum this up for me? It’s actually not possible to “sum up” at this point, the thread wandered a lot, or rather meandered, but the key issue is still simple enough to explain in a paragraph. Several people, obviously intelligent people, grasped it right away. Basic global warming theory predicts warming from an enhanced greenhouse effect will cause changes beyond natural variation, changes which we can measure, so we can know that some of the climate change observed is from human activities. This is important because we know climate changes, based on past changes, so detecting the enhanced greenhouse signal matters. Greenhouse theory (CO2 theory) states that increasing CO2 will result in an increase in LW (long wave) energy effecting the troposphere, surface and ocean temperatures. Physics calculates that because the greenhouse effect is always happening, an increase (enhanced greenhouse effect) should result in warmer night time lows, rather than increased daytime highs. That warming will be greatest over land, and greater in winter than summer. That warming will be most evident at high latitudes, rather than at the equator. And that the lower troposphere should warm more than the surface. Because the NH has much more land, it is expected to warm more than the SH. (the oceans will warm much slower, due to the huge thermal inertia) That’s the most basic part of the theory. But just as important is expected feedbacks from warming, most notable is decreasing sea ice, glaciers and snow cover, all of which should result in greatly increased warming due to LW (long wave) heating, as the surface changes albedo, and open water replaces ice. And of course an increase in water vapor (wv), due to warming in general, which is expected to greatly increase the greenhouse effect, since wv is the most important greenhouse forcing. ([scientific source](http://www-ramanathan.ucsd.edu/files/brt18.pdf)) OK that was way more than a paragraph. We could discuss the other thread about global warming going on, but of course, there isn’t one at the moment. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > I participated in one of them and it was overwhelmed with **GIGO** spewing a bunch of cut and paste stuff and name calling. sad but true, and it’s partly due to his absence here, that this thread is so awesome. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > But, FX’s point in this thread, that colder winters were not previously predicted but rather the opposite was predicted, is a reasonable data point to conclude that the climate scientists models are not reliable at this point. of course, and that simple point is easy to grasp, if you are at all scientific. It’s a basic issue. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > Do you feel that the models are making accurate predictions and are reliable? Of course not. In fact, they are so far off at this point, efforts are being made to change them. It’s not like real climate scientist want a model that doesn’t work. The real problem is politics, which has munged the scientific process. > [@RaftPeople](#): > > Do you realize that was in response to the poster stating that because Atlanta had a record hot day (or two or three or whatever) that it supported global warming? If there are record cold days, doesn’t that imply global cooling if we are using such simplistic metrics? That’s one way of looking at it, but nature isn’t simplistic, no matter how much we wish it were. Understanding how weather works, and how climate changes, it’s one of the largest problems mankind has ever tried to solve. If anyone had a climate model that actually worked, we would be discussing that, rather than this. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2014, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3490 "2014-12-16T14:53:33Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Even if 13.85 inches ran off into the ocean? Of course not, don’t be obtuse. The [actual data](http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/resapp/resDetailOrig.action?resid=SHA) is far more fun than ignorance. California isn’t some mystery when it comes to the water supplies, nor is the amount of snowpack and reservoir retention that hard to find. The topography of the region means a lot, and where the stream feed an artifical lake or three, 14 inches of rain actually matters. [That the rain hasn’t stopped](http://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=shasta)matters even more. (since that link is current conditions, it won’t make any sense later. In essence it has rained or snowed in the Mt Shasta region for [13 out of the last 16 days](http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KRDD/2014/12/16/MonthlyHistory.html)) Rainfall totals in that region are now actually above the yearly average. Of course the long term deficit means technically it’s still drought, but in the real world, it’s wet. (because the official data is from Redding, Shasta rainfall totals are not shown on the WU monthly/yearly chart) ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2014, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3491 "2014-12-16T15:01:32Z")
