What Is Causing The Warming ?

[Thundery wintry showers]

One thing that we should bear in mind is that we haven't just started an El Nino, we have also gone out of a strong La Nina. Therefore it makes sense that global temperatures have risen over the last few months simply because the La Nina forcing hasn't been there. If true, that also implies that the arrival of a moderate to strong El Nino would be likely to result in a series of record-breaking warm months.

However, global temperatures also fluctuate either side of the mean anyway, probably partly due to atmospheric circulation (a pattern of warm anomalies over the land masses and cold anomalies over the oceans gives a warmer planet than vice versa). For example January 2008, during that strong La Nina spell, had temperatures close to the long-term average, but March 2008 was then one of the top two or three warmest on record. So I don't think a few months is long enough yet to be able to form any strong conclusions.

I see nothing wrong in starting a thread like this because while nobody can claim to know the answers for definite, educated guesses are possible and perhaps many of us will learn something from the discussion/broaden perspectives on climate change.

[Iceberg]

There are indeed other factors SB, This allows us to reasonably accurately say why the earth has been cooler, warmer etc. For Example 98 was exceptionally, record breakingly hot due to the natural El Nino. whereas 2007/8 was cooler due to lower solar activity and La Nina.

Likewise we can pin point cooling events and put them down to volcanic eruptions. There is always a driver and the natural ups and downs (not trends) must be down to drivers and not AGW which is only a trend player.

I've tried not to use a single report in this thread and indeed have delibrately used every single report of Global temperatures that exists.

Something must be causing the warming though and I think it's important to understand what it is.

I've put forward a partial explanation of a weak/just starting El Nino which has been enhanced by an AGW trend as I believe there is considerable evidence to support this, however even I don't believe this is the reason for ALL this warming.

If it were and weak/just starting El Nino can give such high global temperatures we are in deep deep trouble, particularly when an El Nino really gets going.

[MR EXTREMES]

I am not sure which bit you are pointing to, the bit that says that the flip of the PDO during the 70's caused instant warming is interesting that would indicate the lack of a lag.

"Now that the Pacific Decadal Oscilation has flipped back to a cold phase (just 2 or 3 years ago) and the Sun is very quiet, expect colder years ahead. No wonder this may be the coldest Summer on record in parts of the Midwest this year"

Ah so expect cold years, but somehow it's not it's actually alot warmer globally, hence my point, why considering everything natural is in a cooling phase is it exceptionally hot lately.?

its not been exceptionally hot lately just incertain places urban heat the right setup.

the cooling is far more widescale than warming with just individual areas effected with heat,

and large parts of the usa feeling the cold through out 2009 so far,

id of thought that in any case cooling would start in the northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere first.

but overall the rest of the globe has been around normal.

and for those above normal id think this is what to expect if a el nino has formed,

so once again warming will be noticed in some places but please dont tell me that its our fult that el nino has formed.

wether where still warming or cooling,

i dont think it really matters yet because things are taking place which our out of our hands wether it be cooling solar,

el nino la nina warming.

as someone said earlier its arguement thats going to drag on.

Edited August 6, 2009 by badboy657

[Iceberg]

One thing that we should bear in mind is that we haven't just started an El Nino, we have also gone out of a strong La Nina. Therefore it makes sense that global temperatures have risen over the last few months simply because the La Nina forcing hasn't been there. If true, that also implies that the arrival of a moderate to strong El Nino would be likely to result in a series of record-breaking warm months.

I'd agree with some of that TWS, Coming out of a La Nina will certainly increase the temperature increase, but wouldn't cause it to swing the other way though, with a pendulum type effect.

Stopping a cold driver will simply bring us back to the equilibrium, this would imply that that the equilibrium is higher now than in 2008 or 2005, which I think is what I am saying indirectly despite the negative drivers. Add in a weak El Nino and we seem to have totally overridden the natural cooling drivers that we know about.

Re March 2008 the temperature anomaly according to RSS MSU (just as it's the source that I have open on my desktop) is 0.063 so wasn't a warm month.... compared to the 0.392 we have now.

Just checked the HADCRU data and for March 2008 it has 0.481 which does seem high (although you have to remember that HADCRU uses a different climatic bench mark for it's anomalies compared to MSU, which will always make HADCRU appear higher).

This is probably in the warm category. I think that HADCRU now has 3 months in the top 5 though and this month will certaintly be higher. I am estimating maybe an anomaly as high as 0.60 which would only have been achieved in 2002 and 1998 and would likely be the second warmest July recorded (over the last 150 years) If would have to over 0.671 to be the highest July which was acheived in 98.

As I've said already to get to even near the level of 98 with only a weak/just forming El Nino would be incredible.

