A trend is defined as "a prevailing tendency or inclination." See if the following strikes you as a trend: The warmest January-April period on record was part of the warmest 12-month period on record, which was preceded by the warmest calendar year on record, which immediately followed the warmest decade on record.
I see a trend -- it's getting freaking' HOT! In case you didn't pick up on the subtle pattern described above, here's a 26-second video from NASA that shows how the planet warmed between 1880 and 2011. The map in the video changes from a refreshing blue (lower than average temperatures) to a an uncomfortable orange (higher than average). You can even see the warming accelerate in the late 20th century as man's greenhouse gas emissions increased.
Yet while the trend towards a warming planet marches on, the trend in people's belief that our climate is changing may be no trend at all. The public at large seems to say, "Climate change is a problem, except that it's not because the planet's not warming -- but now I think it is... but people don't cause it, except that they actually do."
Think I'm exaggerating folks' fickleness? Here are the results of some recent studies:
Just think: if we killed off a few trees and said "boil" constantly, maybe everyone would get on the program.
If people can be influenced by a hot day, why can't they be influenced by a time-lapse video showing 131 years of progressively hotter days? If we could make that happen, THEN we'd have a trend worth following!
(P.S. Boil, boil, boil)
Like "What on Earth?" on Facebook.
Become a Fan here at The Huffington Post.
Victor Stenger: Scientists and Religion
Rev. Jim Ball: The New York Times Gets Played By Climate Deniers
Bill Chameides: America's No. 1 Environmentalist Subversive
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a strong, credible body of evidence, based on multiple lines of research, documenting that climate is changing and that these changes are in large part caused by human activities. While much remains to be learned, the core phenomenon, scientific questions, and hypotheses have been examined thoroughly and have stood firm in the face of serious scientific debate and careful evaluation of alternative explanations…
From a philosophical perspective, science never proves anything… because science is fundamentally based on observations. Any scientific theory is thus, in principle, subject to being refined or overturned by new observations.
In practical terms, however, scientific uncertainties are not all the same. Some scientific conclusions or theories have been so thoroughly examined and tested, and supported by so many independent observations and results, that their likelihood of subsequently being found to be wrong is vanishingly small. Such conclusions and theories are then regarded as settled facts. This is the case for the conclusions that the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12782
I did so conclusively, in multiple postings.
jimboy71's mendacious and defamatory claims have been, therefore, debunked.
Auditioning for a comedian role?
Dear Orkneygal,
Isn't Heartland Institute "Expert" Dr. Bob Carter committing facto global warming fraud by misrepresenting increasing global temperature trend lines as flat?*
Isn't that like a climate science scam, a global warming hoax?
If you disagree please provide a scientifically-valid explanation for Bob Carter's gross misrepresentation of scientific data.
Bob Carter is a leader of and/or major contributor to several of the most prominent organizations that are "skeptical" of man-made global warming, including:
* The Heartland Institute
* The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)
* The Science & Public Policy Institute (SPPI)
* The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
* The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)
* The International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC)
Also:
You Orkneygal have indicated that you live in New Zealand - what relationship do you have with Bob Carter's global warming "skeptic" organization the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition (NZCSC)?
Please finally answer these questions instead of continuing to run away from them - think you.
------------------
* http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/07/bob_carters_trend_lines.php
Steve McIntyre eviscerates Gavin about Yamal data claims.
http://climateaudit.org/2012/05/16/schmidts-conspiracy-theory/
Curiously, Heartland also continuously bashes climate scientists by name. And so does Wattsupwiththat. Their fossil fuel funded reason for existence is to raise climate change doubt and to bash prominent scientists. Peripheral to prominent denier outfits such as Heartland and Watts, is the denier blog climateaudit.
In her post here, Orkney features McIntyre of climateaudit. This is supposed to impress HuffPost readers. McIntyre has connections with petroleum interests and he has been a headliner at Heartland conferences. McIntyre made his name in the fossil fuel community with his campaign to discredit the hockey stick of Michael Mann.
The hockey stick is simply the curve showing that temperatures are accelerating. This curve is also showing up in numerous other studies besides the study of Mann. Recently a major study funded by the Koch brothers disappointed it's funding source by also confirming the hockey stick curve. This was the BEST study.
AGW is real. The hockey stick is real, warming is accelerating. Mann remains a fine scientist. Gavin Schmitt is a highly accomplished climate scientist at NASA. That and the fact that he helps run realclimate.org.
