General Climate Change

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

The Atlantic is also looking very warm for the time of year;

http://www.osdpd.noa...t.5.17.2010.gif

Very cherry picked GW, look at the collapse of the Nino and the cooling Pacific. Now lets see how temps globally hold up for the rest of the year...and I am more than willing to suggest that the less warm April is just the start of a much cooler year as we go on.

Satellite data DOES NOT support NOAA temps...mind you who would?

BFTP

Edited May 18, 2010 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[Devonian]

Very cherry picked GW, look at the collapse of the Nino and the cooling Pacific. Now lets see how temps globally hold up for the rest of the year...and I am more than willing to suggest that the less warm April is just the start of a much cooler year as we go on.

Satellite data DOES NOT support NOAA temps...mind you who would?

BFTP

You support the satellite data? The satellite data remains remarkably warm!

[Methuselah]

My guess is that it'll be judged as fudged if it agrees with AGW, and genuine if it doesn't, but then again I'm a cynic!

Quite! :lol:

[Yorkshiresnows]

Very cherry picked GW, look at the collapse of the Nino and the cooling Pacific. Now lets see how temps globally hold up for the rest of the year...and I am more than willing to suggest that the less warm April is just the start of a much cooler year as we go on.

Satellite data DOES NOT support NOAA temps...mind you who would?

BFTP

Agree entirely.

Not suprising that we have seen a warm start to the year, coming off the back of a strong El-nino. Given where we are world wide temp wise (that is at a high following the warm up from 1979 to 2000), a spike is quite expected. But, PDO is negative and El-Nino collapsing, only one way to go and that's down !!

Jo laminate floori is so far pretty spot on with his forecasts for the year ..... time will tell !

Y.S

[Devonian]

Agree entirely.

Not suprising that we have seen a warm start to the year, coming off the back of a strong El-nino. Given where we are world wide temp wise (that is at a high following the warm up from 1979 to 2000), a spike is quite expected. But, PDO is negative and El-Nino collapsing, only one way to go and that's down !!

Jo laminate floori is so far pretty spot on with his forecasts for the year ..... time will tell !

Y.S

Isn't it surprising to see a month with a record high temperature when the Sun has been so quiet, and for several years? Or, is it lag time :winky:

[Optimus Prime]

BLAST FROM THE PAST doesn't support anything unless it's cold.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

BLAST FROM THE PAST doesn't support anything unless it's cold.

I support the sun and that is certainly not cold....nice 'un.

Dev

Yes I support the satellite records, and yes there has been relative warmth for sure but downward is what we shall see as the year goes on. A significant El Nino, record -AO more than ample to cover recent warmth. Yes there will be big ice melt this year, the quiet sun will see the jetstream predominantly be further south than norm and noticebly so in autumn and winter. Its all part of ther cyclical movement and build up to falling global temps.

BFTP

Edited May 19, 2010 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[pottyprof]

Isn't it surprising to see a month with a record high temperature when the Sun has been so quiet, and for several years? Or, is it lag time :winky:

It's a case of wait and see... There is some lag in the system. That lag, as mentioned elsewhere on here, takes between 2 and 30 years at a best guess. 30 years isn't long within the whole scheme of things.

[Admiral_Bobski]

Isn't it surprising to see a month with a record high temperature when the Sun has been so quiet, and for several years? Or, is it lag time

Not surprising in the slightest - you're welcome to check the LI thread wherein you will find VP's prediction (fairer to call it a projection, actually) of future temps.

Temps fluctuate around what is, currently, a fairly high baseline - one would expect some high temp records to be broken.

CB

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Its been mentioned before and should again. Pro warmists propogate the notion that a quiet sun should be producing 'immediate' cooler global temps and if that isn't the case then AGW is overriding the natural driver. Well disingenuous IMO as warming didn't happen over a 2-3 year period or indeed a 10 year period. It has taken over a hundred years to get here. So lets have a level playing field and re-iterate that its a 30 year projection that the globe will cool to levels pre 20th century...so as we have had a few years only since the cooling cycles have kicked in we are looking at the 2020s to 2030s for these levels to be achieved.

BFTP

Edited May 20, 2010 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[in the vale]

Interesting ...... "New Ice Age to begin in 2014"...apparently....http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=155225

[VillagePlank]

Temps fluctuate around what is, currently, a fairly high baseline - one would expect some high temp records to be broken.

Here

[MR EXTREMES]

Its been mentioned before and should again. Pro warmists propogate the notion that a quiet sun should be producing 'immediate' cooler global temps and if that isn't the case then AGW is overriding the natural driver. Well disingenuous IMO as warming didn't happen over a 2-3 year period or indeed a 10 year period. It has taken over a hundred years to get here. So lets have a level playing field and re-iterate that its a 30 year projection that the globe will cool to levels pre 20th century...so as we have had a few years only since the cooling cycles have kicked in we are looking at the 2020s to 2030s for these levels to be achieved.

BFTP

absolutely spot on im with you on this one.

[Methuselah]

Why haven't all those migrating fauna and flora species woken-up to the 'fact' that GW is a scam yet? Maybe pipe WUWT or IceAgeNow to the polar bears and taiga trees?