(missed the edit window) But even Redding shows the situation well enough. Average rain since July 1 10.31inches Current data, 16.74 inches Average for December 2.82 inches So far this month 7.44 inches The data for lake Shasta shows several things, all of them good at this point. Of course California isn’t one monolithic state when it comes to water. But for some areas, the drought has broken at last. Sorry global warmers, but I’m sure you will find something else to use. I know how heartbreaking it is when things go well. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2014, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3492 "2014-12-16T21:12:33Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > . . . Of course the long term deficit means technically it’s still drought . . . Thank you. > [@](#): > > . . . but in the real world, it’s wet. There are times when you can get away with using a term loosely. There are other times you can’t. I remember, back in June of 2009, it was officially announced that the recession was over. A lot of people sneered at that, because the economy was still hurting badly, and huge numbers of people were out of work. But, by the technical definition of the word, yes, the recession did end then. Informally, loosely, carelessly speaking (“O.J. Simpson murdered his wife”) the drought is over…at this moment…because it’s raining right now. But the drought condition is not over. Reservoirs are low, the rivers are low, the snowpack is low, agriculture is still desperately thirsty, and cities are still engaging in necessary conservation measures. At very least, if you’re going to use language loosely and informally, without regard for technical definitions, you ought to avow this openly. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2014, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3493 "2014-12-16T21:14:27Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > . . . Sorry global warmers, but I’m sure you will find something else to use. I know how heartbreaking it is when things go well. This, of course, clearly indicates that you’re making it a personal issue, and have no respect or regard for real science. The only limit to your cherry-picking is your academic incompetence. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2014, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3494 "2014-12-17T00:29:31Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > At very least, if you’re going to use language loosely and informally, without regard for technical definitions, you ought to avow this openly. Now now, it’s obvious you understand sarcasm, you use it yourself. So don’t play the pedant now. > [@Trinopus](#): > > One cool weekend in one city is enough to void a half century of worldwide temperature trends… You see? We understand you actually stated the opposite of what you really think, it’s a rhetorical device. It would be pedantic to take you to task for saying something stupid, because we know what you meant by it isn’t what you actually said. Adults do these things, they often use language for an emotional effect, like when somebody talks about “the arctic death spiral”, they are trying to sway an audience, they don’t really mean the arctic region is going to die, they are trying to create anxiety, by talking in a manner that isn’t scientific at all. > [@Trinopus](#): > > This, of course, clearly indicates that you’re making it a personal issue, and have no respect or regard for real science. Nah, just saying the same stupid shit warmists say, rather than debate the science. It is the Pit after all. Of course if you responded to the scientific data, we could talk like adults do. For example, I find the CFS data amazing, looking at Whiskeytown, Shasta and Sonoma, you can actually see how much water came in to the reservoirs from the recent rain. [Sonoma](http://www.scwa.ca.gov/current-water-supply-levels/) has already reached higher than last year at this time. And that is great news. [Whiskeytown](http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/queryDaily?WHI) has had 15 inches since Dec 2, and the inflow data shows it. Dec 1st the inflow was just 153, but after the epic rain the inflow jumped to 7220, and the levels reflect the rainfall there. Same for [Shasta](http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/queryDaily?SHA), with the inflow CFS at 4205 on Dec 1st, then jumping to 66542 on Dec 11th. They got 14 inches of rain! That is fucking huge. And the water levels show this clearly. Of course the rest of the state didn’t get that much, but drought is also not a monolithic event. As always, I find facts more interesting than fear mongering or rhetoric. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2014, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3495 "2014-12-17T00:36:18Z")
