IT IS 3 (now 2) MINUTES TO MIDNIGHT

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Meanwhile, back in the US, at all US temperature-monitoring stations maximum summertime temperatures are dropping at a rate of about 0.8C/century and percent of days above 90F is dropping at a rate of about 7%/century:

Image857_shadow-1024x769.png


Image859_shadow-1024x880.png


Of course, it's not just a summer thing: Winters also flatly contradict the alarmist talking points, with the west experiencing it's wettest winter ever just months after The New York Times quoted CA's prescient governor as saying "...we know that drought is becoming a regular occurrence...". In fact, CA just experienced the rainiest water year since records began 122 years ago.
 
GRA said:
The weird part as far as Norcal is that we had snow in the Lake Tahoe area just last Sunday, as well as high winds, some light rain, thunder and lightning, hail, a funnel cloud and below average temps in the Bay Area and Sacramento. While not unheard of, snow in June is extremely rare - even May is somewhat uncommon. Temps have been climbing steadily since then, and were in the normal range the past couple of days, but are forecast to break records in many places for the next week or so, with pretty much the entire Central Valley in triple digits a little early in the season.

And?
 
RegGuheert said:


Likely another example of one statistic being meaningless. In the time I have lived in Oly, the weather description has gone from "less than 5 days annually hitting 90º" to 6½ days on average. Now not saying this is a trend since anything in the 90's here is an outlier or extreme weather event (although it may not seen extreme to anyone else) so we could look at it like a big hurricane season or a small one but the trend seems to be extremely wetter more often and extremely hotter more often.

Yes, we have hit 100º in Oly like twice (none officially) in the first 120 years and a dozen time in the past 10 (including 4 times in 10 days...) but still nothing you can create a trend line on.

This is the whole issue with climate and weather. You need to consider the whole picture EVERYWHERE.

Colder Summers do not compensate for much warmer Winters.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
Likely another example of one statistic being meaningless.
High temperatures over 90F is not a meaningless statistic for us. In fact, that is our *exact* criteria for when we turn on the A/C in our home. If the forecast is for the high temperature to be 90F or above, the A/C goes on. If it is below that point, it stays off. What that means for us is that we run our air conditioner for less than about one month in hot summers (like last year) compared to when we first got married when, we had about two-and-a-half times as many days over 90F during hot years. Lately, we have had quite a few years with only a handful of days above 90F.

WOODSTOCK2_NE_VA_Days_Above_Maximum_Temperature_Thre.png

DaveinOlyWA said:
Colder Summers do not compensate for much warmer Winters.
That's an interesting comment from someone who just lived through the coldest winter in over 30 years. Thus the rapid wintertime cooling trend which began around the turn of the century in your part of the world continues, in spite of the previous two El-Nino-induced warm winters:

ABERDEEN_WA_Average_Mean_Winter_Temperature_Jan_Dec.png
 
WetEV said:
And somehow, the ice keeps melting.

And the band played on.
Yes, the band drones on to distract everyone from the facts.

WetEV denies the science behind what underlies the loss of ice extent around Antarctics last year,, but that does not change the fact that wind was the primary factor:
NSIDC said:
The early maximum appears to be the result of an intense wind pattern in September, spanning nearly half of the continent from the Wilkes Land area to the Weddell Sea, and centered on the Amundsen Sea. Stronger than average low pressure in this area, coupled with high pressure near the Falkland Islands, and near the southern tip of New Zealand in the Pacific Ocean, created two regions of persistent northwesterly winds. Sea ice extent decreased in the areas where the northwesterly winds reached the ice front.
That scientific explanation is very clear and tells exactly what happened and why. But WetEV does not accept that clear scientific explanation by the experts on the subject:
WetEV said:
Not convinced, winds blow every year. Again, why was this year less than all other recorded years?
And, , as detailed in this excellent explanation, wind was again a dominant factor in building up the ice which scuttled this year's "Ship of Fools III" mission into Hudson Bay:
Dr. David Barber said:
It became clear to me very quickly that these weren't just heavy ice conditions, these were unprecedented ice conditions,...
They must have been listening to the band rather than looking at the data:

Image650_shadow.png
 
ENIAC said:
WetEV said:
Then why is the ice melting?

