Man Based Global Warming....

Global Warming Leading to Climate Tipping Point | Newsweek International Edition | Newsweek.com

 

Is it just me after reading the article the scientists are just guessing. The HUGE variable which they have no idea how to factor in is natural variablility. Do all the models use a constant baseline?

 

So basically, you're complaining because an error which started in January was discovered within roughly a month of its occurrence, and the data is now being corrected. An error which showed up because this data is streamed in real time.
As the site itself says,
Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

We have removed the most recent data and are investigating alternative data sources that will provide correct results. It is not clear when we will have data back online, but we are working to resolve the issue as quickly as possible.
​

Here's what the error looked like

While dramatic, the underestimated values were not outside of expected variability until Monday, February 16. Although we believe that data prior to early January are reliable, we will conduct a full quality check in the coming days.

Sensor drift is a perfect but unfortunate example of the problems encountered in near-real-time analysis. We stress, however, that this error in no way changes the scientific conclusions about the long-term decline of Arctic sea ice, which is based on the the consistent, quality-controlled data archive discussed above.
​

If anything, this speaks to the robustness of climate research, in that analysis of an odd result quickly revealed the source of the problem.

 

Institute for Governance & Sustainable Development :: UN and the World Bank Warning: Urgent Action Needed to Avoid Climate Tipping Point

 

I was just sent this email, let me know what you think?

Conservative writer George Will provoked a firestorm last week with an erroneous Washington Post column in which he deliberately sowed confusion over climate science. The column was riddled with factual inaccuracies but Will and his editors have refused to issue a correction.
Join us in demanding that the Washington Post correct demonstrably false statements in George Will's column.


George Will is entitled to his misguided opinion, but he is not entitled to his own facts. As the Center for American Progress Action Fund and Media Matters have documented, Will's column contained numerous errors:

• Will claimed that "according the U.N. World Meteorological Organization, there has been no recorded global warming for more than a decade." This is false. In fact, the WMO recently stated that "global warming, mostly driven by greenhouse gas emissions, is continuing."
• Will misleadingly conflated Arctic and global sea ice levels to leave readers with the false impression that global warming isn't real. After Will's column was published, the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center took issue with his use of their sea ice data, writing: "It is disturbing that the Washington Post would publish such information without first checking the facts."
• Will repeats science deniers' discredited assertion that a scientific consensus about a global "cooling" crisis existed in the 1970s.

It is unacceptable for the Washington Post to refuse to correct such falsehoods. Click here to demand a correction now.
There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that global warming is real and caused by humans. But while the climate crisis continues to worsen, willfully ignorant conservative elites continue to peddle lies. It's one thing to hear such dishonesty from the likes of Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly, but it's something else to see it perpetuated by a respected journalistic institution like the Washington Post.
Unfortunately, the Washington Post has a pattern of printing demonstrably false assertions from science deniers. Post editors' refusal to stand up for the truth strengthens the hand of polluting industries while irreparable harm is caused to our planet and its people.
Enough is enough. Tell the Washington Post global warming is real.

Tell the Washington Post global warming is real? Why does that help the cause? I am not a scientist? Overwhelming scientific consensus? How many scientists would it take to overturn the consensus? One?

 

Gore Pulls Slide of Disaster Trends - Dot Earth Blog - NYTimes.com

Al Gore pulls slide of disaster trends because it is misleading but the "tipping point" is just around the corner?

 

Quite frankly, I'm a lot more worried about a massive solar flare, like a repeat of the 1859 Carrington's Flare. Geomagnetically induced current is already causing severe erosion of the Alaska Pipeline.

When you figure how braindead folks have become due to useless consumer trinkets, perhaps a massive CME event is overdue

 

I actually agree with Scott (for a change). My understanding (though I didn't read the who story) is there was basically a sensor glitch or something that was corrected shortly afterward. It was kind of a non-story, although you would think the folks looking at the data would have caught it a bit sooner.

 

I think the surprising thing about the article is the statement that CO2 will be with us for 1000 years. The bulk of CO2 to my understanding is gone in 50 or 100 years. I think there is exponential decay, so in theory some CO2 could be left after 1000 years, but the amounts are likely meaningless.

 

This is an opinion piece. I'm wondering when it will become a crime to write an opinion piece. Certainly his piece is no less one-sided than is commonly found on the subject outside the opinion pages of most newspapers.

What is more of a crime to me is the hyperventilating reporters (like here at BBC) who uncritically do things like claim the antarctic is warming (based on the latest study from Eric Steig), ignoring significant flaws in the study methodology while at the same time overstating the significance of the studies findings.

 

NASA scientists reported today that the global average surface temperature in 2008 was the coldest since 2000, but was still well above the long-term average, coming in at ninth-warmest since measurements began in 1880. This followed another report from the National Climatic Data Center that said 2008 was the eighth-warmest year on record. The two organizations analyze data sets slightly differently, which explains the disparity.
"Given our expectation that the next El Nino will begin this year or in 2010, it still seems likely that a new global surface air temperature record will be set within the next one to two years, despite the moderate cooling effect of reduced solar irradiance," said James Hansen, director of GISS. The sun is just passing through solar minimum, the low point in its 10- to 12-year cycle of electromagnetic activity, when it transmits its lowest amount of radiant energy toward Earth.

Some nuggets from Dr Hansen I read in USA Today. 2008 was the coolest since 2000 but the ninth warmest on record?
On the second paragraph, the sun's 10-12 year cycle is at a low point which is why the temperatures have dipped. If that is the case, was it not also at a low-point in 1998, when all the temperature records were set? If that is so what explains the lower temperatures in 2008 vs 1998?

 

Antarctic ice melt more widespread than first thought: scientists

 

1998 was a strong El Nino year, which caused a spike in global temperatures. We still don't really have a good handle on what drives El Nino / La Nina. But it appears that during a PDO warm phase, you get more El Nino activity (and generally warming surface temperatures). During PDO cool phases, you tend to get more La Nina conditions and generally cooling surface temperatures. The PDO warm / cool phases typically last 20-30 years I believe.

We have come out of a PDO warm phase and are now in a PDO cool phase. So it is not surprising that the "global warming" we saw in the late '90s is waning and global temperatures are cooling.

 

This may be an opinion piece but it pretends to state facts. Also George Will is a well respected conservative who people trust to give them the facts. It's stories like this that continue to put doubt in global warming.

 

Isn't Al Gore's movie opinion? Isn't Dr Hansen's alarmist congressional testimony opinion or was it factual based upon 100% reliable data and computer models with a 100% degree of accuracy?

 

Exactly - it is a complete double standard.

 

This is something the climate alarmists are going to have an increasingly difficult time explaining. Why the temperature is not rising in lockstep with CO2. When we were in a PDO warm phase, all was copacetic for the alarmists. Now that we are in a PDO cool phase, it's as if someone finally looked behind the curtain.