Any doubts about Climate Change?

**S Landreth** · 18-01-2017, 11:13 PM

NASA, NOAA and the Met Office 2016 warmest year to date

___________

Forty-year-old spy satellite images are beginning to provide the first consistent look at how glaciers across the Himalayas are changing and what future water supplies might look like for millions of people who rely on their seasonal melt.

Until now, knowledge about glacier mass change in the region has been spotty, with inconsistent measurements from glacier to glacier. Public satellite images could reveal changes in a glacier’s area but not its height or mass, so scientists made physical measurements by putting stakes in the ice and checking back year to year. Many glaciers are too remote or too dangerous to reach, though, making field data scarce.

When the U.S. government began declassifying spy satellite data, scientists figured out how to manually build 3D elevation models by matching landmarks between images and calculating the satellite camera’s angle, but the process was still time consuming and inconsistent.

Josh Maurer, a graduate student at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, developed a better way.

Picture a stereoscope, like the View-Master with its cardboard reels of tiny photos. The stereoscope takes two photos of the same scene, shot from slightly different angles, and puts them together so your eyes see a 3D image through the viewer. Maurer took that concept and used computer vision techniques to design an automated process that creates consistent 3D models of glaciers across a wide region as they appeared in the past using declassified spy satellite images.

By automating the process, Maurer was able to start creating the first consistent look at glacier change over the past 40 years across Asia’s entire high-mountain region, from the greater Himalaya, including Bhutan and Nepal, through the Karakorum and into the Hindu Kush. This week, he is presenting his early results at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting in San Francisco.

1975:

2007:

Knowing how glaciers are changing is critical for communities and governments across the region today as they plan for water changes in the future. Roughly 20 percent of the world’s population relies on the Himalayan glaciers’ seasonal meltwater, in addition to monsoonal rain and snowfall, for drinking water, to grow crops and to produce energy. Bhutan’s economy, for example, relies heavily on the production and sale of hydropower, and parts of India rely on that energy source to power their homes and businesses.

“Life depends on water, so changing the amount or timing of how that water reaches a community or an ecosystem is going to have an impact,” Maurer said.

___________

global record minimum

____________

___________

Global Warming Arguments You'll Hear for the Next Four Years

1. “There’s no proof that global warming is real.”

This statement, while popular among science deniers, couldn’t be much further from reality. There is overwhelming evidence that not only is the earth warming, but that humans are causing it.

2. “The jury is still out.”

Although many media outlets often present “both sides” of this issue, there is no real debate among those actually studying the science. The peer-reviewed literature speaks for itself. Here are some facts:

At least 97 percent of climate researchers agree that humans are the cause of global warming Those that do not agree are significantly less qualified than those that do. The agreement spans nearly 200 international scientific organizations.

3. “Global warming is motivated by the politics of money-grabbing scientists.”

Svante Arhennius, a Nobel Prize winner, first calculated the potential of CO2 as a greenhouse gas over 100 years ago. Surely he did not have any political motive.

4. “Temperature changes are a natural, cyclical process.”

It is true that tiny variations in the earth’s orbit may contribute to ice ages… but over periods of hundreds of thousands of years! The rate of the current temperature increase is roughly 10x faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming and unprecedented in recorded history.

**harrybarracuda** · 19-01-2017, 12:11 AM

You're going to confuse all those tiny little idiot brains that don't understand science.

**Cujo** · 19-01-2017, 12:33 AM

2016 Hottest year ever recorded. Scientists blame human activity.
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ivity-to-blame

**buriramboy** · 19-01-2017, 01:23 AM

CO2 is a fertilizer isn't it, let's do away with CO2 and see how your crops grow next year. No CO2 then a lot less green planet. Fukwits.

**blue** · 19-01-2017, 02:12 AM

They pump co2 into commercial greenhouses.
or look at the grass by a motorway- always lush and green

**harrybarracuda** · 19-01-2017, 11:22 AM

Sharp as a fucking beach ball....

