NOAA: Global Warming is Real

The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration's Earth System Research Laboratory has issued a report today verifying that 2006 was one of the warmest years on record and that last year's El Niño event was unlikely to have been the cause for the increase in temperature. As such, this report contradicts the assertion that the increase in temperature is primarily due to natural phenomena and states in writing that global warming is primarily caused by an increase in greenhouse gases:

"Greenhouse gases likely accounted for more than half of the widespread warmth across the continental United States last year, according to a new study by four scientists at NOAA's Earth System Research Lab in Boulder, Colo. [snip] The NOAA team also found that the probability of U.S. temperatures breaking a record in 2006 had increased 15-fold compared to pre-industrial times because of greenhouse gas increases in Earth's atmosphere."

The report states that 2006's average temperature was "2.1 degrees F above the 20th Century average and marked the ninth consecutive year of above-normal U.S. temperatures." It also confirmed that every state in the continental United States had reported higher than normal temperatures and that 2006 was among the ten hottest years since 1895 (which was when they began to keep the records). The report went on to say that the: "authors also estimate that there is a 16 percent chance that 2007 will bring record-breaking warmth."

This is not new information. Not to the farmers going out of business in Southern California (1.93 inches of rainfall in 2006), or those forests dying in the high Sierras, or the Greek citizens fleeing for their lives from arson and negligence as their cradle of civilization burns, or the drought-stricken Turks converging on mosques in Ankara to pray for rain as the city cuts off their water supply for days at a time -- at the same time as their new, former Islamic party, albeit western leaning, President Abdullah Gul is sworn in against the wishes of their secular military who raised a ruckus at first, but then paused when they saw all those Gul supporters in mosques praying for rain had voted his party in as the majority and decided to wait and see whether Gul's new administration would live up to its secular promise.

It's also not news to the millions displaced by floods in South Asia and in the heartland of the United States, the nonstop rain in Oxfordshire earlier this summer, the imbalance between record heat and floods in Europe, the unexpected snowfall in South Africa... and then there's that whole lake that disappeared in Chile...

What is news? Four scientists from the established U.S. government agency responsible for reporting on the weather have put it in writing: Global warming is real, it is caused primarily by greenhouse gases and it's likely to cause record-breaking temperatures yet again this year.

Here's a link to the NOAA report.

Comments

[Boxorox]

It becomes clear that Carbon Dioxide really is the "Low Hanging Fruit" this is used by the climate zealots to hype up the Global Warming scare campaign. The role of CO2 in the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas has been way overplayed and it sure looks like the truth of that is finally coming out. This is excellent. See, science does work!
With so many other natural factors applying themselves to climate behavior, there can be no doubt that they are far more important, collectively, to determine what our climate does and how the regional weather patterns play out over the long-term.

[Dalpine]

The article at http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?d87f58c3-be16-4959-88e2-906b7c291fd6 was a real eye opener. Thanx Jay1975

[jay1975]

My pleasure

[BigTuna]

Why are people so eager to spin any shred of doubt or uncertainty into proof that climate change isn't happening, or that it is but we aren't causing it? I'm talking at a personal level here - why does this cause so many strong feelings? Are that many people truly concerned about the possible long-term effects on the economy? Is it vogue to completely ignore the science and champion the "nothing we can do about it" line? Or is it a proxy war of words against the eeeevil liberals?

[jay1975]

Here is a website that has an article showing why there is growing doubt. The more research that is conducted, the more it puts the computer models in doubt. There is no debate about whether the climate is changing, the debate is are the computer models or labrtory studies correct? The IPCC is made up of only 53 climate scientists, the other scientists are there for input as to what would happen in their field of specialty if certain changes occur. (sorry about the cut and paste link)
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?d87f58c3-be16-4959-88e2-906b7c291fd6

[yellowdogSC]

Tuna,

Two reasons for expressing doubt come immediately to mind:

1) It prevents the doubters from having to lift a finger to help, since they all know that it makes us work all the harder.

2) It keeps the value of "green" investments down, until doubters can get more money into this valuable market. (Why would they criticize Gore for making money unless he was?)

No doubt there are more.

You mention the economy. The REASON they give is ALWAYS money. Is it true? Unlikely. But it is their claim.

How's this:
Last week I made the comment, “If WE'RE 100% wrong about GW, the WORST to happen will be clean(er) air and water.
If you're 1% wrong, it may spell disaster for all generations to come.”

The FIRST comment in return from this individual was,
”No legitimate, credible, respected, Economist would ever agree with that statement.”

Global warming? Destruction of the planet, wildlife, children and quality of life for every living human EQUALS.....ECONOMIST???

‘Nuff said?

Thanks, friend.

[jay1975]

I agree completely that we need to pollute less. The problem is that all of the focus is on CO2. We are spewing chemicals way worse than that into our air and water. Those should be the real focus. Debating whether our CO2 output, which constitutes 0.012% of our atmosphere is counterproductive to truely fighting real pollution.

