Man Based Global Warming....

Somebody needs to tell those silly old glaciers that climate change is a myth.

 

There was nothing in Gore's movie that was proven to be wrong. Unlike George Will's article which as riddled with misquotes.
I only hope that you are right and I am wrong. If I am wrong the worse that can happen is we all have cleaner air to breathe and live healthier lives. Peace.:rockon:

 

The "hockey stick", the inference of a lag in the relationship between carbon and temperature, hurrciane katrina, mt kilimanjaro, the list goes on and on.

I hope you are wrong, but I also hope in some ways I am wrong and the AGw movement has not turned into a large money and power grab.

 

This displays a very nice job of selecting short term patterns that run counter to longer term trends. This is a skill that serves politicians very well, regardless of what viewpoint they take.

Usually when I see this on other subjects, hindsight later finds that the short term trend was already done before the report hit the streets. But you are likely to fare better, as some of this is likely driven by the PDO, which runs longer cycles.

 

Speaking only regionally, not globally, that "multi-decadal oscillation" and 20-30 years of cooling looks very much like the PDO that has given the Pacific Northwest two consecutive cold winters, with expectations of more:

Another "cool" weather statistic (PDO / El Nino / La Nina starts half way down the page)
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_decadal_oscillation"]Pacific Decadal Oscillation [/ame]

All indications are that this is independent of any GW/GC. But of course, many folks take local short term results as proof of their global viewpoint or disproof of the opposition's.

 

I think PDO is starting to generate a lot of interest. And as it has moved to a cool cycle we are seeing ocean heat content decline (and land temperatures follow).

 

The recent 11 year solar minimum is over, and the recent La Nina ocean event is over. Since CO2 keeps going up every year, forcing the climate warmer, as the short term cooling events finish, the short term warming events on top of the long term CO2 forcings will line up this year and the next few.

The "bad news" for people refusing to see the problem will be record warm temperatures. Clinging to the fact that 2008 is "only" the ninth warmest year on record will be less and less comforting to the deluded as new record warm years are seen.

:rockon:

 

The real world data is worse than the recent modeled predictions, especially sea ice melt. The Arctic Ocean could very well be ice-free in the summer in the next 5 years.

When that happens, the whole concept of global warming will be front and center, with people screaming about why more wasn't done earlier, just as they did with the Ford Explorer rollover deaths.

 

:welcome: Welcome Herodotus.:tea:

 

It is? The sun is still blank today, March 21: Spaceweather.com

------
Update March 22: Today's Spaceweather includes this item: Deep Solar Minimum: Where have all the sunspots gone? As of yesterday, March 21st, the sun has been blank on 85% of the days of 2009. If this rate of spotlessness continues through the end of the year, 2009 will match 1913 as the blankest year of the past century. A flurry of new-cycle sunspots in Oct. 2008 prompted some observers to declare that solar minimum was ending, but since then the calm has returned. We are still in the pits of a deep solar minimum.
------

It is? As of March 19, the National Weather Service's Climate Prediction Center doesn't know that: Climate Prediction Center - Seasonal Outlook.
Another page doesn't expect it to dissipate for several more months:
[FONT=verdana,arial,serif]EL NIÑO/SOUTHERN OSCILLATION (ENSO)[/FONT] [FONT=verdana,arial,serif]DIAGNOSTIC DISCUSSION[/FONT]

The PDO cycle that is likely to keep some of us cool for much longer. While I share your belief that AGW is real, I very strongly doubt that this dispute can be settled that quickly. Overstating a case doesn't win over skeptics, it just reinforces their skepticism.

 

Craig Loehle is publishing in "Energy & Environment" because that is a climate skeptic or contrarian friendly journal. It is not a good journal, however, and is not listed in the ISI's Journal Citation Reports indexing service for academic journals. The journal's peer-review process has at times been criticised for publishing substandard papers.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_and_Environment"]Energy and Environment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

According to NASA scientists, the ocean heat content continues to climb:

There is some noise in the rising curve, but the Earth's climate system is very complex with interacting feedback cycles, and no one expected global warming to be a simple linear rise.
For awhile some scientists thought the oceans were cooling, but that turned out to be instrument errors in the Argos and XBT temperature sensors:
Correcting Ocean Cooling : Feature Articles

The global temperature is going up, up, up:


Again, noisy, rising temperatures, with a smoother 5-year running average.

The CO2 is going up, up, up also:

Which part of "big problem" is confusing to you?

 

Thanks :yo:

 

True, I rushed my comment a bit because I wasn't allowed to add links or images until I had made 5 comments.

Still, the sunspot minimum has little effect on Total Solar Irradiance, and whether the expected El Nino is late by 6 months or a year doesn't really matter. The underlying CO2 buildup is forcing the climate warmer, inexorably, and these same short-term effects that slow down the warming by a year or two become short term effects that speed up the warming when they reverse.
Data @ NASA GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: 2008 Annual Summation

You never "convince" climate skeptics by arguing, they have an emotional/religious/political attachment to the idea that humans are not screwing up the climate. As the data comes in over the next decade or two, the conclusion will be unmistakeable to most people.

Personally, I think the first ice-free Arctic ocean summer will be a tipping point in world public opinion. It will also be a tipping point for the surrounding permafrost decay, but that's another topic.

 

If that data may take a decade or two, then you are shooting yourself in the foot by saying it "will line up this year and the next few." There is a high probability it won't line up that fast, in which case you have just handed them more evidence, on a silver platter, that you are wrong.

 

I become discouraged in these threads when the denialist argument becames reduced too:

1). You can't look at peer reviewed publications only.

2). It is so bad it's just alarmism.

Or plain misinformation or lack of capacity to interpret a graph as in:

1). True there is warming but this specific time period is not warming!

2). Many scientists disagree with the IPCC

3). There is actually cooling!

But as the data above demonstrates along with all empirical observations global warming is real. There is no need to wait for confirmation of the observation.

The only way to argue against this conclusion and it's link to co2 is to dwell on opinion outside peer-reviewed publications one-off comments and punditry.