Does anyone still believe in Global Warming? Have we all finally concluded that it was a hoax?

hmmmmm... wrote:

You Are What You Is wrote:Global temperatures over the past 6 months are the hottest on record.

This claim is not remotely consistent with the data shown in the graph in this earlier link:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/2014-on-track-to-be-warmest-year-on-record-18041

Your link is "year to date" through August, that is, the average anomaly for Jan-Aug. The claim from the Slate article is average anomaly for Apr-Sept.

hmmmmm... wrote:

You Are What You Is wrote:Global temperatures over the past 6 months are the hottest on record.

This claim is not remotely consistent with the data shown in the graph in this earlier link:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/2014-on-track-to-be-warmest-year-on-record-18041

You mean the link that goes to the page with this headline:

"2014 on Track to be Hottest Year on Record"

?

Dunno, seems fairly consistent.

You Are What You Is wrote:You mean the link that goes to the page with this headline:

"2014 on Track to be Hottest Year on Record"

?

Dunno, seems fairly consistent.

Yes that's exactly what I mean. I was not simply reading the headline, however, I was looking at the details.

The graph shows that every month in 2014 from January to August was cooler than those same months in 1998 and 2010. So how is it then possible that the past 6 months were the hottest on record (and in the most recent link it specifically mentions several months this year that were supposedly the hottest ever)?

One of these articles has the facts wrong. Which one?

The graph isn't the temperature anomaly for just that month, it is the average anomaly from the beginning of the year through that month.

hmmmmm... wrote:

You Are What You Is wrote:You mean the link that goes to the page with this headline:

"2014 on Track to be Hottest Year on Record"

?

Dunno, seems fairly consistent.

Yes that's exactly what I mean. I was not simply reading the headline, however, I was looking at the details.

The graph shows that every month in 2014 from January to August was cooler than those same months in 1998 and 2010. So how is it then possible that the past 6 months were the hottest on record (and in the most recent link it specifically mentions several months this year that were supposedly the hottest ever)?

One of these articles has the facts wrong. Which one?

Do you not understand that "on the record" is meaningless? "On the record" means since about 1880 so you are talking about 135 years out of 4.6 BILLION. To mention "on the record" is the most ridiculous thing for anyone to mention.

It is more meaningful than looking at two random 365 day periods and comparing them to each other.

Sally V wrote:

Do you not understand that "on the record" is meaningless?

"On the record" means since about 1880 . . .

Own goal

Citizen Runner wrote:The graph isn't the temperature anomaly for just that month, it is the average anomaly from the beginning of the year through that month.

Ahhhh.... good catch, thanks

Fat hurts wrote:

The thing that is hard to believe is your contention that AGW is all a hoax. Real life is not like the X-Files. There is no global scientific conspiracy.

How is it that all the scientists from all over the world are able to keep the conspiracy secret? Maybe a secret handshake?

Don't you think at least a few would be out there exposing the lies? Where is their Edward Snowden?

Why would a tenured scientist be worried about telling the truth? He could make millions off a book deal alone.

The truth is out there. But you don't need Mulder and Scully to find it. It's right there in the overwhelming scientific consensus.

Yes, the overwhelming scientific consensus. Enlighten yourself before buying into anything wholesale..

Are you kidding? Not only did we reach record temp last year but a cold winter is also a side effect of high carbon emissions which is why we are projected to have an even colder winter this year. People who think that there is no such things are just in denial at the destruction of our planet. There is more scientific evidence backing up global warming and climate change then you clearly care to actually look for.

Lakes Superior and Lake Michigan are currently six degrees colder than last year. If the water continues to remain colder than normal, it could have an impact on Michigan’s winter in several ways.

The average water temperature on Lake Superior and Lake Michigan is currently colder than both last year and the long-term average.Mark Torregrossa

Currently Lake Superior has an average surface water temperature of 47.6 degrees. Last year on this date Lake Superior was at 53.7 degrees. The long-term average water temperature on Lake Superior for October 11 is 51.1 degrees.

So Lake Superior is 6.1 degrees colder than this time last year, and 3.5 degrees colder than normal.

Lake Michigan has an average surface water temperature of 56.0 degrees, while last year at this time it was 62.1 degrees. The long-term average water temperature on Lake Michigan for October 11 is 58.4 degrees.

Lake Michigan is also 6.1 degrees colder than this time last year, and 2.4 degrees colder than average.

Lake Huron is 5 degrees colder than last year, and only 1.5 degrees colder than normal.

Citizen Runner wrote:The graph isn't the temperature anomaly for just that month, it is the average anomaly from the beginning of the year through that month.