Ice doesn't care.
Here's why the ice is melting.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/decadaltemp.php
It seems that you, like WetEV, interpret a reduction in sea ice extent as all "melting". The science is pretty clear, the reduction in Antarctic sea ice extent last September was due to the ice being rapidly compressed into a smaller area due to winds.

This conclusion is very consistent with NCAR's conclusion just one month prior to the September event that the GROWTH in sea ice around Antarctica was due to natural processes:
NCAR said:
The recent trend of increasing Antarctic sea ice extent — seemingly at odds with climate model projections — can largely be explained by a natural climate fluctuation, according to a new study led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).
Sorry, guys, but the scientists are correct: natural processes still dominate the sea ice extent around Antarctica.
 
Of course those aren't the measured global temperatures. As we all know, this data has been tampered with to get a desired result. This tampering has been done worldwide, but we know how much was done here in the U.S.:

Screen-Shot-2016-11-21-at-9.31.19-AM.gif


Look at that! Temperatures are cyclical.

Fortunately, not all historical records have been tampered with. We know that ice extent today is virtually the same as it was in the 1920s,1930s and 1940s. You can read the same alarming newspaper articles about ice loss from all around the world from the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. Of course it was nonsense then, just as it is nonsense now.

What we find is that the climate did virtually the same thing in the first half of the 20th century as it is doing now. But we have scientists putting their thumbs on the scales to try to frighten people. It's unfortunate that so many believe the nonsense.

Fortunately, global trends of tornadoes, hurricanes, floods and drought are all down and global tends of food production are up. And it seems heat waves are a thing of the past in the U.S., as well:

Image905_shadow.png
 
I've often wondered if the period prior to 1980 (after which global temperatures began accelerating) was more stable due to suspended particulates in the atmosphere. See chart below. Recall how filthy the air appeared in many large cities back then. In Denver we had the "Brown Cloud". In Colorado they found that if the sand they used on the roads in the winter was quickly swept up suspended particulates were significantly reduce. But of course reduced suspended particulates will result in additional solar energy reaching the earths surface.

graph_gis_2014.png
 
ENIAC said:
I've often wondered if the period prior to 1980 (after which global temperatures began accelerating) was more stable due to suspended particulates in the atmosphere. See chart below. Recall how filthy the air appeared in many large cities back then. In Denver we had the "Brown Cloud". In Colorado they found that if the sand they used on the roads in the winter was quickly swept up suspended particulates were significantly reduce. But of course reduced suspended particulates will result in additional solar energy reaching the earths surface.
Sorry I can't recall the papers, but there is quite a bit of evidence that pollution was suppressing temperatures in Europe during that period and that some of the warming after that time was due to laws that limited pollution. Of course China has way worse pollution today than the U.S or Europe ever had. Hmmm.

Edit: Found it: Diurnal temperature range over Europe between 1950 and 2005. Here is the beginning of the conclusion from that paper:
We investigated annual mean DTR for the period 1950 until 2005 for 23 different countries and regions in and around Eu- rope as well as Europe as a whole. A total of 16 out of these 23 regions as well as the European mean show a statistically significant period of decrease and a subsequent increase in DTR. Two additional regions (BeNeLux, Spain) show an in- crease, which however is not statistically significant in the multiple regression analysis. Of the remaining five regions, two (East Germany, Portugal) show no specific trend and three (Sweden, Baltic States, Ukraine) regions show a con- tinuation of the decreasing trend. The trend analysis is lim- ited by the lack of a standard homogeneity procedure and by the limited number of available measurement sites and their spatial distribution.

The connection between DTR, shortwave radiation and SO2 emissions has been qualitatively discussed with respect to a common trend reversal. The period of reversal of DTR from decrease to increase is in most cases in line with social and economic development as indicated by SO2-emissions or deposition, respectively. All reversals of DTR were shown to take place between 1965 and 1990. This is consistent with the change from decrease to increase of incoming short- wave radiation (“Global Dimming” to “Global Brighten- ing”). Consequently, we conclude that the long-term trends in DTR are strongly affected by changes in incoming short- wave radiation, presumably largely influenced by direct and indirect effects of aerosol from sulphurous emissions.
 
RegGuheert said:
Of course those aren't the measured global temperatures. As we all know, this data has been tampered with to get a desired result. This tampering has been done worldwide, but we know how much was done here in the U.S.:

Screen-Shot-2016-11-21-at-9.31.19-AM.gif


Look at that! Temperatures are cyclical.