[MR EXTREMES]

also something i noticed that the 1918 flu pandemic happened in a solar minimum and of coarse where deeper than that minimum at this moment,

maybe flu virus lives better in cooler temps or more average condition although im not 100% about connections.

but my point is maybe there are other indications that the planet is cooling off but not yet proven.

[Iceberg]

its not been exceptionally hot lately just incertain places urban heat the right setup.

the cooling is far more widescale than warming with just individual areas effected with heat,

and large parts of the usa feeling the cold through out 2009 so far,

id of thought that in any case cooling would start in the northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere first.

but overall the rest of the globe has been around normal.

and for those above normal id think this is what to expect if a el nino has formed,

so once again warming will be noticed in some places but please dont tell me that its our fult that el nino has formed.

wether where still warming or cooling,

i dont think it really matters yet because things are taking place which our out of our hands wether it be cooling solar,

el nino la nina warming.

as someone said earlier its arguement thats going to drag on.

No it should not be dragging on, this has nothing to do with Urban heat. Satelites recorded the whole surface of the globe, If they are saying it's the 2nd or 3rd warmest July on record then the Globe has been exceptionally hot. EVERY satelite temperature record has said this... It doesn't matter what auntie maple down the road has recorded.

It is impossible for the cooling to be more widespread than the warming see my sentence above.

The globe has not been normal (ARGGGGGGG) Please read what I've said (EVERY, EVERY, GLOBAL DATASET has put the GLOBE to be exceptionally HOT.) I am not sure how I can make this any clearer.

I am not and never have said it's our fault that EL Nino has formed.

[MR EXTREMES]

No it should not be dragging on, this has nothing to do with Urban heat. Satelites recorded the whole surface of the globe, If they are saying it's the 2nd or 3rd warmest July on record then the Globe has been exceptionally hot. EVERY satelite temperature record has said this... It doesn't matter what auntie maple down the road has recorded.

It is impossible for the cooling to be more widespread than the warming see my sentence above.

The globe has not been normal (ARGGGGGGG) Please read what I've said (EVERY, EVERY, GLOBAL DATASET has put the GLOBE to be exceptionally HOT.) I am not sure how I can make this any clearer.

I am not and never have said it's our fault that EL Nino has formed.

i never said you did say that just something we might see in the media sooner or later but still that would be more rubbish.

of course using the words hotter oh please.

to be honest id be more inclined to read global facts and yes its warmer than the 80s,

and no its not warmer than 98 and has stayed about the same since then,

so there for maybe cooling is taking effect to some degree wether this be the recent la nina or not.

the over all picture is solar output and because of this i say any warming that has happened has been because of this very source.

[MR EXTREMES]

If they are saying it's the 2nd or 3rd warmest July on record then the Globe has been exceptionally hot. EVERY satelite temperature record has said this... It doesn't matter what auntie maple down the road has recorded.

so your on about 1 month july thats it?

so going back through 100 years hot weather never happened,

rare hot events never happened this hardly makes a case,

now if you said to me that the last 2 years have been exceptionally hot then id agree with what your saying.

and id rather have auntie maple was the one giving the data because seeing as large parts of the planet have been experiencing cold records for what ever reasons then maybe this is very important in regards to what is happening.

but right now we have a developing el nino and im sure your waiting for the rising heat from this event so then, i told you so comes into play.

like wise im intrested to see what happens with the many other factors that could be taking effect in regards to cooling but i dont expect warming just to disolve over a couple of years,

as i dont expect we will fry in a couple of years i think where know alot more in a dacade.

[noggin]

It's the Sun and it's Milankovitch cycles. The Sun is the only thing that heats the Earth. Feel how much colder it is when night-time comes and the Sun goes away. Feel how it gets instantly colder when the Sun goes behind a cloud. Feel how much colder it is in the Winter. The Sun is a huge ball of gas and fire, it writhes in it's fireyness, spewing out heat and fire. We all know how a tiny candle flame moves and flickers and how the heat from it gets projected in a wild and frenzied way. Imagine the unimaginably ( ) huge variation there must be in the Sun's output. Heat has so many effects on so many things. I am no scientist ( ) but I know that heat has the most amazing effects....it can make things move and change and live and die. Likewise light. The Sun is all-powerful.

It's the Sun, I tells ya! B)

[MR EXTREMES]

now noggin i just wish i had saved myself some time and just put it like that .

sometimes the most simple answer is the best answer B)

[mt-leinster-snow-drifts]

Ok , everyone have a look at this link: http://www.scienceda...60921123321.htm

Now bare in mind befor reading , THIS IS FROM A NOUTORIOUSLY WARMIST BIAST SITE!