OK, so I went and had a closer look at actual data. I downloaded all the monthly HADCRUT4 (NH+SH/2) data and ran some quick stats. Here are some statistics pulled from those data:

Jan 2014 - 6th warmest January on record (since 1850)

Feb - 20th warmest

Mar - 6th

Apr - 2nd

May - 1st

Jun - 1st

Jul - 4th

Aug - 1st

Sep - 1st

So, four months so far this year have been warmest since 1850. If I take a 6 month running average, the period ending September 2014, we do get the six months ending September, 2014 as the warmest 6 month period since 1850. Mind you the 6 months up to August were "only" the 10th warmest on record (where "warmest' is in relation to all six month periods since 1850), and all the others were in 2007, 2010 and 1998. Here are the "warmest" 6 month periods since 1850:

4 2010 0.5835

5 1998 0.586833333

5 2010 0.5905

6 1998 0.6005

8 1998 0.605

8 2014 0.605166667

5 2007 0.6075

6 2010 0.609666667

1 2007 0.611

8 2010 0.613833333

2 2007 0.616

7 2010 0.6195

3 2007 0.62

4 2007 0.624

7 1998 0.631666667

8 2014 0.642166667

First column is the month (e.g. 4 = April)

And sorry, third column is the six month running average temperature anomaly (above 1961-1990 average)

Sally V wrote:

Do you not understand that "on the record" is meaningless? "On the record" means since about 1880 so you are talking about 135 years out of 4.6 BILLION. To mention "on the record" is the most ridiculous thing for anyone to mention.

This shows that you don't even understand, at its most fundamental level, what it is you are trying to argue against. Climate change explicitly deals with what our impact has been since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and what it will be going forward. We know that the Earth's surface has been much colder and much warmer during its history due to natural variability, but this information is mostly irrelevant to anthropogenic climate change. However, understanding climate prior to the Industrial Revolution is useful as we prepare for what to expect given an anticipated temperature change.

arctic_circler wrote:

Sally V wrote:

Do you not understand that "on the record" is meaningless? "On the record" means since about 1880 so you are talking about 135 years out of 4.6 BILLION. To mention "on the record" is the most ridiculous thing for anyone to mention.

This shows that you don't even understand, at its most fundamental level, what it is you are trying to argue against. Climate change explicitly deals with what our impact has been since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and what it will be going forward. We know that the Earth's surface has been much colder and much warmer during its history due to natural variability, but this information is mostly irrelevant to anthropogenic climate change. However, understanding climate prior to the Industrial Revolution is useful as we prepare for what to expect given an anticipated temperature change.

I only bring up the "on record" issue because Global Warming Alarmists continue to claim that the most recent years are the hottest "on record" i.e., ever. I understand that the Earth has been much warmer and much colder than the present but Global Alarmists seem to forget this.

The dinosaurs are unlikey to forget this....if they had survived their climate change....

There's too much fixation on whether 2014 is the hottest year ever. The long term (200 year) trend is up. The trend since 1900 is about 0.16C/decade, so it would logically follow that eventually we would see a new global high. The question whether this is natural or manmade.

The IPCC has failed to prove their case. Consider this.

IPCC 1990 predicted 0.2 to 0.5 degrees C rise per decade.

Didn't happen.

IPCC 1990 predicted a rise of 1.8 C by 2030, i.e., over the next 40 years. So far, 24 years into this forecast, temperature has risen only 0.3 C, which projects to only 0.5 C by 2030, roughly the same as the rise rate in the first half of the 20th Century when CO2 was not a problem.

IPCC 4 (2007) predicted 0.2 C rise per decade for the first few decades of the 21st Century.

Instead, it's been flat.

IPCC 5 lowers the forecast to 0.11 to 0.41 C/decade.

The natural warming from 1910 to 1940 was about 0.11 C/decade.

Yes, it's getting warmer, but the world has been warming naturally for over 200 years. The IPCC has failed to make a convincing case for Catastrophic AGW. Judith Curry provides a good summary on her website here.

http://judithcurry.com/2014/01/06/ipcc-ar5-weakens-the-case-for-agw/

Sally V wrote:

I only bring up the "on record" issue because Global Warming Alarmists continue to claim that the most recent years are the hottest "on record" i.e., ever. I understand that the Earth has been much warmer and much colder than the present but Global Alarmists seem to forget this.

Strangely enough, I understand exactly what "on record" means. And, you know, I bet a lot of other "Global Alarmists" do, too. It means that the only time period for which we have fairly reliable data: the last 100+ years. (Fortunately, that's also the period that interests/alarms us most.) Most of us also seem to understand that Earth has had significantly warmer and colder periods in its past.

And you know what? Many who post on this site say "on record" PRECISELY to make it clear that we're NOT talking about the whole history of Earth--of which H. sapiens sapiens has only been present for ~100-200k years; and agriculture only for ~10k years; and major modern cities (for anything approaching their current populations) only a few hundred years. Actually, MANY educated people understand what "the record" means, in the context of reliable *global* temps; using the phrase is being informative, not sneaky.

Sally V wrote:

I only bring up the "on record" issue because Global Warming Alarmists continue to claim that the most recent years are the hottest "on record" i.e., ever.

No it's quite clear to people that "on record" does not mean "ever". You are providing more proof that the climate scientists are more intelligent than you.