• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Learning Global Warming facts and fiction

Status
Not open for further replies.
BHS1975 said:
Lets just agree to disagree. I really don’t care to change anyones mind because it wont happen in here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Then why bother even posting about it? Of course you care. And you should. Climate change and taking care of our planet should be on the minds of everyone. But that doesn't change some of the facts I mentioned before. And it also doesn't mean that ANYBODY knows how things will turn out. History is littered with predicted certainties that never became reality. That doesn't mean that some doomsday video will be wrong, but it does mean that we should approach the future with a certain degree of humility and realize that we know a mere fraction of what is actually available to know. And some of the things we "know" inevitably turn out to be wrong as we work through the expanse of time.
 
Rain Cold said:
Then why bother even posting about it? Of course you care. And you should. Climate change and taking care of our planet should be on the minds of everyone. But that doesn't change some of the facts I mentioned before. And it also doesn't mean that ANYBODY knows how things will turn out. History is littered with predicted certainties that never became reality. That doesn't mean that some doomsday video will be wrong, but it does mean that we should approach the future with a certain degree of humility and realize that we know a mere fraction of what is actually available to know. And some of the things we "know" inevitably turn out to be wrong as we work through the expanse of time.
Click to expand...

Folks can do their own research and make up their own minds. I’m done talking about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Rain Cold said:
Then why bother even posting about it? Of course you care. And you should. Climate change and taking care of our planet should be on the minds of everyone. But that doesn't change some of the facts I mentioned before. And it also doesn't mean that ANYBODY knows how things will turn out. History is littered with predicted certainties that never became reality. That doesn't mean that some doomsday video will be wrong, but it does mean that we should approach the future with a certain degree of humility and realize that we know a mere fraction of what is actually available to know. And some of the things we "know" inevitably turn out to be wrong as we work through the expanse of time.
Click to expand...
The Earth once was flat; the Earth once was the center of the universe ... and "great" scientific minds agreed on both, just 'cause it was all they could see at the time ...
 
BHS1975 said:
We can just ignore it and let nature take care of it for us by collapsing civilization and killing most of us off or we can do something about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Civilization is not going to collapse. I feel sorry for people that think Gods not in control
 
Bham 99 said:
Civilization is not going to collapse. I feel sorry for people that think Gods not in control
Click to expand...
No offense but there is no evidence of God even existing.. I dont understand why you would feel sorry for someone because they dont understand what you think is right/obvious. That's actually pretty condescending and arrogant.
 
EastAtlwx said:
No offense but there is no evidence of God even existing.. I dont understand why you would feel sorry for someone because they dont understand what you think is right/obvious. That's actually pretty condescending and arrogant.
Click to expand...

I think religion and climate change are very similar when it comes to believing. I’m guessing you don’t believe in god? If so that’s ok, more room for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Attached is the July of 2019 global temperature anomaly from the CFSv2 per WxBell. It has the global anomaly at only +0.305 C vs 1981-2010. What struck me as surprising in the map is how much of the CONUS is pretty solidly cooler than normal. So, I decided to investigate.

I looked at numerous US cities’ July, 2019, mean anomalies starting with some in SD and NE. Then when they almost all came in warmer than that CFSv2 showed, especially in the eastern halves of those states, I decided to expand my analysis to cities in states such as MN, IA, IL, AZ, CO, LA, AR, TN, MS, AL, GA, FL, and the Pacific coast states. I made sure I was comparing apples to apples such as making sure the normals were based on 1981-2010 and I converted from F to C. I found only a very small % that were close, mainly in AR (where the coolness verified pretty well) and FL (the @pcbjr (and for a short time my own) home of Gainesville did actually come in near -0.5 F). But the vast majority came in 1-2 F or even warmer than the CFSv2 map showed!

After seeing this, I found out from Radiant/Maxar that Moscow came in 3.6 cooler than its 1981-2010 normal. If you look closely at the map, Moscow is on the edge of the green, some of the coldest in the northern Hem. The edge of the green is -3 C or -5.4 F. Comparing the -5.4 F suggested by the map to the actual of -3.6 F tells me that even at Moscow it is close to 1.8 F too cool!

When you folks get a chance, check for yourself rather than take my word for it. Why is this so important? Because WxBell is essentially claiming based on this CFSv2 map that the globe was only 0.305 C warmer than the 1981-2010 globe average. But if one were to adjust for the average error in the too cool direction, the actual could very easily be more like 1 F warmer than +0.305 C. If so, that would bring the actual anomaly closer to +1 C vs 1981-2010 normals! Even if the average error in the map were only 0.5 F too cool, that would still be enough to warm the anomaly from +0.305 C to near +0.55 to +0.60 C. This is a big deal to me and should be investigated. I do not trust Weather Bell at all. I also do wonder about the methodologies of the CFSv2 to determine this map.

Any other opinions?CFSv2-global-July-2019-Wxbell.jpg
 
Last edited:
GaWx said:
Attached is the July of 2019 global temperature anomaly from the CFSv2 per WxBell. It has the global anomaly at only +0.305 C vs 1981-2010. What struck me as surprising in the map is how much of the CONUS is pretty solidly cooler than normal. So, I decided to investigate.

