• 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.
MichaelJ said:
Here is a good overlay of the differing phases of the AMO and arctic ice melt.

View attachment 26354

While corelation does not always equal causation, this is an amazingly close comparison
Click to expand...

Look how much warmer the warm phase of the AMO is now as compared to the past and ditto with the cool phase. AGW fingerprints all over that just like ENSO.

e5d12db81b5c8dbcf58a95e709f88c48.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
UN climate report that just came out looks bleak. We got our foot slammed on the gas pedal heading toward impending catastrophe. It’s going to be interesting to watch it all unfold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
UN climate report that just came out looks bleak. We got our foot slammed on the gas pedal heading toward impending catastrophe. It’s going to be interesting to watch it all unfold.
Click to expand...


Yes, the globe has warmed considerably and continues to warm. The problem is that I don’t trust the UN at all for objectivity.
 
BHS1975 said:
UN climate report that just came out looks bleak. We got our foot slammed on the gas pedal heading toward impending catastrophe. It’s going to be interesting to watch it all unfold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Who is this "we" that you speak of? China has surpassed EU and is closing in on Japan and is still be far the largest contributor of CO2 emissions. We should start a grass roots movement to change the China representation to be more climate conscious...wait, their population doesn't really have a choice, now do they? Please stop making CO2 reduction a U.S. problem. We need to withdraw from the U.N. and kick them out of our country.
 
Fake news! The planet goes through cycles! The ice age, little ice age, it’s all cyclical. 1000 years from now, we could be in another ice age. Nobody can say with any certainty, that the earth is going to get nothing but warmer the next 100-500 years! Climate change is BS!
 
Tarheel1 said:
Fake news! The planet goes through cycles! The ice age, little ice age, it’s all cyclical. 1000 years from now, we could be in another ice age. Nobody can say with any certainty, that the earth is going to get nothing but warmer the next 100-500 years! Climate change is BS!
Click to expand...
Dude, you literally just described climate change. The extent of it attributable to man can be debated, however.
 
weatherfide said:
Who is this "we" that you speak of? China has surpassed EU and is closing in on Japan and is still be far the largest contributor of CO2 emissions. We should start a grass roots movement to change the China representation to be more climate conscious...wait, their population doesn't really have a choice, now do they? Please stop making CO2 reduction a U.S. problem. We need to withdraw from the U.N. and kick them out of our country.
Click to expand...

Tarheel just said AGW is BS so we can emit all the CO2 we want yay!!! Maybe we can hit 1000ppm by 2100. Let see how that turns out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
Tarheel just said AGW is BS so we can emit all the CO2 we want yay!!! Maybe we can hit 1000ppm by 2100. Let see how that turns out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I'll be long dead and so will you. Besides, 1000 ppm might be very good for plant growth. We need to get the discussion back on water, air and soil contamination. This is a greater threat in my opinion.
 
weatherfide said:
I'll be long dead and so will you. Besides, 1000 ppm might be very good for plant growth. We need to get the discussion back on water, air and soil contamination. This is a greater threat in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Actually high CO2 just makes plants grow faster with less nutritional value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
Web what do think this means for winter the SE?


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1764-4
Click to expand...

From your link: "Here we show that rapid warming over the tropical oceans during 1981–2018 has warped the MJO life cycle, with its residence time decreasing over the Indian Ocean by 3–4 days, and increasing over the Indo-Pacific Maritime Continent by 5–6 days."

I decided to count the days in each of phases 2-3 (Indian Ocean) and 4-5 (Maritime Continent) and compare for two ten year periods: 1981-1990 and 2009-2018 to see if the raw data agrees with these findings using this link:

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/mjo/graphics/rmm.74toRealtime.txt

Here are the annual averages:

Phase...……….Avg # days/yr 1981-1990...…Avg # days/yr 2009-2018...…………Change
2...………………......……..48...…………………………...…………...48...…………………………………..0
3...…………...……………..45...………………………………………..42...…………………………………..-3
4...…………………………..43...………………………………………..46...…………………………………..+3
5...…………………………..38...………………………………………..48...…………………………………..+10

So, 1981-1990 averaged 93 days of phases 2 and 3 vs 90 days for 2009-18.
So, 1981-1990 averaged 81 days of phases 4 and 5 vs 94 days for 2009-18.