Which science site threw you out again Orkney? Was it realclimate.org or skepticalscience.com? And wasn't it for incessant science bashing? Orkney and pals are still full of it.
That's what the Yamal data is all about. When the courageous whistleblower released the first set of Climategate emails, Phil Jone's first reaction was that it was all about Yamal.
The whole Yamal data episode exposes the Hockey Stick Team for what they really are.
That is why Gavin's most recent claims are just more of the same from the Team.
Orkneygal: "McIntyre, et al have debunked the hockey stick long ago."
The "hockey stick" is alive and well, relentless science denier propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding.
Mann's findings have been verified by several independent scientific groups:
NRC (2006). Surface temperature reconstructions for the last 2,000 years. Washington, DC; National Academies Press.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309102251
D'arrigo, R; Wilson R; Jacoby G (2006). "On the long-term context for late twentieth century warming". Journal of Geophysical Research
Osborn, TJ; Briffa, KR. (2006). "The Spatial Extent of 20th-Century Warmth in the Context of the Past 1200 Years". Science
Appell, David (October 28, 2009). "Novel Analysis Confirms Climate "Hockey Stick" Graph". Scientific American
Tingley, MP; Huybers, P (2010). "A Bayesian Algorithm for Reconstructing Climate Anomalies in Space and Time. Part I: Development and Applications to Paleoclimate Reconstruction Problems". Journal of Climate
Tingley, MP; Huybers, P (2010). "A Bayesian Algorithm for Reconstructing Climate Anomalies in Space and Time. Part II: Comparison with the Regularized Expectation–Maximization Algorithm". Journal of Climate
Even "skeptic" Roger Pielke, Jr. says the National Research Council publication constituted a "near-complete vindication for the work of Mann et al."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
---------------------------
* Gish Gallop: "A debating technique that involves drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood that has been raised."
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
Which the Rommulans think is the natural order of things and perfectly support by the world of IPCC climate "science" shenanigans.
On the other hand, we have the magnificent Dr Bob Carter, a recognized expert in his field-
A link to some recent comments!
http://tinyurl.com/7alptdd
Dr Bob Carter-One of Gaia's most hard working Truth Seekers!
The long term warming is only 1/2 degree per century and the short tem [since 2001] shows only cooling.
No mater what data you use the rate of warming has gone to nothing or it actually is cooling.
Who fact checks these stories ?
Texas is burning up. Saturn aka netdr continues to astroturf, thousands of times now.
And now netdr introduces a new line. It is the science side who are the deniers, according to saturn science.
http://blog.chron.com/climateabyss/2012/04/about-the-lack-of-warming/
Use any other database of global temperature, like HadCRU or BEST, and you'll reach the same conclusion. The reason for starting at 1965 is because before then global warming hadn't really kicked in and there was a period after WWII when aerosol pollutants also obscured the AGW signal.
As for 'only cooling' since 2001, the same referenced article explains why we must account for the ENSO (El Nino/La Nina) effect when making such claims. Once this is accounted for, saturn1's claim is seen as the bull-pucky we always suspected it was.
Dear Orkneygal,
Isn't Heartland Institute "Expert" Dr. Robert M "Bob" Carter committing facto global warming fraud by misrepresenting increasing global temperature trend lines as flat?*
Isn't that like a climate science scam, a global warming hoax?
If you disagree please provide a scientifically-valid explanation for Bob Carter's gross misrepresentation of scientific data.
Bob Carter is a leader of and/or major contributor to several of the most prominent organizations that are "skeptical" of man-made global warming, including:
* The Heartland Institute
* The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)
* The Science & Public Policy Institute (SPPI)
* The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
* The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)
* The International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC)
Also:
You Orkneygal have indicated that you live in New Zealand - what relationship do you have with Bob Carter's global warming "skeptic" organization the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition (NZCSC)?
Please finally answer these questions instead of continuing to run away from them - think you.
------------------
* http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/07/bob_carters_trend_lines.php
The recent paper in Science by Durack et al. provides more proof of global warming and of the validity of our understanding of it. The Science paper reinforces the report in the latest IPCC report stating that human engineered global warming is causing an enhancement of the hydrological cycle, based on observed ocean salinity changes. In other words, dry places are tending to get dryer, and other places are tending to flood more.
http://tinyurl.com/dyc3ucf
Prominent MIT researcher -- and conservative -- Kerry Emanuel receives “frenzy of hate” after a video featuring an interview with him was published...