Looks like another case of warmists tripping over and contradicting themselves trying to salvage what they can from their sinking theory

Edited August 6, 2009 by mt-leinster-snow-drifts

[Richie V]

Here we are again. I'ts about time people here woke up and see just what a joke GISS, HAD, NCDC, HADCRU etc etc is. Trust me If you knew what I knew you would have a total duggy fit, thats another story for another day though. Yet another alarmist thread and sets of data from foremensioned sources that should be confined to the trashcan.

By the way folks, I mean no offence to anyone on here with this post, I'm just running out of patience, thats all <_<

[Solar Cycles]

Ok , everyone have a look at this link: http://www.scienceda...60921123321.htm

Now bare in mind befor reading , THIS IS FROM A NOUTORIOUSLY WARMIST BIAST SITE!

Looks like another case of warmists tripping over and contradicting themselves trying to salvage what they can from their sinking theory

It's not a case of sinking, more sunk really! And like all shipwrecks, it's a case of survival of the fittest. AGW is sound as a theory, but you can't dictate policies around a failing theory. Now I know the warmists will come running to the defence of this failing theory, but the overall facts don't lie! 11 years of static temperatures, have completely blown a theory out of the water. No amount of spin, will convince those without an agenda otherwise!!!

[Richie V]

It's not a case of sinking, more sunk really! And like all shipwrecks, it's a case of survival of the fittest. AGW is sound as a theory, but you can't dictate policies around a failing theory. Now I know the warmists will come running to the defence of this failing theory, but the overall facts don't lie! 11 years of static temperatures, have completely blown a theory out of the water. No amount of spin, will convince those without an agenda otherwise!!!

Thank you, well said <_<

[stewfox]

This thread does not need to go round in circles, and as long as people don't put in silly quotes about how cold the 48 states have been, we might be able to go somewhere with it.

You started the thread by using that phrase 'since records began'. Its used a lot in the artic thread .

Can you clarify when did the accurate records begin ? 5 ,10 or 20+ yrs ago ?

Today has been the HOTTEST DAY EVER ever for a August day in 2009

[Iceberg]

Well done to everybody on this last page you have just proven without doubt what a joke NetWeather is as a place to discuss climate sensibly.

It's a real shame and goes to show how ignorant and infantile the skeptic brigade on here really is.

[laserguy]

I really wish I could do some headbanging here.

I'm sure I've got an old 'quo album kicking around somewhere,could dig that out for you?

[Methuselah]

Right peeps,

Cut-out the Daily Mail type rants now. Or your posts will be vanishing into the ether...

Okay???

[Paul]

OK, so Pete posts a polite request to ask everyone to stop with the name calling etc, and what happens, straight away it continues!!

Please read this and take it in:

http://www.netweathe...ction=rules&f=8

As per the code of conduct, please also accept this as a public notice to anyone taking part within any of the discussions in this part of the forum that any further issues will result in an immediate 1 month posting restriction within the climate area.

[Iceberg]

I was a little irritable this morning, to be honest If you don't believe any of the figures produced around the world then fine, but if this is the case then you're not going to be able to contribute to this thread in a constructive manor, indeed if you fail to

This thread isn't or shouldn't be about AGW.

It doesn't have to be circular in nature.

It's about trying to explain what has caused the warming noticed in ALL of the worlds data sets, (This includes ALL of the satelite record sets and ALL of the compiled datasets), with the datasets going back to between 30 to 150 years.

If people think about it they might be able to come up with something. IF it can be evidenced that this warming can be attributable to natural cycles it would be a) a step forward into understand the climate and a step forward for those that don't believe AGW theory.

I would say again though this thread isn't about AGW itself.

Thinking last night I thought what about the Feb stratospheric warming event. It was almost record breaking and caused a very large spike in temperatures.

Maybe a component of this took 6 months to feed down through the atmospheric layers ?. If so there should be some record of it as we move down through the layers.

If so it would be a shortish peak that has just coincided and augemented the start of the more modest natural El Nino global warming....

[Solar Cycles]

I was a little irritable this morning, to be honest If you don't believe any of the figures produced around the world then fine, but if this is the case then you're not going to be able to contribute to this thread in a constructive manor, indeed if you fail to

This thread isn't or shouldn't be about AGW.

It doesn't have to be circular in nature.

It's about trying to explain what has caused the warming noticed in ALL of the worlds data sets, (This includes ALL of the satelite record sets and ALL of the compiled datasets), with the datasets going back to between 30 to 150 years.

If people think about it they might be able to come up with something. IF it can be evidenced that this warming can be attributable to natural cycles it would be a) a step forward into understand the climate and a step forward for those that don't believe AGW theory.

I would say again though this thread isn't about AGW itself.

Thinking last night I thought what about the Feb stratospheric warming event. It was almost record breaking and caused a very large spike in temperatures.

Maybe a component of this took 6 months to feed down through the atmospheric layers ?. If so there should be some record of it as we move down through the layers.