So, the average # of the sum of phase 2 & 3 decreased by 3 days per year whereas the sum of 4 & 5 increased by 13 days per year. The largest change of these 4 phases by far was the 10 day increase per year for phase #5.

Conclusion: the raw data, indeed, seems to support the idea from the article that residence time did decrease over the Indian Ocean and increase over the Indo-Pacific Maritime Continent between early and late in 1981-2018.

******Edit: Regarding phase 5, there was not even one year amongst 1981-1990 with 48+ days. But there were 6 years of 48+ days within 2009-2018. So, it wasn't skewed heavily by one or two years.
 
Last edited:
GaWx said:
From your link: "Here we show that rapid warming over the tropical oceans during 1981–2018 has warped the MJO life cycle, with its residence time decreasing over the Indian Ocean by 3–4 days, and increasing over the Indo-Pacific Maritime Continent by 5–6 days."

I decided to count the days in each of phases 2-3 (Indian Ocean) and 4-5 (Maritime Continent) and compare for two ten year periods: 1981-1990 and 2009-2018 to see if the raw data agrees with these findings using this link:

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/mjo/graphics/rmm.74toRealtime.txt

Here are the annual averages:

Phase...……….Avg # days/yr 1981-1990...…Avg # days/yr 2009-2018...…………Change
2...………………......……..48...…………………………...…………...48...…………………………………..0
3...…………...……………..45...………………………………………..42...…………………………………..-3
4...…………………………..43...………………………………………..46...…………………………………..+3
5...…………………………..38...………………………………………..48...…………………………………..+10

So, 1981-1990 averaged 93 days of phases 2 and 3 vs 90 days for 2009-18.
So, 1981-1990 averaged 81 days of phases 2 and 3 vs 94 days for 2009-18.

So, the average # of the sum of phase 2 & 3 decreased by 3 days per year whereas the sum of 4 & 5 increased by 13 days per year. The largest change of these 4 phases by far was the 10 day increase per year for phase #5.

Conclusion: the raw data, indeed, seems to support the idea from the article that residence time did decrease over the Indian Ocean and increase over the Indo-Pacific Maritime Continent between early and late in 1981-2018.
Click to expand...

Nice work. What does being stuck in 4 and 5 longer mean for us?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
Nice work. What does being stuck in 4 and 5 longer mean for us?
Click to expand...

Thanks. It depends on the time of year. Whereas it is hard to say outside of winter because it varies a lot from season to season, the following chart suggests that would tend to skew SE winters somewhat warmer:

DJF by MJO phase.png

**Edit: Therefore, my new homework assignment to myself is to count up only DJF of those 20 years,.
 
GaWx said:
Thanks. It depends on the time of year. Whereas it is hard to say outside of winter because it varies a lot from season to season, the following chart suggests that would tend to skew SE winters somewhat warmer:

View attachment 26718

**Edit: Therefore, my new homework assignment to myself is to count up only DJF of those 20 years,.
Click to expand...

For @BHS1975 and others: here's the averages/year just for DJF:

Phase...……….Avg # days/yr 1981-1990...…Avg # days/yr 2009-2018...…………Change
2...………………......……..11...…………………………...…………...8...…………………………………….-3
3...…………...……………..13...………………………………………..9...…………………………………..-4
4...…………………………..9...………………………………………..11...…………………………………..+2
5...…………………………..7...………………………………………..14...…………………………………..+7

So, the change is clear if you just look at only DJF meaning an implication of warmer SE winters on average 2009-2018 vs 1981-1990 based solely on the changes in the MJO phase breakdown. If we just compare the cold phase 2 with the warm phase 5: phase 5 had 4 fewer days than phase 2 on average per winter during 1981-1990 vs 6 more days than phase 2 on average per winter during 2009-2018.