Fortunately, not all historical records have been tampered with. We know that ice extent today is virtually the same as it was in the 1920s,1930s and 1940s. You can read the same alarming newspaper articles about ice loss from all around the world from the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. Of course it was nonsense then, just as it is nonsense now.

What we find is that the climate did virtually the same thing in the first half of the 20th century as it is doing now. But we have scientists putting their thumbs on the scales to try to frighten people. It's unfortunate that so many believe the nonsense.

Fortunately, global trends of tornadoes, hurricanes, floods and drought are all down and global tends of food production are up. And it seems heat waves are a thing of the past in the U.S., as well:

Image905_shadow.png

I like the new title, Reg. It's too bad it didn't stick.

I have nothing to add to this discussion, as I am not a climate scientist, nor am I particularly "alarmed" by current trends. From what I can tell, there are far more pressing issues facing this world. Environmentally, many of them involve much more acute pollution (smog, poisoning water supplies, etc), which are much more of a driver for my behavior that CO2. For those who are concerned about CO2, I guess they can rest assured that your solar array and mine, as well as our EVs, are making a dent in CO2 emissions too, regardless of what we think.
 
GetOffYourGas said:
I like the new title, Reg. It's too bad it didn't stick.

I have nothing to add to this discussion, as I am not a climate scientist, nor am I particularly "alarmed" by current trends. From what I can tell, there are far more pressing issues facing this world. Environmentally, many of them involve much more acute pollution (smog, poisoning water supplies, etc), which are much more of a driver for my behavior that CO2. For those who are concerned about CO2, I guess they can rest assured that your solar array and mine, as well as our EVs, are making a dent in CO2 emissions too, regardless of what we think.
Well said. You are not alone: Taking action on climate change was dead last on the UN's survey of the priorities of people all around the world. That tells you a lot about leaders who claim that it is the world's most pressing problem.
 
Our Winter may have been the coldest since whenever but due to the number of colder days and not due to severity since this past Winter was merely wetter than normal with temps not all that much lower than the norm. It definitely was not the coldest Winter since I have lived here by quite a stretch. We had one year like 89-90 or so that was much colder but likely over a somewhat shorter period mixed in with unseasonably warm weather (which is something we got very little of this year)

That Winter we hovered at zero for 2+ weeks. Had a few heavy snows and for the first (and only) time had several roads trashed from frost upheaval. That would have been ok but a few weeks later, the temps went cold again and we had 3 snowfalls each with accumulation that was enough to hang around several days including a stretch of a week or so where it did not warm up enough to melt any significant amount.

Now all that probably doesn't seem like much to most here but snow is not all that common here. We might get some 2-3 times a year but an entire season without accumulation is not all that unusual.

But all these are one offs. And we need to realize that Global "warming" was the incorrect term from day one. What is happening is simply greater weather extremes. We are setting cold and hot records at a blistering pace and yes, the hot ones outnumber the cold ones like 2 to 1 or something but this only illustrates the pendulum is swinging in ever wider arcs and we are left holding on for dear life...
 
lorenfb said:
GRA said:
The weird part as far as Norcal is that we had snow in the Lake Tahoe area just last Sunday, as well as high winds, some light rain, thunder and lightning, hail, a funnel cloud and below average temps in the Bay Area and Sacramento. While not unheard of, snow in June is extremely rare - even May is somewhat uncommon. Temps have been climbing steadily since then, and were in the normal range the past couple of days, but are forecast to break records in many places for the next week or so, with pretty much the entire Central Valley in triple digits a little early in the season.
And?
And nothing. A couple of hot spells every summer is pretty meaningless - they happen every year, although this one's a bit early, and quite a change in a short time. Example, the high a week ago Sunday in Livermore was 65; yesterday it was 106 there, and we're not forecast to see a drop below triple digits until Friday. Quite a few temp records were broken yesterday, some going back almost a century, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to draw any long-term conclusions about climate change from a single heat wave owing to an inland high - that's weather. Climate's a longer cycle.
 
The temperature is rising, so the ice melts.

Ice doesn't care about any quibbles about temperature records.

Your words are smooth and well crafted. But you are not convincing the ice.

resultsCB_700.jpg
 
Back
Top