If so it would be a shortish peak that has just coincided and augemented the start of the more modest natural El Nino global warming....

Point taken Iceberg, we have all gone round in circles on the other threads. Let's all try not too on this one!

[noggin]

It's about trying to explain what has caused the warming noticed in ALL of the worlds data sets, (This includes ALL of the satelite record sets and ALL of the compiled datasets), with the datasets going back to between 30 to 150 years.

May I add a little to my post on page 2? My view is that right at the very start of it all, the Sun is the driver of all climatic changes....it is like the push that topples the first domino. The knock-on effects are the changes to atmospheric conditions and sea and ocean conditions, which in themselves "cause" the weather and the climate. As well as being the driver in itself, the result of that initial "push" varies due to the effect of Milankovitch cycles, much like the initial domino push can vary according to to the force used, the angle of contact etc. thereby changing the way in which the dominoes fall.

Do I make any sense? I sometimes have trouble explaining what I mean!

Edited August 7, 2009 by noggin

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Thinking last night I thought what about the Feb stratospheric warming event. It was almost record breaking and caused a very large spike in temperatures.

Maybe a component of this took 6 months to feed down through the atmospheric layers ?. If so there should be some record of it as we move down through the layers.

If so it would be a shortish peak that has just coincided and augemented the start of the more modest natural El Nino global warming....

Edited August 7, 2009 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[Guest North Sea Snow Convection]

I was a little irritable this morning, to be honest If you don't believe any of the figures produced around the world then fine, but if this is the case then you're not going to be able to contribute to this thread in a constructive manor, indeed if you fail to

This thread isn't or shouldn't be about AGW.

It doesn't have to be circular in nature.

It's about trying to explain what has caused the warming noticed in ALL of the worlds data sets, (This includes ALL of the satelite record sets and ALL of the compiled datasets), with the datasets going back to between 30 to 150 years.

If people think about it they might be able to come up with something. IF it can be evidenced that this warming can be attributable to natural cycles it would be a) a step forward into understand the climate and a step forward for those that don't believe AGW theory.

I would say again though this thread isn't about AGW itself.

Thinking last night I thought what about the Feb stratospheric warming event. It was almost record breaking and caused a very large spike in temperatures.

Maybe a component of this took 6 months to feed down through the atmospheric layers ?. If so there should be some record of it as we move down through the layers.

If so it would be a shortish peak that has just coincided and augemented the start of the more modest natural El Nino global warming....

There are some problems though in terms of how to address this thread, based on what you have said to me yesterday, and what you have again said here..

In your opening post you basically rule out to varying degrees most of the natural and cyclical factors in terms of the warming that you want to discuss in the thread. Now that is your opinion and it is fine for you to have that opinion - and your reasons are well enough known . But that leaves AGW as your reasoning for the warming does it not? Yet you say the thread is not designed to be about AGW . Sorry, not trying to be awkward, it is just that in terms of you pointing at AGW forcings as your own reasoning it basically seems this is another thread that is being set up for others to challenge the AGW viewpoint and give reasons why they disagree with your own reasoning (which backs up AGW). Or, alternatively, for other AGW proponents to back up your own post in agreement as to why they share your own viewpoint. It is rather loaded in the way that you have set the thread out - hence why I mentioned about the risk of it leading to circular debating. This is not meant to sound like 'I told you so' and I don't (genuinely) get any satisfaction from it - but unfortunately that is what has happened as we can see.

The other problem is in terms of the highlighted bit I have indicated. Using short term data to present warming,discussing reasons for it as the format of the thread, and then going on to use that as to possible reasons to extrapolate long termclimate trends is, effectively, mixing up short term weather with long term climate. I was well and truly shot and unfairly discredited (with unsubstantiated accused motives from one individual) in my recent ruined Met Office thread for suggesting that the METO blur seasonal forecasting with climate change (which I still very much believe they do), so the principle here IMO is not much different. It is fine if we all want to do that on a level playing field, but if we are going to do so can we please be consistent in allowing everyone to do it and not just make it ok for one side of the debate to do so and shoot down and lynch the other?

[noggin]

May I add a little to my post on page 2? My view is that right at the very start of it all, the Sun is the driver of all climatic changes....it is like the push that topples the first domino. The knock-on effects are the changes to atmospheric conditions and sea and ocean conditions, which in themselves "cause" the weather and the climate. As well as being the driver in itself, the result of that initial "push" varies due to the effect of Milankovitch cycles, much like the initial domino push can vary according to to the force used, the angle of contact etc. thereby changing the way in which the dominoes fall.

Do I make any sense? I sometimes have trouble explaining what I mean!

I see I have support from scientific circles!

http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2009/aug/long-debate-ended-over-cause-demise-ice-ages-%E2%80%93-may-also-help-predict-future