*Edit: Just looking at warm phase 5, during 1981-1990 the highest # of days for any one year in DJF was only 11. But during 2009-2018, the highest was 21 and 7 of the 10 years had 14+ days! So, it really looks like there is something to this research that may help explain a major reason for the SE US' warmer winters recently. Of course, it is intertwined with GW.

To paraphrase that famous phrase from the Bill Clinton campaign, “it is the MJO, stupid.”

Edit: So, the very warm phases 4-5 increased from 18% of DJF to 28% of DJF. That isn’t a small % increase.

So, perhaps the warming that would occur from GW, alone, may be increasing further by how GW may have increased the residence of the MJO in phases 4 and 5.

Does this mean that GW may be giving a double whammy to SE winters, one whammy by direct means and the other one by indirect means via the MJO?

I hope others comment on this as this would seemingly be worthy of further discussion. Let’s hope that the # of days in phases 4 & 5, especially at higher amplitude/outside circle, is not too large this winter. The good news is that the model consensus suggests that there will be none, especially at higher amplitudes, through the first half of December at least. That would be a good start.
 
Last edited:
Humanity is eventually going to have to face the fact that there are too many of us on this planet. We are reproducing at exponential rates, and at some point, there will be far too many... in fact we're already there.

Nobody wants to think about it or admit it, but we are facing a big decision. How many families are allowed to reproduce? Will it work like deer tags for hunting season?

We can blame fossil fuels and cow farts all we want, but in the end, the amount of people is the problem.
 
ForsythSnow said:
That has nothing to do with bringing up relatively recent analogs for one, and for second this is the Dec discussion, not GW related. Also as Webb mentioned, this point is not even worth bringing up because it's not even the same month. It's December which is cooler than early March anyway. Also there hasn't been that much warming and patterns cancel out that very meager degree that could or could not even have an impact.
Click to expand...

There’s been about 0.4 C of warming which is quite a bit considering the short time scale.

424a95b7a64230a691364d25b5bc5eb3.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
GaWx said:
But that 0.4C is much less than the difference in normal between late Feb and late Dec.
Click to expand...

True that but with the accelerating rate of warming due to the accelerating rate of emissions and rapid loss of ice analogs over several years old are pretty useless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
"Australia just recorded its hottest day in history, capping a year of extreme temperatures around the world"

https://www.businessinsider.com/extreme-weather-australia-records-hottest-day-in-history-2019-12
  • "Australia on Tuesday recorded its hottest day on record, with an average temperature across the country of 40.9 degrees Celsius, or 105.6 degrees Fahrenheit — passing the 2013 record of 40.3 C.
  • Meteorologists predicted temperatures would increase further in the coming days and issued a health warning for people living in the southeastern part country."
My comment: I'd change the wording to hottest day in "recorded history".
 
GaWx said:
"Australia just recorded its hottest day in history, capping a year of extreme temperatures around the world"

https://www.businessinsider.com/extreme-weather-australia-records-hottest-day-in-history-2019-12
  • "Australia on Tuesday recorded its hottest day on record, with an average temperature across the country of 40.9 degrees Celsius, or 105.6 degrees Fahrenheit — passing the 2013 record of 40.3 C.
  • Meteorologists predicted temperatures would increase further in the coming days and issued a health warning for people living in the southeastern part country."
My comment: I'd change the wording to hottest day in "recorded history".
Click to expand...
sounds like last May in our own little 40 acres, Larry ... :confused:
 
Pretty clever of the AGW believers to rename Global Warming to Climate Change. This way they can blame any unusual weather event to Climate Change whether it is more severe storms (not true by the numbers) more and stronger hurricanes (again not according to actual results), less snow or cold in selected areas (like the SE), disappearance of Arctic and Antarctic sea ice (they are still there and becoming more stable if you add error bars to the graphs). Thing is, we all should believe in Climate Change because, well Climate does change, decade to decade, century to century, millennium to millennium and epoch to epoch. They can not be proven wrong about Climate Change because they are right, it does change, only it is nature's way of balancing the processes of our planet and man has a relatively statistically miniscule effect on it over time.
 