**S Landreth** · 21-01-2017, 10:05 PM

JMA – 2016 warmest year to date

Five Warmest Years (Anomalies)
1st. 2016 (+0.46°C), 2nd. 2015 (+0.42°C), 3rd. 2014 (+0.27°C), 4th. 1998 (+0.22°C), 5th. 2013,2010 (+0.20°C)

**blue** · 21-01-2017, 10:16 PM

owwwch the morning after...
take 6 pills and a pretty graph you'll feel better soon

**Takeovers** · 21-01-2017, 10:29 PM

@blue

As you never grasped the concept of science you can probably not understand that scientific research outcome is not determined by elections.

**blue** · 21-01-2017, 11:11 PM

When the funding stops so will the adjusted graphs.
That's the connection.
Trump will redirect NASA etc to do proper space research just like the old days.

**Takeovers** · 22-01-2017, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by blue

When the funding stops so will the adjusted graphs. That's the connection.

A president can to some extent suppress science. That does not change the science though.

**harrybarracuda** · 22-01-2017, 02:34 AM

All Trump is going to do is fuck things up.

The idiots that voted for him will notice that when taxes go up, prices go up, temperatures go up and his buddies' bank accounts go up.

Blue won't notice it because he's as thick as fucking shit.

**blue** · 22-01-2017, 03:41 AM

I overstand the science (behind MMGW).
the thinking is thus:
Co2 is a gas that traps heat in the atmosphere (a greenhouse gas) stopping its path to space and thus being dispersed.
Therefore increased Co2 must create a warming Earth.

All very logical ,
The flaw: It's not an isolated event, but one with myriad other factors to take into consideration in the Earths super complex system.
That's why the warmists models always fail in their predictions.

I agree Co2 increase is a phenomenon that needs looking into :
a concern or maybe it's beneficial ?

Thing is the debate has been hijacked and totally shut down by the politically correct liberals, who are using the same fascist style blueprint they used to close the debate on things like nationalism, homosexuality, racism etc.
To the point no one trusts or listens the MMGW people anymore.

It's even got to the point where, they cannot prove their case and have resorted to fixing the statistics and rigging the data over time to fit their agenda.
And being religious zealots they feel this is justified ,

**harrybarracuda** · 22-01-2017, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by blue

I overstand the science (behind MMGW).
the thinking is thus:
Co2 is a gas that traps heat in the atmosphere (a greenhouse gas) stopping its path to space and thus being dispersed.
Therefore increased Co2 must create a warming Earth.

All very logical ,
The flaw: It's not an isolated event, but one with myriad other factors to take into consideration in the Earths super complex system.
That's why the warmists models always fail in their predictions.

I agree Co2 increase is a phenomenon that needs looking into :
a concern or maybe it's beneficial ?

Thing is the debate has been hijacked and totally shut down by the politically correct liberals, who are using the same fascist style blueprint they used to close the debate on things like nationalism, homosexuality, racism etc.
To the point no one trusts or listens the MMGW people anymore.

It's even got to the point where, they cannot prove their case and have resorted to fixing the statistics and rigging the data over time to fit their agenda.
And being religious zealots they feel this is justified ,

It's got to the point where people who don't understand science write rubbish like this in the hope that they think people won't realise it's vacuous crap.

**longway** · 22-01-2017, 11:43 AM

^ You understand 'science'?

**longway** · 22-01-2017, 11:46 AM

Anyway more to the point:

Hottest Year Evah: The Climate Alarmists' Last Big Scare Story Before Trump

And the problem is that the supposedly neutral gatekeepers in charge of the temperature records – NASA, NOAA, the Met Office, etc – are in on the scam. This graph – courtesy of Steve Goddard – shows the extent of NASA’s dishonest adjustments. Unadjusted and satellite records combine to suggest that there has been no more than 0.6 degrees C warming since the middle of the 19th century. NASA’s adjustments have doubled this.

As you can see from this satellite chart below, 2014 and 2015 were nowhere near record-breaking years.

The alarmists have been playing similar dirty tricks on tornadoes: NOAA has been trying to make out that they’ve been getting worse – when it fact, as Homewood shows, the opposite is true.
According to NOAA, the number of tornadoes has been steadily growing since the 1950s, despite a drop in numbers in the last five years.

Homewood doesn’t pull his punches. NOAA’s breach of trust here borders on the criminal.

The bottom line is that the NOAA headline graph is grossly dishonest. Indeed, if a company published something like that in their Annual Accounts, they would probably end up in jail!