Emails contained “veiled threats against my wife,” and other “tangible threats,” Emanuel... director of MIT’s Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate program, said... “They were vile, these emails. They were the kind of emails nobody would like to receive.”
“What was a little bit new about it was dragging family members into it and feeling that my family might be under threat, so naturally I didn’t feel very good about that at all,” Emanuel said...
The video... documented a climate change conference run by a group of Republican voters upset by their party’s anti-science rhetoric...
In one clip, Emanuel says, “It makes me feel to some extent disgusted with politics and to some extent ashamed to be an American.”...
ClimateDepot [blog] posted Emanuel’s email address.
Emanuel notes that in the full video, he went on to explain that the Republican candidates “have either been misled, in which case it’s not great to be part of the political system where candidates for the president of the United States could be so misled on such an important issue, or they were dishonest, which [is] equally bad in my view: How could we live in a country where candidates are being dishonest about an issue of such importance?”
http://tinyurl.com/74larxf
The hot areas are getting hotter, just as predicted.
It is starting to look to me like the next few years will be the ones when climate change becomes a topic of interest to just about everyone on the planet. As the natural el Nino cycle kicks in this year and adds to the forcing from fossil fuel combustion, the weather will really get people's attention, unfortunately because of the great harm it will do. But there is an up side to all this. At that point in the near future, we will finally be able to leverage Senator Inhoffe and Lord Monckton and the other Denialist Clown Mobilers off of our screens for good. Amen.
I am fed up with right wing religious, political, and corporate authoritarians who are constantly trying to attack science. They are trying to drag us back to some dark age because they are intellectual cowards.
And as a result they are in the process of bringing down a well deserved climatological pox on all their own houses, all because of their cowardly, parasitic and greedy behavior. I wish that the rest of the human race didn't have to suffer for it.
Orkneygal is disrespectfully referring to Dr. Gavin Schmidt and his site RealClimate. Unlike non-scientist Jonova winning an Internet blog popularity contest, for his contributions at RealClimate Schmidt has been honored with an award that was judged and given by an actual, prestigious scientific organization - the American Geophysical Union.
---------------
Inaugural Climate Communications Prize Winner Announced
New Award from the American Geophysical Union Recognizes Excellence in Climate Communications
18 October 2011
WASHINGTON, DC — In recognition of his exceptional work as a climate communicator, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) has selected Gavin Schmidt as the recipient of its inaugural Climate Communications Prize.
Schmidt is a climate scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and co-founder of the RealClimate.org, a blog that covers areas of science related to climate-from present-day measurements to paleoclimate proxies, from natural climate variation to anthropogenic change. Schmidt has also worked with photographers on a popular science book, on museum exhibits, and on online courses and has often appeared on TV and radio and in print.
The award, which was established by AGU earlier this year, recognizes excellence in climate communication as well as the promotion of scientific literacy, clarity of messaging, and efforts to foster respect and understanding for science-based values related to climate change.
http://www.agu.org/news/press/pr_archives/2011/2011-34.shtml
853
John Whitman says:
3 May 2012 at 2:24 PM
“One could even ask whether the effort that we have put into RealClimate has been in vain.”
RC did have a major impact. It spun off a great many really high caliber skeptics and that had a significant impact on the current trend toward a more balanced discourse in climate science.
John
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/the-bore-hole/comment-page-18/#comments
The borehole:
"A place for comments that would otherwise disrupt sensible conversations."
A sort of a sweeping up of the miscellaneous that didn't make the cut for their superb regular presentations. Be it known that Realclimate.org features comments from all sides of an issue. A cherry picker will be able to go there and find whatever they need to support their agenda. Just like Orkney has done here.
Realclimate presents real climate science, by real climate scientists.
http://www.realclimate.org
" It spun off a great many really high caliber skeptics"
Apparently, Orknegal thinks that the likes of bloggers like non-scientist "Jonova" -- winner of what Orkneygal characterizes as a "prestigious" Internet popularity contest run by a conservative media organization -- are "high caliber skeptics".
Thanks again for the laugh, Orkney.
Jo Nova
TallBloke'S Talkshop
Climate Audit
Watts Up With That (X 2)
Joe Rommulan's, Comical Gavin's and Tamino's sites did not even make the Finals.
http://2012.bloggi.es/
Granted, I've been busy doing work, and not stacking award polls...
http://blog.chron.com/climateabyss/2012/04/about-the-lack-of-warming/
This rate never broke after 1998, once the ENSO effect is accounted for, as done in this article.