MichaelJ said:
Pretty clever of the AGW believers to rename Global Warming to Climate Change. This way they can blame any unusual weather event to Climate Change whether it is more severe storms (not true by the numbers) more and stronger hurricanes (again not according to actual results), less snow or cold in selected areas (like the SE), disappearance of Arctic and Antarctic sea ice (they are still there and becoming more stable if you add error bars to the graphs). Thing is, we all should believe in Climate Change because, well Climate does change, decade to decade, century to century, millennium to millennium and epoch to epoch. They can not be proven wrong about Climate Change because they are right, it does change, only it is nature's way of balancing the processes of our planet and man has a relatively statistically miniscule effect on it over time.
Click to expand...
The first part of this is borderline delusional... no one is renaming anything. There interchangeable. Also, there is no “believers” belief in something requires faith. AGW has evidence to support it...
 
MichaelJ said:
Pretty clever of the AGW believers to rename Global Warming to Climate Change. This way they can blame any unusual weather event to Climate Change whether it is more severe storms (not true by the numbers) more and stronger hurricanes (again not according to actual results), less snow or cold in selected areas (like the SE), disappearance of Arctic and Antarctic sea ice (they are still there and becoming more stable if you add error bars to the graphs). Thing is, we all should believe in Climate Change because, well Climate does change, decade to decade, century to century, millennium to millennium and epoch to epoch. They can not be proven wrong about Climate Change because they are right, it does change, only it is nature's way of balancing the processes of our planet and man has a relatively statistically miniscule effect on it over time.
Click to expand...
No I think it's stupid some are screaming it as "Climate emergency". It's actually better called climate change not for the reason you stated, but because we know the climate is changing and that's all we know for certain.
 
Take off your blinders. This rapid warming is not natural and is all manmade. Natural processes would take millennia to change by the same amount. The Earth would we slowly heading to the next ice-age without us.

e5e60bf6aa6bde3a235e97ec17754e22.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
pcbjr said:
You wanna leave? I prefer being around, even without a cold December ...

BTW ... 1880 as a starting point is a micro-second in the grand scheme of things
Click to expand...

No I’m stuck in this planet just like everyone else. This civilization is going down the tubes. Just look at what happened at COP 25. Utter failure and collapse. Just keep on living in your fantasy land.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Humans have never taken care of their planet and only pillaged it for resources. Why would that suddenly change?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
No I’m stuck in this planet just like everyone else. This civilization is going down the tubes. Just look at what happened at COP 25. Utter failure and collapse. Just keep on living in your fantasy land.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
If you think civilization is about to end because the climate warms a little then you're crazy. People will move a little inland from the oceans or not care. Technology will adapt to the changes. Don't act like we are doomed and completely stupid. Tech will also help create new ways to get food so don't go on about that.
 
BHS1975 said:
The native Americans had the right idea with living in harmony and respecting nature.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
If you mean back before ... they had no internet that you use, no weather board to spout off on ... no running water, no extended expected life span ... (nor did anyone else) ... wanna go back? Glad to sell you a piece of real estate that exists right now / today that will put you right there ... bet you come back for comforts in 6 weeks ...
 
ForsythSnow said:
If you think civilization is about to end because the climate warms a little then you're crazy. People will move a little inland from the oceans or not care. Technology will adapt to the changes. Don't act like we are doomed and completely stupid. Tech will also help create new ways to get food so don't go on about that.
Click to expand...

Yeah it will eventually collapse because as weather disasters and coastal flooding increase the insurance companies will collapse (already starting to happen in California) and the economic system will collapse as the government won’t be able to pay for any more disaster relief.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top