[Boxorox]

Of course the global warming is real.
How much of it is going on is now more in question than it has been over the past many years. NOAA needs to stick to the science when it deals with climate change. Making the accusatory statement that global warming is the result of human activity is not science. This is public policy activism which is not NOAA's role.

[Maxbyte]

"The report states that 2006's average temperature was '2.1 degrees F above the 20th Century average and marked the ninth consecutive year of above-normal U.S. temperatures.'"

Comparing the mean of one year in the 21st Century to a 100 year mean in the 20th Century is indefensible from a statistical point of view. It is an apples and oranges comparison that means nothing at all.

The Vostok Ice Core, that generally provides a large part of the foundation for global warming arguments, actually does little to support global warming when plotted across its entire 400,000 year span.

I am increasingly convinced that much of the answer to the increase in global temperature will be found beyond the boundaries of earth. A number of other researchers and scientists are already in pursuit of better exogenous data, which include increasingly rapid changes in solar flares, the solar system's position within the galaxy in relation to where it was during peak warming and cooling cycles in the past, and external forces that bombard the earth and its atmosphere in enormous volume every second of every day.

While I believe the current global warming argument is a red herring, we have long known that the quality of life in our largest urban centers is unacceptable due to airborne pollutants. We should have taken giant steps to make every city livable long ago. It's not too late, and it can be done.

[jay1975]

I emailed the NOAA last night when I read this since GISS changed the warmest year in recorded US histry to 1934. NOAA said that they used different equipment from GISS and NASA so it was expected for them to have different results for measured temperature. Next month there are two new studies coming out that may sway the debate a bit. The first is a peer reviewed study showing that CO2 (0.037% [0.012 of which is caused by man]of our atmosphere) is only one third as strong as the IPCC report says that it is. The second study, coming out in the journal Energy and Environment shows that the "consensus" exists among non-climate scientists. This study is most interesting in that it takes all studies concerning climate change for the last 3 years and of over 500 studies only 7% say there is a consensus where as over 50% of the studies lay blame on causes other than man. Is the climate changing? Yes, always had, always will.

[Spookcatcher]

Your reporting of the science is much more accurate. Actually CO2 considered attributeable to manmade factors appears by different models to be between .02 and .04%. So negligible that if we could halt it altogether it would not affect Climatic, Volcanic, the Cyclical Universal and Orbital influences, or our own sun's solar radiational influence. In fact higher degrees of CO2 increase plant life and abundance, they use it to grow. We have only had accurate Thermometers since the early 1880's. And Although we are very close, our Navy has not completely webbed sensors all over the floors of our oceans, which are then linked to satellites for gathering real time thermal activity. It only has been about ten years that there was good enough info (or enough surface area monitored) to even build reputable computer models. We just started climbing out of a "mini"-ice age in the early 1800's. So is could be presummed just by judging from earth's own history, that our globe could to be returning to a warming cycle. Time will tell, won't it. The obvious point is that just because in our modern era, humans have become so arrogant concerning our own importance that we decide to build, live, and farm anywhere on earth we want to, and then act surprised or angry when the earth reminds us of our ignorance and frail existence. I do believe however that we should/must for so many reasons get off the fossil fuel addiction, and the automobile dependant economy..

[auntiegrav]

Unfortunately, the events you listed so categorically shouldn't be used to define what will happen, nor should they be used as a measure of what is happening because most of these things could happen under anomalies in normal climate swings. Our subjective views aren't what matter. What matters are the data which show how we are affecting the atmosphere, and what has happened in the past as near as we can tell under these conditions.
No discussion of global warming should be without a referral to Fred Pearce's book, "With Speed and Violence". The dangers that we face cannot be politically imagined. Partly because we don't have the will to imagine them, because we won't be able to handle them with the social and economic systems we so blindly treasure, and also because they have never happened before. Any one of several tipping conditions COULD change our climate. We are trying as hard as we can to modify them ALL AT THE SAME TIME!!

"Can we spend enough for Africa?" --Rev Billy

[jnuno]

Changes in climate temperatures are no doubt occuring, but by the report's own conclusion, greenhouse ommissions are likely only more than a 50% part of the reason for global warming. Which means that if we somehow convince China, India and other developing countries to halt expansion of their industrial economies while we degrade our own economy here to curb greenhouse gases, global warming will continue because, again using the report cited, natural phenomena is likely responsible for global warming upto, but less than 50% of the time.

I believe it is the latter part of the doomsday equation that is more disturbing because there is nothing we can do to stop natural phenomena, also known as mother nature, from occuring.

[yellowdogSC]

jnuno,

PLEASE read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/world/asia/26china.html?ex=1345780800&en=c2fb14345e2905b1&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

China is actually VERY CONCERNED about their pollution.
That they don’t care is a MYTH that needs to be stopped.

(I think we all KNOW who spreads it, don’t we?) It's not you (willingly), jnuno.

A VERY important article.

Thank you.