[The monthly rainfall totals so far](http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/precip/DLYPCP)are amazing. A reasonable person can understand why somebody in FOUR TREES would think the drought broke, after 20 inches of rain there already this month. BRANDY CREEK, over 28 inches of rain. BUCKS LAKE, over 18 inches already. These are huge numbers. STRAWBERRY VALLEY, 17.7 inches, the list is long. Certainly California is still way below average, but some places there are above average now. Weather is like that. Hell, STRAWBERRY VALLEY [averages 7.57 inches of rain for the entire winter](http://average-rainfall.findthebest.com/l/24998/Strawberry-Valley-California). And 6.43 for the fall. It received more rain already this month than it usually does in 6 months. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2014, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3496 "2014-12-17T00:42:07Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > we could talk like adults do. That’s a novel approach. If you decide to try it out, let me know how it goes. . ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2014, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3497 "2014-12-17T00:42:52Z")
Speaking of California, it’s another situation where no matter what happens, somebody will try and say it’s due to global warming. The drought is global warming. If the drought breaks with heavy rain, that is global warming. Everything except “nice weather” is global warming, which is just insanity talking. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2014, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3498 "2014-12-17T00:45:34Z")
> [@andros](#): > > That’s a novel approach. If you decide to try it out, let me know how it goes. > . Try reading sometime. Like here > [@FXMastermind](#): > > Why is it important to look at long term data? Long trends? See? (tl;dr - complicated NH monthly mean data and shit like that) Why is it important to look at long term data? Long trends? Because CO2 theory (AGW) predicts an increase in the heat energy of the atmosphere and oceans. This is, in the simplest form, the global warming theory based on an increase of CO2. How can we know if that theorized event has happened? By checking the data. I will now show you, very simply, why the CO2 theory has been proven wrong, in an easy to understand way. (there will be no skepticalscience link fro GIGOGallop to counter this, as they don’t even know about this) Here is the global anomaly for January, since 1940. [http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1940/every:12](http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1940/every:12) That is the coldest month in the NH, which theory predicts will show the most warming from CO2. This is an absolute prediction of CO2 theory. This is due to the nature of CO2 warming, it’s physics. The raw data shows the problem very clearly. 1942 0.215 - this was the warmest winter in that period, though several others were quite close. [Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs](http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1930/every:12/to:1960) With 1958 0.224 but it wouldn’t be fair to use the highest value, 1942 will work just fine. Remember these numbers represent the global average above the global mean using the period Jan 1961 - Dec 1990 (30 years) [http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/](http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/) So there is the January anomaly, it represents the global heat balance. 1942 0.215 We see the cooling period until 1976, followed by warming. **1976 -0.266** 1977 -0.134 1978 0.014 1979 -0.029 1980 0.106 1981 0.26 1982 -0.028 1983 0.386 1984 0.088 1985 0.019 1986 0.115 1987 0.118 1988 0.348 1989 -0.002 1990 0.198 1991 0.229 1992 0.282 1993 0.217 1994 0.157 1995 0.359 1996 0.065 1997 0.15 1998 0.492 1999 0.37 2000 0.206 2001 0.324 2002 0.598 2003 0.525 2004 0.504 2005 0.461 2006 0.319 2007 0.61 2008 0.053 2009 0.387 2010 0.489 2011 0.194 2012 0.206 **2013 0.39** 1942 **0.215** Right there you can see, in black and white, what the graph clearly shows. The heat balance change for January, in the last 70 years. The astute observer might say, it’s not fair to use the global average in regards to NH winters, and you would be correct. Since the SH hasn’t warmed like the NH, we should look at just NH winters. Here is the warm period (before current warming) [http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3nh/from:1930/every:12/to:1960](http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3nh/from:1930/every:12/to:1960) Note the warm winter of 1958 0.487 but that winter of 42 is now not that high. But 44 sure as hell is. 1944 0.572 When comparing the NH heat balance of then to now, it’s quite fair to look at the difference. The warmists will of course cry foul, and want the coldest periods then compared to the warmist year now. But that isn’t how heat balance works. If the heat balance in 44 was 0.572, then in 58 0.487, you have to look at how much heat has accumulated since then. 1944 0.572 1945 -0.045 1946 0.273 1947 -0.349 1948 0.305 1949 0.256 1950 -0.541 1951 -0.366 1952 0.176 1953 0.127 1954 -0.351 1955 0.241 1956 -0.163 1957 -0.285 1958 0.487 1959 0.174 1960 -0.036 1961 0.131 1962 0.173 1963 0.056 1964 0.066 1965 -0.104 1966 -0.094 1967 -0.172 1968 -0.304 1969 -0.544 1970 -0.014 1971 -0.019 1972 -0.676 1973 0.069 1974 -0.471 1975 0.064 1976 -0.073 1977 -0.436 1978 0.088 1979 -0.08 1980 0.068 1981 0.507 1982 -0.131 1983 0.44 1984 0.116 1985 -0.064 1986 0.238 1987 0.097 1988 0.384 1989 -0.032 1990 0.248 1991 0.337 1992 0.436 1993 0.268 1994 0.217 1995 0.536 1996 0.07 1997 0.232 1998 0.499 1999 0.47 2000 0.272 2001 0.376 2002 0.773 2003 0.611 2004 0.649 2005 0.589 2006 0.317 2007 0.924 2008 0.053 2009 0.495 2010 0.531 2011 0.142 2012 0.297 **1944 0.572** There is your global warming in the last 69 years. [http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/](http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/) You can use other data sets, maybe the well liked CRUtemp4 (which shows the past as cooler) [http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/data/download.html](http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/data/download.html) 1944 0.656 2012 0.453 There is the current accumulated heat in the last 68 years. Comparing the NH winter heat balance. That is global warming. Haha of course that is completely unfair. We need to compare more average winter anomalies. 2008 0.216 1946 0.292 Actually the whole point is why averages matter. And why using the short time period since the last cool period is bullshit for showing drastic warming. Comparing 1932 with 1932 0.376 2011 0.332 (Hadcrut4) or using Hasdcrut3 to compare 1932 0.326 2012 0.314 makes it seem like there has been no gain in heat for 80 years. When it just means there was no increase in the heat balance between those years. The real global warming shows up in spring and summer. And make no mistake, there is warming. here is summer (June) anomalies 1932.5 -0.037 2012.5 0.675 No doubt if you look at NH summers, there has been a lot of warming. The thing is, that isn’t what CO2 theory predicted, predicts, or explains. Which is why GIGO and company are so funny. They don’t know this. Neither does SS. So why is there such alarm in some minds? They take the coldest temperatures, like winter 72, and compare it to the hottest summer temperatures. 1972 -0.639 2007 0.904 Which obviously shows almost 1.5 degrees warming. In a very short time. Everybody panic. If you did that trick, took the warmest reading in the 40s and compared it to the coldest in 2008, you could show global cooling instead. 1944 0.552 2008 0.084 [http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/](http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/) But that is a bullshit trick. The thing to take away is that if you compare the heat balance now with then, there hasn’t been much CO2 warming at all. This does not mean no warming, but it certainly means the theory is wrong. Not that CO2 doesn’t act as a greenhouse gas, that isn’t what is wrong. It’s the predictions of how we will see warming based on that forcing. That is what is obviously wrong. We will get to why in another post. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2014, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3499 "2014-12-17T00:55:43Z")
Short version, (haha, there actually isn’t one) is that the expected warming from CO2 depends very much on wintertime warming, and an increasing feedback loop from that warming. Less ice, less snow, more open water, more bare rocks and vegetation, leading to a warming loop, but from sw radiation, not lw. The models that predict drastic warming show that it is the increase in sw energy that should drive the warming, the small amount of lw forcing isn’t nearly enough to make it happen. [source](http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2014/global-warming-increased-solar-radiation-1110) This might explain why we do not observe the expected warming, and especially why we are observing a NH cooling effect for Jan/Feb, **which is not what was predicted by the theory** , or the current models. I tried to explain that wv is a forcing, but such science fell on deaf ears of course. Snow, ice and clouds are all far more powerful than the small amount of forcing from CO2, especially in winter in the NH. The increasing NH snow cover, along with the cooling it causes, may actually be the reason for the pause. And (no sarcasm at all) this might be due to global warming. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2014, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/3500 "2014-12-17T07:07:39Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > No, I think it’s pretty idiotic to claim the drought is over, period. So you agree that the specific example I found (which is the only example in the top twitter search results) is idiotic? A simple yes or no will do. > [@](#): > > The people who are saying “the drought is over” aren’t basing it on a Scientific American article. They’re basing it on two days of rain. False. The only example in the top results of the twitter search I did cited a Scientific American article. Maybe there are other examples out there, but that’s what I found with a Twitter search. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440.md?page=174) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440.md?page=176)