Trophim Lysenko would have been proud of such an attempt at biological correctness!

[laserguy]

Why haven't all those migrating fauna and flora species woken-up to the 'fact' that GW is a scam yet? Maybe pipe WUWT or IceAgeNow to the polar bears and taiga trees?

GW isn't necessarily a scam - (A)GW is, and I'm sure the range and extent of flora and fauna is never constant. But the AGW mob latch onto the perfectly normal and hold it up as "evidence of our meddling". Gotten used to it now,like the little old man in the corner of the snug who mumbles away to himself.

[Methuselah]

GW isn't necessarily a scam - (A)GW is, and I'm sure the range and extent of flora and fauna is never constant. But the AGW mob latch onto the perfectly normal and hold it up as "evidence of our meddling". Gotten used to it now,like the little old man in the corner of the snug who mumbles away to himself.

I'd agree that AGW might be a scam, Barrie...So far, though, I'm yet to see anything in the way of evidence being presented - only politicized waffle???

That said, how's the you, mate??? :blush:

[laserguy]

That said, how's the you, mate???

Fine thank you Pete (and yourself?) - or will be once this horrendous heat breaks! I wish I could do something about it .

[Solar Cycles]

I'd agree that AGW might be a scam, Barrie...So far, though, I'm yet to see anything in the way of evidence being presented - only politicized waffle???

That said, how's the you, mate???

Solar, Lunar, Oceanic heat distribution. These are not political tools Pete, there is as much evidence for these, as there is for AGW. Maybe if a fraction of the funding, went into natural cycles as to what is pumped into AGW, then we would have a more balanced view of what is actually the cause! Still let's leave the political waffle to the green brigade! Edited May 21, 2010 by Solar Cycles

[Thundery wintry showers]

Those are lines of evidence for the existence of natural forcings, not against the existence of AGW, let alone providing evidence for AGW being a scam!

[Solar Cycles]

Those are lines of evidence for the existence of natural forcings, not against the existence of AGW, let alone providing evidence for AGW being a scam!

That is what I meant TWS, AGW isn't a scam, some of our warming is down to CO2. What is a scam, is the daily sermons being preached by all those associated with the IPCC, using flawed data, to make second rate predictions.

[Yorkshiresnows]

Those are lines of evidence for the existence of natural forcings, not against the existence of AGW, let alone providing evidence for AGW being a scam!

Sorry TWS but it is my belief that you are mistaken here.

There is now a lot of evidence that the warming (that has undoubtably occurred) can be explained by natural cycles and changes in global cloud cover (associated with the coupled oceanic / atmposheric cycles).

As such it is becoming increasingly clear,that although CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and yes is contributing to the global warming scene, ... it is a minor and not a major player. Furthermore, it is the misguided notion that the climate system is predominatly sensitive (via positive feedback mechanisms) rather than tolerant (via feedback and forcing mecahnisms combined) that is skewing the IPCC global forecast models 'predictions' for the future.

Clearly new satellite data and recent publications on the solar cycles and perhaps most importantly PDO cycles cast huge doubt on the singular anthropgenic greenhous gas theory.

Y.S

[Gray-Wolf]

Natural cycles come and go (as they ever did) but our 'little push' is what is key here.

Our 'little push' continues to grow and ,some may say, it has now grown to the point that it has 'tipped' an essential climate control.

We all know 'history will tell all' but if you are wrong Y.S. your complacency condemns millions to death,

I'd rather listen to the science and err on the side of caution.

Our words are 'out there' now and there are those who WILL measure us by them.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Gray-Wolf

[jethro]

Natural cycles come and go (as they ever did) but our 'little push' is what is key here.

Our 'little push' continues to grow and ,some may say, it has now grown to the point that it has 'tipped' an essential climate control.

We all know 'history will tell all' but if you are wrong Y.S. your complacency condemns millions to death,

I'd rather listen to the science and err on the side of caution.

Our words are 'out there' now and there are those who WILL measure us by them.

That's out of order GW.

[laserguy]

We all know 'history will tell all' but if you are wrong Y.S. your complacency condemns millions to death,

Our words are 'out there' now and there are those who WILL measure us by them.

Let's just imagine for one moment that CO2-inspired climate change is indeed real and won't have any benefits whatsoever but will result in only death and destruction. Why am I more culpable than your good self,GW? And who are the people who are waiting to dish out the retribution for having the audacity to publicly reject AGW theory/consequences etc etc?

[Gray-Wolf]

That's out of order GW.

How so Jethro?

If we sit back whilst we suspect we are throwing 'our' finely balanced system out of kilter, bringing with it sea level rises, droughts across productive areas, more extreme storms then are we not culpable for the loses we foresaw and chose to ignore?

Surely the wise course (and most humane) is to be looking at mitigating the impacts we foresee, and fear most???

From your personal experience do you not wish that folk had acted differently across sub-Saharan Africa through the late 70's early 80's and do you not wish we all had better knowledge of what was occuring then so as to be able halt it far sooner?