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

doesn't matter what I believe it's what going to happen....each of us someday will be taxed on....

*called a Carbon Tax....

*the miles we drive

*how many times you flush the toilet

*using the air conditioner (all controlled by smart meters)

*all forms of lights and electricity...hair drier, PCs, etc..

*how much you water the grass

it's coming...you can't stop it

Meanwhile, GLOBALLY, we're on target for the warmest year ever.

6.5 billion people (9 billion by 2050) are not going to produce global cooling.

Human beings have never had any effect on the planet. None. Zip. Zero. That is why I always get my drinking water from the brown river that goes through the city.

No Way wrote:

Meanwhile, GLOBALLY, we're on target for the warmest year ever.

Link to supporting data please?

Thanks

hmmmm? wrote:

No Way wrote:

Meanwhile, GLOBALLY, we're on target for the warmest year ever.

Link to supporting data please?

Thanks

Athletics Illustrated wrote:

A

The Heartland Institute

I once suffered through an event at the Heartland Institute.

The keynote speaker was there to debunk global warming. He was a retired scientist from Exxon.

I then found out Exxon was the biggest donor to the Heartland Institute that year, and probably more after that.

Through enough money their way and Heartland would defend child abuse.

Fat hurts wrote:

hmmmm? wrote:

Link to supporting data please?

Thanks

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

Are you guys this clueless? No Way always forgets that he means "on record" when he is instead saying "ever." Seriously, you guys are making yourselves look bad.

Check this out and you will see that 1100 BC was much much more warm then current temps and so too were the Middle Ages:

"Throw"

Sally Vixxxxxens wrote:

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

Are you guys this clueless? No Way always forgets that he means "on record" when he is instead saying "ever." Seriously, you guys are making yourselves look bad.

Check this out and you will see that 1100 BC was much much more warm then current temps and so too were the Middle Ages:

http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

Your link points to a guy who calls himself a climatologist. But he does not have a degree in any related field. Word has it, he has a degree in law. Notice that he does not disclose his "education" on his web site.

He relies on unpublished information that he says he received from a now-defunct organization. But he won't publish the data.

Joe Binks wrote:

Wonder who was responsible for those [temperature] extremes thousands of years ago - must have been caused by those pesky Neanderthals driving around in their 4 wheelers.

As a finance guy I often shake my head at 'smart' people dense enough to interpret budget deficits as an implicit rise in spending. As though only spending can create a deficit. They're really not thinking at all about sums and algebra, just parroting a flawed analogy they were fed by a talking head unconcerned with mathematical outcomes.

Similarly, it's surreal that people would suggest (self-righteously!) that because greenhouse gas levels were once high before the industrial age, that this could disprove similar outcomes with rising greenhouse gas levels after industrialization. Both instances; increasing temps along with increasing gas levels - correlating directly with a known law of physics. Do you suppose there might be other sources of these gases than the burning of fossil fuels via engines and machines?

A climate denier in good faith might point out the uncertainty involved in the many differing variables (most of which have been schussed-out by the available science). An ideologue can only posit nonsense and general lack of understanding of the topic they're arguing.

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

Much appreciated. If we compare apples to apples from the graph at that link, looking only at January to August (and not imagining what *might* happen *if* something happens) then I get the following ranks:

2010 - 0.701 average anomaly from 20th century average

1998 - 0.695

2014 - 0.639

2005 - 0.622

2003 - 0.619

2013 - 0.584

Anything *might* happen but I would bet a *small* amount of money based on current trends that 2014 will *not* turn out to be warmer than 2010 or 1998.

A plea to No Way: Please never again say "ever" when what you are referring to means on "on the record", i.e., since 1880 which is infinitestimal considering the Earth is 4.6 BILLION years old.

NativeSon wrote:

Global Warming expert wrote:http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Snow-Spotted-in-Chicago-as-City-Prepares-for-Record-Temps-278112851.html

Walruses are having a hard time in Alaska.

Does anyone know why?

http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/01/walruses-sea-ice-melt-climate-change/

They are probably liberals

hmmmm? wrote:

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

Much appreciated. If we compare apples to apples from the graph at that link, looking only at January to August (and not imagining what *might* happen *if* something happens) then I get the following ranks:

2010 - 0.701 average anomaly from 20th century average

1998 - 0.695

2014 - 0.639

2005 - 0.622

2003 - 0.619

2013 - 0.584

Anything *might* happen but I would bet a *small* amount of money based on current trends that 2014 will *not* turn out to be warmer than 2010 or 1998.

Absolutely. There is potential for anything, even the coldest year on record, just saying it's been a warm year globally, so it doesn't really matter that it snowed in Chicago.

Fat hurts wrote:

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

Thanks for the link!

I particularly appreciated the simple bar graph they had that listed the ten warmest years (*globally*) since useful recordkeeping began (circa 1880). In ascending order, the ten warmest years out of the last ~130:

2004

2007

2009

2006

2002

2003

2013

1998

2005

2010

Noting two things: 1) Earth *has* gotten warmer since 1998; and 2) the ten warmest years on record have all been since 1997.

Now let's hear some of the "religious" rejoinders.

Sally Vixxxxxens wrote:

A plea to No Way: Please never again say "ever" when what you are referring to means on "on the record", i.e., since 1880 which is infinitestimal considering the Earth is 4.6 BILLION years old.

Sure thing. I'll do that the moment that you stop claiming the Earth hasn't warmed in how ever many years you're claiming this week. I'd also prefer that you start providing peer reviewed studies to back up your claims.

logical fallacy wrote:

...most of which have been schussed-out by the available science....

I would bet a fair amount that you meant "sussed out" there, Sparky. We're talking about figuring stuff out, not about skiing.

No Way wrote:Absolutely. There is potential for anything, even the coldest year on record...

Don't be ridiculous, hyperbole on either side of this discussion is of no benefit to anyone.

The reason I looked closely at the graph was to test the statement that 2014 is on track to be the warmest year on record. It turns out if you look at the numbers, you need to rely on the *if* part of the original statement quite heavily.

I don't suggest 2014 isn't or won't be a *warm* year relative to the instrumented record. It is, and will be. But not warmer than 2010 or 1998, and evidently not much different (at least not in a statistically meaningful way) than 2003 or 2005.

Making a bombastic argument on the basis of twisted statistics only invites (legitimate) criticism and weakens what might be reasonable arguments in the absence of statistics-inflation.