I looked at numerous US cities’ July, 2019, mean anomalies starting with some in SD and NE. Then when they almost all came in warmer than that CFSv2 showed, especially in the eastern halves of those states, I decided to expand my analysis to cities in states such as MN, IA, IL, AZ, CO, LA, AR, TN, MS, AL, GA, FL, and the Pacific coast states. I made sure I was comparing apples to apples such as making sure the normals were based on 1981-2010 and I converted from F to C. I found only a very small % that were close, mainly in AR (where the coolness verified pretty well) and FL (the @pcbjr (and for a short time my own) home of Gainesville did actually come in near -0.5 F). But the vast majority came in 1-2 F or even warmer than the CFSv2 map showed!

After seeing this, I found out from Radiant/Maxar that Moscow came in 3.6 cooler than its 1981-2010 normal. If you look closely at the map, Moscow is on the edge of the green, some of the coldest in the northern Hem. The edge of the green is -3 C or -5.4 F. Comparing the -5.4 F suggested by the map to the actual of -3.6 F tells me that even at Moscow it is close to 1.8 F too cool!

When you folks get a chance, check for yourself rather than take my word for it. Why is this so important? Because WxBell is essentially claiming based on this CFSv2 map that the globe was only 0.305 C warmer than the 1981-2010 globe average. But if one were to adjust for the average error in the too cool direction, the actual could very easily be more like 1 F warmer than +0.305 C. If so, that would bring the actual anomaly closer to +1 C vs 1981-2010 normals! Even if the average error in the map were only 0.5 F too cool, that would still be enough to warm the anomaly from +0.305 C to near +0.55 to +0.60 C. This is a big deal to me and should be investigated. I do not trust Weather Bell at all. I also do wonder about the methodologies of the CFSv2 to determine this map.

Any other opinions?View attachment 21431
Click to expand...
Does the CFSv2 use satellite data to smooth out urban heat effects That would be the only thing I can think of.
 
Cad Wedge NC said:
Does the CFSv2 use satellite data to smooth out urban heat effects That would be the only thing I can think of.
Click to expand...

I also was wondering if the discrepancy could be due to urban heat effects. Another thing I was wondering is if the CFSv2 averages 0Z, 6Z, 12Z, and 18Z anomalies rather than using average of high and low for each day. I bet it does. How would it even know the high and low? But if it is using 0Z, 6Z, 12Z, and 18Z, what is it using as normals?

My guess is that the urban heat effect is the key. I will investigate further.

Edit: Upon further review, which includes talking to a pro-met just now, I think that the urban heat effect (UH) is likely the key factor causing the discrepancy because satellite data is likely a main input and satellite data doesn’t overrepresent UH and airport warmth like station data does.

One concern I have regarding satellite data: don’t clouds cause inaccuracies since they can throw off ground temperatures?
 
Last edited:
In light of the previous posts, is the urban heat effect (UH) and airport effect causing GW to be exaggerated or not? We know the oceans have been warming and they’re not affected by UH. The Arctic has clearly been warming a whole bunch based on the daily maps I follow and sometimes post about. Arctic ice coverage is way down. The oceans cover about 70% of the globe. So, undoubtedly there has been significant warming globally even after taking UH/airport warming into account. But is it being overstated significantly due to UH/airports or not?
 
GaWx said:
In light of the previous posts, is the urban heat effect (UH) and airport effect causing GW to be exaggerated or not? We know the oceans have been warming and they’re not affected by UH. The Arctic has clearly been warming a whole bunch based on the daily maps I follow and sometimes post about. Arctic ice coverage is way down. The oceans cover about 70% of the globe. So, undoubtedly there has been significant warming globally even after taking UH/airport warming into account. But is it being overstated significantly due to UH/airports or not?
Click to expand...
It could be a contributing factor to the degree of warming for sure. Drive out into the country from any city. Even a small city like where I'm near (Spartanburg SC) and you can lose 5 degrees easily. However that doesn't explain the oceans. However, satellite data to measure SST have only been around what 40 years? We were in an extremely active period for sunspots from that time up until the last 10 years or so. So one would think SST would have responded with cooler by now. Unless theres more of a lag than one would think. I believe global warming is very real. The cause is up for debate.
 
Snowless & Grumpy said:
It could be a contributing factor to the degree of warming for sure. Drive out into the country from any city. Even a small city like where I'm near (Spartanburg SC) and you can lose 5 degrees easily. However that doesn't explain the oceans. However, satellite data to measure SST have only been around what 40 years? We were in an extremely active period for sunspots from that time up until the last 10 years or so. So one would think SST would have responded with cooler by now. Unless theres more of a lag than one would think. I believe global warming is very real. The cause is up for debate.
Click to expand...
The biggest concern for me is the arctic sea ice.... It doesn't look good folks. We may not surpass 2012's minimum this year, but it doesn't show any signs of recovering either. I don't think anyone can deny that there is climate change. As you mentioned, it's the cause of that change (natural variations or man-made) that's being debated.
 
Not an opinion ... every day my local paper reports the historic high and low for each day going back to when records were kept here. (Yes. Larry, it is the Sun so that has to be factored into accurate reporting ... LOL) ... Notably, the record highs generally (in fact by large measure as reported in the paper for this time of year) are in the 1894 - 1899 range ... some wierd wether happened in 1899 winter wise, and the Model-T was just a dream then ... not an editorial, just saying that folks may get caught up in what they see today as opposed to ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top