11th Straight Month of Record Warm Global Temperatures

Actually, neutral parties ask many questions. The most useful compendium of the answers they have found to date can be found here:

Here's why I think John Q. Public feels it's okay to weigh in with uneducated opinions on some sciences, but not all:

A lot of people never took physics (or advanced math), not even in high school; but they've seen pictures of physics equations (e.g.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/b4/df/c8/b4dfc89b60e3858c6387228d0d2b39c0.jpg

), and they know that it's beyond them. So they hold off on that, or at least restrict themselves to philosophical (rather than scientific) objections to things like big bang theory.

[Similarly, people generally don't have much to say about chemistry: many took it in high school, but not too many in college--and, again, people can see that it's beyond their ken:

http://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2009/39/aa12269-09/img172.png

]

But biology, on the other hand? Well, shoot, almost everybody took it in high school, and lots took it in college (and some even got high grades). They've seen plants and animals all their lives, and even looked through microscopes; so regardless of the *actual* complexity of the topics, they feel entitled to "contrarian" positions on things like evolution, and the safety/efficacy of vaccines (especially because almost everyone's had experience with those ow-y shots).

And weather? Come on! Let's skip the fact that an education in climate science comprises coursework in calculus/analytic geometry, physics, statistics, chemistry, probability, geography, geology--even chaos theory--everybody has looked at a thermometer! So people feel their opinions on the subject--even if they don't have the scientific background--are entitled to just as much respect as the opinions of those who have had the education, and have made climate science their life's work.

Hint for those uneducated in the requisite fields: your opinions of, say, Schroedinger's Equation (physics) and evolutionary theory (biology) do NOT merit respect.

And neither do your opinions about climate science.

ghar wrote:

Hint for those uneducated in the requisite fields: your opinions of, say, Schroedinger's Equation (physics) and evolutionary theory (biology) do NOT merit respect.

And neither do your opinions about climate science.

No problem. My comments weren't addressed to you.

fisky wrote:

ghar wrote:

Hint for those uneducated in the requisite fields: your opinions of, say, Schroedinger's Equation (physics) and evolutionary theory (biology) do NOT merit respect.

And neither do your opinions about climate science.

No problem. My comments weren't addressed to you.

Equally no problem. I just clicked on any random previous post (so I could post), rather than going back to the OP. My sentiments were not specifically directed at you!

welp...sure beats an ice age.

ghar wrote:

Hint for those uneducated in the requisite fields: your opinions of, say, Schroedinger's Equation (physics) and evolutionary theory (biology) do NOT merit respect.

And neither do your opinions about climate science.

But Sarah Palin's opinion counts as much as Bill Nye's.

Make America Great Again wrote:

ghar wrote:

Hint for those uneducated in the requisite fields: your opinions of, say, Schroedinger's Equation (physics) and evolutionary theory (biology) do NOT merit respect.

And neither do your opinions about climate science.

But Sarah Palin's opinion counts as much as Bill Nye's.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/04/18/sarah-palin-is-right-bill-nye-is-no-scientist/

Just bringing up Sarah Palin's name in defense of your argument is enough to make your argument moot.

One of the least intelligent public figures in recent memory.

Seriously mate? wrote:

welp...sure beats an ice age.

Also undoubtedly better than the current climate on mercury. So you've really got a good point there.

The streak of monthly records in the NOAA analysis is alive through June:

http://www.noaa.gov/june-marks-14-consecutive-months-record-heat-globe

This is likely the end of excursions so far above trend as we move out of the El Nino phase.

;) wrote:

Make America Great Again wrote:

But Sarah Palin's opinion counts as much as Bill Nye's.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/04/18/sarah-palin-is-right-bill-nye-is-no-scientist/

Just bringing up Sarah Palin's name in defense of your argument is enough to make your argument moot.

One of the least intelligent public figures in recent memory.

I'm hoping he was being sarcastic...

Are you whacko Global Warming Nut jobs still at this? LOL. No one in the world still believes in your crap. Give it a rest you Losers.

This will be the third straight year of record temperatures.

Sallly V wrote:

Are you whacko Global Warming Nut jobs still at this? LOL. No one in the world still believes in your crap. Give it a rest you Losers.

+10,000,000

Excellent argument!

Streak is alive for 15th straight month: http://www.noaa.gov/news/july-was-hottest-month-on-record-for-globe

It's a Conspiracy! wrote:

Sallly V wrote:

Are you whacko Global Warming Nut jobs still at this? LOL. No one in the world still believes in your crap. Give it a rest you Losers.

+10,000,000

Excellent argument!

Hey, what's the big idea? That's supposed to be my line!

August marks 16th straight monthly record high per NOAA dataset:

http://www.noaa.gov/news/august-marks-ongoing-trend-of-record-breaking-heat-for-globe

For those playing at home, September is on track to extend the streak. October 2015 record is unlikely to be topped this year so streak will most likely get to 17 and end.

For those that care about distinctions....the alarmists are recording record AVERAGE highs which means they average the evening low and daily high to get the averages.

The average have been skewed by a number of factors affecting the evening lows (urbanization around the probe locations). There have been very few new record HIGH temperatures which were mostly recorded in the 1920s.

Dwumfkin wrote:

Liberalism = a mental disorder wrote:

This is great news. The benefits of slightly warmer temperatures greatly outweigh the few drawbacks.

You must not have kids. Good thing our founders weren't short sighted like you.

You mean the guys who wore tights, wigs, and coats in a room with no air conditioning in the middle of the summer?

Geniuses, the lot of 'em.