Which is why, of course, the dodgy scientists at places like NASA and NOAA are so dreading the incoming administration. They know that their days are numbered, that the dubiousness of their corrupt science is about to be exposed to the world. Rather than admit the truth though – which they are congenitally incapable of doing: they’re in far too deep for that – they are instead trying to make out that it’s Donald Trump who is the problem, that he is some kind of anti-science wrecker who is determined to destroy all the good noble work that the selfless climate scientists have been doing all these years.

**harrybarracuda** · 22-01-2017, 02:28 PM

So you quote Breitbart bollocks backed up by a climate change denier called Paul Homewood who has already been exposed as a fucking idiot for cherry picking data to suit his feeble theories.

One thing Longway - don't lecture people on science when you haven't got a fucking clue what the word means.

And seriously, no fucker will take you seriously when you try and pass off Breitbart as science, you mug.

**bsnub** · 22-01-2017, 02:30 PM

^^ Steve Goddard and Paul Homewood the two "sources" for that nonsense are not even scientists.

This is just more of the same rehashed trash posted up once again.

Steve Goddard;

climatecrocks.com/tag/steven-goddard/

Paul Homewood;

dosbat.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-bitter-irony-of-paul-holmewood.html

The truth...

Thorough, not thoroughly fabricated: The truth about global temperature data | Ars Technica

**pulvarien** · 23-01-2017, 02:36 AM

When a president and we wont mention obamas name increases funding for climate research bye 13 times, and only if it proves global warming is true, then science is corrupted.

**blue** · 23-01-2017, 04:47 AM

It's hard to argue with the facts

looks like that pesky pause is still here ..

By: Marc Morano - Climate Depot

2016 GLOBAL TEMPERATURE: THE PAUSE NEVER WENT AWAY – ‘HOTTEST’ CLAIMS WITHIN MARGIN OF ERROR

Above graph shows the 2016 temperature without the El Nino contribution, as calculated by the Met Office. 2015 – a year with an equally strong El Nino effect – is interpolated. It shows that the pause hasn’t gone away. It has simply been interrupted by two very strong El Nino years. By removing this temporary El Nino contribution from the Met Office’s 2016 data, it becomes obvious that global average temperatures would be essentially identical to where they were in 2014. Without the El Nino 2016 would have been statistically in the same region as the previous 15 years.

2016 GLOBAL TEMPERATURE: THE PAUSE NEVER WENT AWAY ? ?HOTTEST? CLAIMS WITHIN MARGIN OF ERROR | Climate Depot

**bsnub** · 23-01-2017, 05:18 AM

^ You spastics will not stop with the long debunked BS propaganda. Climate depot is complete garbage it has been exposed as a fraud countless times on this thread.

Marc Morono is a right wing hack funded by the Koch brothers. He is not a scientist in fact he is more of a politician. Anyone that buys anything he puts out is an idiot.

https://skepticalscience.com/ipcc-gl...ming-pause.htm

**harrybarracuda** · 23-01-2017, 11:22 AM

ENSO does not affect climate change.

Climate Change affects ENSO.

This basic science is probably too difficult for the muppets to understand.

**birding** · 23-01-2017, 02:25 PM

First snow for 37 years.

This is snow joke! Sahara desert sees huge snowfall

**harrybarracuda** · 23-01-2017, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by birding

First snow for 37 years.

This is snow joke! Sahara desert sees huge snowfall

I bet it isn't 37 years to the next one.

**Hugh Cow** · 23-01-2017, 05:08 PM

i think the global sea temperature variation put out by NOAA was explained to a congressional committee if I remember correctly (and I have a vagina of a memory) The discrepancy (which seems logical to me)in global sea surface temps was caused by the fact that in the past the temperature was taken by ships at the sea water entry where as now it is taken from ocean buoys. When the change in data catchment was recorded there was an initial drop in temperature from the buoys compared to the water entry into the ship as the measurement point was taken after the water had already entered the ship thereby affecting a slight increase caused by the ships hull. but if the more accurate measurement from the buoys only is taken the data suggests a steady rise in ocean temperatures. IMHO I think it is drawing a very long bow to suggest NOAA would purposely distort the figures.
In short I think the argument that global temperatures are rising has been won. The argument now is how much of it is caused by CO2.

Thread: Any doubts about Climate Change?

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions